Unconstitutional Checkpoint: Video Analysis

Words: 775
Pages: 4

Unconstitutional Checkpoints
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” -Fourth Amendment, United States Constitution

The fourth amendment, under the United States Constitution, protects people from searches, seizures, and Terry stops (when a cop and pull someone over for probable cause). It also protects people from giving out personal information. For example, it is illegal for a cop to pull someone over, without probable cause. If the cop asking for
…show more content…
People need to know how to handle the check points before they get out of control. The Holocaust, which caused suffering for 6,000,000 humans, started out as simple as random checkpoints. A video went viral, in 2014, of a man at a DUI checkpoint. He stopped at the checkpoint, and simply cracked his window. Next, he slipped out a sign that read: “I remain silent. No searches. I want my lawyer.” He also had his license, registration, and insurance. In the video, people are saying that they didn’t even know they could do that. If more people would do this, the random checkpoints would come to an …show more content…
Most people just stop and do what they are told. But people who feel that the government should follow the laws, stand up against the check points. A San Diego teacher, traveling through New Mexico, was illegally detained for over three hours. This happened because she refused to to state whether she was an American citizen or not. The woman had the full right to not state the answer. The border patrol agent proceeded to tell her that it was completely legal what they were doing because congress approved it. Although, anyone with basic knowledge of the amendments, knows that the checkpoints are breaking the fourth amendment. Even according to the “laws” that the agent showed the lady, it still would would have been illegal to detain her and her family for an extended time. At the border stops, the agents and police do not care whether they break the laws. They feel as if they are “above the law” since they are the authority. They also feel they’re are above the law, since most people that enter the random checkpoints, don’t stand up against them. It is wrong for people to be illegally detained for practicing their constitutional rights. It is also wrong for the agents to stop people and force them to give out their information; the fourth amendment specifically protects people from giving out personal information without a warrant. Therefore, it should be obvious that these checkpoints are