Citizenship for Transit ? - Yep !!!

[EastsideAl]

So immigration agents are attempting to enforce U.S immigration laws? What's the big freaking deal here? As others have mentioned these types of checks occurred while Obama was in office and the media had little to nothing to say about them.

I've had my ID/documents randomly checked well within the borders of other nations while traveling abroad. Why should I be concerned or offended that our government does the same?

Other countries don't have the Bill of Rights, and specifically the 4th Amendment. It's requirement for probable cause and warrants for searches and seizures would seem to bar such "random" searches of people simple traveling from place to place within the country and not crossing a border.

However, as oladub points out, this outrageous expansion of ICE and Border Patrol power to conduct such checks is a creature of our post-2001 panic and trashing of much of the Bill of Rights. So, although the frequency and intrusiveness of such actions has reportedly increased significantly in the past year, you can't blame President Donny McRacist for the laws and policies that allows them.

[Johnnny5]

Other countries don't have the Bill of Rights, and specifically the 4th Amendment. It's requirement for probable cause and warrants for searches and seizures would seem to bar such "random" searches of people simple traveling from place to place within the country and not crossing a border.

I'm curious, do you feel the same way about the restrictions that have been placed upon our 2nd Amendment rights? In most of America in order to purchase and carry a firearm one has to go background checks, be delayed by waiting periods, have fingerprints taken, complete training courses, pay fees and taxes and more. Those restrictions seem to be far more extensive and controlling than random checks of citizenship that occur near our international borders.

Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of random stops by law enforcement, and if these stops were to expand further I would be opposed to them. That said, we're faced with a situation where close to 5% of the population of Mexico is now living and working within our borders illegally. Add another 5+ millions illegal aliens from other nations and the possibility of foreign terrorists hiding within that mix and this has become an emergency situation where drastic measures needed to be taken.

I'm tolerant of reasonable restrictions to my 2nd Amendment rights because I realize that they can help identify and control those that should not legally possess firearms. In the same way I'll tolerate reasonable limitations of my 4th Amendment rights if they can help identify and stop threats that those here illegally may pose.

[EastsideAl]

I'm curious, do you feel the same way about the restrictions that have been placed upon our 2nd Amendment rights?

Not to get too far into gun issues, but despite all of the panic from certain organizations, there are really no restrictions on our 2nd Amendment rights. Aside from some very small, precisely and narrowly defined, categories of people exempted for public safety reasons due to a court finding or age, all American citizens can legally purchase and own firearms.

The Amendment itself has consistently been read by our courts as allowing the government a right to regulate some aspects of firearm purchasing, registration, and use. And even the Heller decision, which overturned over 100 years of legal precedents on certain 2nd Amendment issues, left intact the basic right to regulate. But the right to "keep and bear arms" itself remains unabridged.

Quite a bit different IMO from declaring that our constitutional protection against warrantless search and seizure without probable cause is completely negated 100 miles from any border. Thus rendering a quite large percentage of the US population [[like all of the residents of the Detroit metro area), due to no cause other than where they reside or travel within the country, to effectively not have a constitutional right.

[Bham1982]

I'm curious, do you feel the same way about the restrictions that have been placed upon our 2nd Amendment rights?

What "restrictions"? There's no such thing. You can't have a law restricting any amendment.

If a weapons law were unconstitutional, it would be found as such. Courts decide this stuff every day.

Courts have found that govts. can regulate weapons, obviously. You find it overly restrictive that toddlers can't buy nukes or something? I mean, we're already pretty close to a free-for-all.

[Johnnny5]

What "restrictions"? There's no such thing. You can't have a law restricting any amendment.

If a weapons law were unconstitutional, it would be found as such. Courts decide this stuff every day.

Courts have found that govts. can regulate weapons, obviously. You find it overly restrictive that toddlers can't buy nukes or something? I mean, we're already pretty close to a free-for-all.

I disagree.

There are literally 1000's of laws on the books limiting and restricting the right to bear arms. There are restrictions on who can purchase firearms, where they can be purchased, how they must be transported, how they can be stored. There are also federal and state laws and limitations on many different types of firearms including short barreled shotguns and rifles, most fully automatic guns, magazine capacity, etc. In fact, I wouldn't hesitate to say that of the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights the 2nd Amendment is probably the most limited and regulated of them all.

Of course the courts have found that most of these current laws limiting 2nd Amendment rights are legal. The U.S Supreme Court has also determined that limited interior immigration checkpoints and limited checks for legal residency are legal.

[iheartthed]

I disagree.

There are literally 1000's of laws on the books limiting and restricting the right to bear arms. There are restrictions on who can purchase firearms, where they can be purchased, how they must be transported, how they can be stored. There are also federal and state laws and limitations on many different types of firearms including short barreled shotguns and rifles, most fully automatic guns, magazine capacity, etc. In fact, I wouldn't hesitate to say that of the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights the 2nd Amendment is probably the most limited and regulated of them all.

Of course the courts have found that most of these current laws limiting 2nd Amendment rights are legal. The U.S Supreme Court has also determined that limited interior immigration checkpoints and limited checks for legal residency are legal.

The Second Amendment was not intended to enshrine the right of gun ownership to every individual citizen. It was meant to protect the ability of militias to organize themselves against an aggressor [[or a rogue Federal Government).

Even if we interpret it the way that you are saying we should, courts only restrict liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights when it is a threat to security. An example of this is that law enforcement does not need a warrant to search bags of public transit systems due to the threat of terrorism. Journalists can also be prosecuted for publishing confidential information that compromises security of intelligence agencies working covert missions. I think it'd be very hard to prove that illegal immigration is an immediate security threat that requires the government to be able to check documentation without justification.