Will Americans Give Up Their Rights Also?

[Kentucky Windage]

It's an Ag check, there is no "border" checking in CA. It makes for a good story though. Basically they way it works is this: If you have a CA plate, you're waved through. IF you have an NV plate, you're waved through. AFAIK all others are "Stopped" and asked: Do you have any fruits and vegetables. You say no, and you're off. Generally though, these guys provide a huge service, as they will give you maps if you need them, and answer questions about the local area if you need a place to rest, etc. Unless you act like an asshat, the CHP never gets into the situation.

That is not true. Several people have been stopped on "Suspicion of having fruits and vegetables." If you say, "No" they can choose to not believe you, ask you to pull over into one of their parking spots and shut off the vehicle and wait. Then they ask you to exit the vehicle while they gain access to your trunk, back of the truck, moving van etc. A bag on the floor board can give them suspicion. Sometimes they randomly pick out vehicles to check.

If you are transporting anything illegal other than fruits and vegetables - bonus for them.

A simple traffic stop for example. It is very unlikely you will be pulled over for nothing. At some point, the Officer will have some sort of suspicion about something before he/she initiates a traffic stop.

 

[fd15k]

It's an Ag check, there is no "border" checking in CA. It makes for a good story though. Basically they way it works is this: If you have a CA plate, you're waved through. IF you have an NV plate, you're waved through. AFAIK all others are "Stopped" and asked: Do you have any fruits and vegetables. You say no, and you're off. Generally though, these guys provide a huge service, as they will give you maps if you need them, and answer questions about the local area if you need a place to rest, etc. Unless you act like an asshat, the CHP never gets into the situation.

Granted, this may have changed since the last time I crossed that border last winter.

KW- I've given you the laws, you choose to ignore them. .50cal is not banned, only rifles chambered for the .50 BMG cartridge there is a difference.

I drove to AZ frequently while living in CA, I didn't get a free pass having a CA number plate - same question about fruits/vegetables was asked. As the OR resident I've been to CA 3 times last year and 2 times this year (every time
with a bunch of guns and ammo ) they still asked about fruits and veggies, and let you in when you say you got nothing.

Technically agricultural checkpoints are intended for the commercial traffic only. There is a video posted by 4409 group on youtube challenging officers at one of such checkpoints,
though without much success. In any case, being intended for commercial traffic checkpoints are present on major highways only. I have successfully tested a couple of routes
posted here http://www.ferretsanonymous.com/checkpoints/checkpoints.html.

 

[davemata]

I wasn't going to mention ferret runs, but yeah. When I lived in Reno and mom was in Sac I made that drive every weekend. They''re innocuous, and a couple are very easy to get around. Fwiw, I''ve never entered from AZ. For all I know they have the tsa and shoe scanners, but I doubt it.

Its rather insulting and exhausting that KW is trying to make it sound like some checkpoint Charlie thing when it obviously isn't. Like I said. CA has a lot to grouse about, creating tall tales is unneeded when there is enough fact for months of fun.

 

[Mark W.]

Just a odd comment on something said in the above post.

ON LINE SALES is a NEW thing there was no on line ammo sales prior to what 1995 (can't find the exact date) So its a very recent thing. Its not like we have had it for ever.

Granted prior to that we had mail order sales of ammo and since they aren't taking about banning mail order sales. You could still take out your Midway flyer and give them a call tell them your CC# and buy ammo through the mail.

 

[Kentucky Windage]

Its rather insulting and exhausting that KW is trying to make it sound like some checkpoint Charlie thing when it obviously isn't. Like I said. CA has a lot to grouse about, creating tall tales is unneeded when there is enough fact for months of fun.

Negative. That may be what you are turning it into. That is not what I am doing or have done at all.

You can call it, "Hype" all you want. That will not change the State of CA.

Sometimes you get searched, sometimes you do not. Sometimes you get waived through, sometimes you do not. Sometimes you say you do not have any fruits and/or vegetables and you are asked to pull to the side anyways. That is just how it is.

I have continuously provied links to current CA law. To say that, I, have attempted to create tall tales is comical at best.
In fact, the links have been met with, "Well oh yeah, blah blah blah." That is how a child makes a dispute.

Besides, we all know, CA has never done anything wrong to its citizens. Ever.

After all, CA is where happy cows come from.

 

[davemata]

You're being willfully dishonest, and that's sad.

 

[Grunwald]

Negative. That may be what you are turning it into. That is not what I am doing or have done at all.

You can call it, "Hype" all you want. That will not change the State of CA.

Sometimes you get searched, sometimes you do not. Sometimes you get waived through, sometimes you do not. Sometimes you say you do not have any fruits and/or vegetables and you are asked to pull to the side anyways. That is just how it is.

I have continuously provied links to current CA law. To say that, I, have attempted to create tall tales is comical at best.
In fact, the links have been met with, "Well oh yeah, blah blah blah." That is how a child makes a dispute.

Besides, we all know, CA has never done anything wrong to its citizens. Ever.

After all, CA is where happy cows come from.

Sorry, your story does not hold water. They cannot search your vehicle without your permission, and I sure as heck would say no unless there was something else they could nail me for. I've allowed NV state police to do a search because they pulled me over for speeding and let me go with a warning (after running my data thru their system). I had one of my brake lights out and suspected that they might pull me over again for that, so I consented to a search. Even had to sign a form.

Maybe the "secret" is that you have to tell them in plain and simple language that you do not consent to a search and tell them that if they decide to violate your constitutional protections you will respond with legal action though your lawyer, including a civil lawsuit.

 

[Darknight]

If a cop wants in your car bad enough they will find a way. There are a lot of little tricks, a little dirty, but very effective. Anyone that tells a cop in plain english, NO, has just given them a green light challenge to find a way to do it anyway. Cops hear the, I'm gonna get my lawyer and sue you routine everyday, it gets old. They could care less, they are still going to do what they think is their job. That means, you go to jail and don't get out until Mon morning when you get to see the judge. Then, even if the cop is wrong, they just say, sorry a mistake was made, then nothing happens to the cop. I've seen it a thousand times. It's sad. Good luck with the lawyer though.

 

[davemata]

If a cop wants in your car bad enough they will find a way. There are a lot of little tricks, a little dirty, but very effective. Anyone that tells a cop in plain english, NO, has just given them a green light challenge to find a way to do it anyway. Cops hear the, I'm gonna get my lawyer and sue you routine everyday, it gets old. They could care less, they are still going to do what they think is their job. That means, you go to jail and don't get out until Mon morning when you get to see the judge. Then, even if the cop is wrong, they just say, sorry a mistake was made, then nothing happens to the cop. I've seen it a thousand times. It's sad. Good luck with the lawyer though.

I have occasionally seen CHP at the ag checks, but they're almost always manning the scales for trucks. It's a non-issue with the CA Ag checks.

As for beat cops doing it, they're going to continue to until they are harshly corrected. First step, removing immunity from prosecution for actions taken on the job. Second step, create a civilian review board that can and routinely does fire bad actors. Finally, the citizens need to grow a set, and bring every instance of trampled rights to the media and to the courts.

Then and only then will that practice stop.

Grunwald - might be better to just ignore him, he won't pay attention. He's determined to paint Ag checks as checkpoint charlie, and reality be damned.

 

[Mikej]

So ferrets are illegal in Cali. huh? Who'd a thunk it.

Man, I always learn something on NWFA!

Mike

 

[Rascals]

So ferrets are illegal in Cali. huh? Who'd a thunk it.

Man, I always learn something on NWFA!

Mike

Thats becasue the black footed ferrets are endangered and they dont want problems. Back when I was young you could make 5000.00 for a picture of one in the wild and 10,000 if you could take them out and show them where one was. It is becasue they are protecting the wild ferrets. One thing that I actually agree with them on. Woooow never thought I would do that.

 

[Kentucky Windage]

Sorry, your story does not hold water. They cannot search your vehicle without your permission, and I sure as heck would say no unless there was something else they could nail me for. I've allowed NV state police to do a search because they pulled me over for speeding and let me go with a warning (after running my data thru their system). I had one of my brake lights out and suspected that they might pull me over again for that, so I consented to a search. Even had to sign a form.

Maybe the "secret" is that you have to tell them in plain and simple language that you do not consent to a search and tell them that if they decide to violate your constitutional protections you will respond with legal action though your lawyer, including a civil lawsuit.

They do not know what else they can attempt to get you for - that is why they want to search you/your vehicle/luggage.

We acknowledge your 4th Amendment. Legally through the State of CA we have the authority to make sure there is not going to be anything that is invasive to the State of CA.

Just because you said, No does not mean that the State of CA will accept your answer.

If you want to go ahead, just on standard, say I do not want you coming into my car, then what is going to have to happen is I am going to have to escort you back into NV and you will not be able to enter the State of CA.

...You will recieve a Notice of Rejection.

...If you don't sign it (Notice of Rejection) you get arrested.

...They are the State Police. There are here to support us.

...Your vehicle is being refused entry and all your luggage. If you get caught coming into the State after we issue the Notice you will be arrested.

^This particular individual did say, No and his access to CA was rejected. He returned to NV.

CA Agriculture Inspection Checkpoint

All vehicles are subject to inspection at CA Agriculture Inspection checkpoints.

If a cop wants in your car bad enough they will find a way. There are a lot of little tricks, a little dirty, but very effective. Anyone that tells a cop in plain english, NO, has just given them a green light challenge to find a way to do it anyway. Cops hear the, I'm gonna get my lawyer and sue you routine everyday, it gets old. They could care less, they are still going to do what they think is their job. That means, you go to jail and don't get out until Mon morning when you get to see the judge. Then, even if the cop is wrong, they just say, sorry a mistake was made, then nothing happens to the cop. I've seen it a thousand times. It's sad. Good luck with the lawyer though.

This is, like it or hate it, reality.

I have occasionally seen CHP at the ag checks, but they're almost always manning the scales for trucks. It's a non-issue with the CA Ag checks.

As for beat cops doing it, they're going to continue to until they are harshly corrected. First step, removing immunity from prosecution for actions taken on the job. Second step, create a civilian review board that can and routinely does fire bad actors. Finally, the citizens need to grow a set, and bring every instance of trampled rights to the media and to the courts.

Then and only then will that practice stop.

Grunwald - might be better to just ignore him, he won't pay attention. He's determined to paint Ag checks as checkpoint charlie, and reality be damned.

Cute. Grow up.

This has nothing to do with, "Checkpoint Charlie" or "Beating cops." In fact, you are the only person who has labeled the border as such - no one said anything about beating the Police.

So ferrets are illegal in Cali. huh? Who'd a thunk it.

Man, I always learn something on NWFA!

Mike

CA is unfortunately a troubled State.

Here is a quote from Ms. Sarah Palin as of 30 minutes ago:

When I think about the direction our country is rapidly drifting in, I can't help but look at California as a cautionary tale. The Golden State once boasted the entrepreneurial innovation of Silicon Valley, the American creative engine of the arts, economically powerful and beautiful cities from San Francisco to San Diego, and fertile farmlands that helped feed the nation. Now it is descending into financial ruin accompanied by an exodus of middle class Californians leaving for other states. As one writer put it, California's "fastest-growing entity is government and its biggest product is red tape."

 

[Misterbill]

Wow, you quoted Sarah "quitter" Palin.

I will now discount everything else you said.

 

[nwwoodsman]

<broken link removed> And then this pops up. How many people will just give up their guns without a fight?

 

[Morrilp]

Owning an automatic weapon with an authoritative approval isn't a removal/giving up of ones' right. That's an example of a regulation. Washington state regulates firearms by saying no to SBRs and automatics although exceptions exist - FFL-holders of a particular type, so they're regulated in that way.

California is a different topic. A better thread would be, "Why would anyone in their right mind live in California - ESPECIALLY if you're a gun owner?"

<broken link removed>

This is an example of why you do not want to live in CA they are losing all of their AR style rifles. Next will be WA if we let them. Will you let them take your rifles?

 

[davemata]

Thats becasue the black footed ferrets are endangered and they dont want problems. Back when I was young you could make 5000.00 for a picture of one in the wild and 10,000 if you could take them out and show them where one was. It is becasue they are protecting the wild ferrets. One thing that I actually agree with them on. Woooow never thought I would do that.

Isn't there an ag reason as well to not wanting domestic ferrets and the reasoning that as rodents they'd ruin crops? Gerbils as well, if I remember correctly.

 

[davemata]

"Beating cops."

Beat cops. Why do you have to get all punchy and shooty without reading what was written? Are you familiar with the term beat cop? I don't know if this was more kungfu treachery on your part, or just a simple mistake. Since you've been fast and loose with the truth thusfar.

As for Palin... dude, the only good thing that came about from Palin was Lisa Ann. Accepting Palin is a sign of defeat, quoting Palin... whoooooeee. Beating cops and Palin quotes.

 

[davemata]

<broken link removed> And then this pops up. How many people will just give up their guns without a fight?

I promise you right now that thing is DOA. Why? If for NO OTHER REASON it lacks a grandfather or safe harbor allowance and creates an immediate ban of all items past and present. However, if they do a grandfather clause, they'll have to allow people to register their existing AR rifles as assault rifles, which means the bullet button can come off, it's already registered as super killy under the same registration as the pre-bans, and the silly equipment requirements are out the window.

So there's this choice on the lawmakers parts... on one hand, let it die and keep up with the asshat laws as they are. OR, go full retard and amend the law to pass it allowing current owners to register the AR as an assault rifle, allowing them to get the "scary" features such as detachable mags, lugs, telescoping stocks, and pistol grips for front or rear.

I really don't think they'd allow that. What's your call on it? (I know if they do I'm sending my mom $1k to buy a ton of lowers, she wants and AR10 and AR15 afterall.)

ETA - I should really apologize for the multi-posts, but I really don't know how to make the multi-quote work right.

 

[Kentucky Windage]

Wow, you quoted Sarah "quitter" Palin.

I will now discount everything else you said.

Beat cops. Why do you have to get all punchy and shooty without reading what was written? Are you familiar with the term beat cop? I don't know if this was more kungfu treachery on your part, or just a simple mistake. Since you've been fast and loose with the truth thusfar.

As for Palin... dude, the only good thing that came about from Palin was Lisa Ann. Accepting Palin is a sign of defeat, quoting Palin... whoooooeee. Beating cops and Palin quotes.

You guys are funny. You pick one thing out of all of that, which happens to be a quote from Ms. Palin, and attack that. Good God, grow up.

It would not matter if Piers Morgan said it. It would still be absolutely true.

Kungfu treachery? Oh please. I have posted CA PC after CA PC etc. If you want to call that, "Kungfu Treachery" well, so be it.

Isn't there an ag reason as well to not wanting domestic ferrets and the reasoning that as rodents they'd ruin crops? Gerbils as well, if I remember correctly.

In the State of CA, ferrets are known to cause Cancer.

Wow, you quoted Sarah "quitter" Palin.

I will now discount everything else you said.

Beat cops. Why do you have to get all punchy and shooty without reading what was written? Are you familiar with the term beat cop? I don't know if this was more kungfu treachery on your part, or just a simple mistake. Since you've been fast and loose with the truth thusfar.

As for Palin... dude, the only good thing that came about from Palin was Lisa Ann. Accepting Palin is a sign of defeat, quoting Palin... whoooooeee. Beating cops and Palin quotes.

I promise you right now that thing is DOA. Why? If for NO OTHER REASON it lacks a grandfather or safe harbor allowance and creates an immediate ban of all items past and present. However, if they do a grandfather clause, they'll have to allow people to register their existing AR rifles as assault rifles, which means the bullet button can come off, it's already registered as super killy under the same registration as the pre-bans, and the silly equipment requirements are out the window.

So there's this choice on the lawmakers parts... on one hand, let it die and keep up with the asshat laws as they are. OR, go full retard and amend the law to pass it allowing current owners to register the AR as an assault rifle, allowing them to get the "scary" features such as detachable mags, lugs, telescoping stocks, and pistol grips for front or rear.

I really don't think they'd allow that. What's your call on it? (I know if they do I'm sending my mom $1k to buy a ton of lowers, she wants and AR10 and AR15 afterall.)

Right, because so many of CA absurd firearms laws have been DOA. A total flop.

 

[davemata]

you don't make any sense. I give up on you.