Thread: Welcome to our Post-Constitutional America.

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Yeah, Hooray poverty is still so pervasive that people need to put their lives on the line to earn a buck, Woooo! Yeah Three cheers for that! Not that we'll actually pay them or take care of them.

When did that happen?

Originally Posted by dex71

Maybe some, but the market hadn't gone to shit until a few years after 9/11. Also, a bad job market doesn't shoot live rounds at them.....war does, and many are still opting for it.

That was my point. Those that really believed they would be riding in a humvee, which I'm sure the recruiter didn't take great pains to make clear, were idealists. They would have made up the extreme minority. Most chose it as a means to earn a living and to receive other benefits that the military offers. When the military decides to only offer room and board only, we can then say that it was really because of the 'mission'.

Originally Posted by dex71

When did that happen?

Seriously?
The VA Backlog: Where Are We Now? Really? | TIME.com

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

That was my point. Those that really believed they would be riding in a humvee, which I'm sure the recruiter didn't take great pains to make clear, were idealists. They would have made up the extreme minority. Most chose it as a means to earn a living and to receive other benefits that the military offers. When the military decides to only offer room and board only, we can then say that it was really because of the 'mission'.

mmmmkay. If that is what you choose to believe, fine by me.

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Seriously?
The VA Backlog: Where Are We Now? Really? | TIME.com

When were the masses forced into the military by poverty?

Originally Posted by dex71

When were the masses forced into the military by poverty?

I think Smoken means that due to the lack of reasonable employment opportunities, most enlistees chose the military.

Let's not forget the large sign up bonuses that were offered during the height of troop deployment. Clearly these weren't be handed out because the recruiting drive was going so great.

And I'll mention it again...Stop Loss. I guess that was to help the idealists stay idealistic. Not.

I have always been interested in the constitutionality of checkpoints. I just got done watching this trial motion in which the case was dropped against Pastor Anderson. Pastor Anderson was one of the first persons to upload footage to youtube of himself refusing to answer any questions from border patrol at their checkpoints. On some occasions he is allowed to pass without any issue; I suspect it is because they already know him and don't want to deal with him. However, on one occasion his driver side window was smashed in by a border patrol agent and he was forcibly removed from his vehicle. He was subsequently tazed outside of his vehicle and was injured, resulting in nine stitches.

Here is the video of the trial motion in that case in which the state pressed charges against Pastor Anderson. The state failed to provide the defense with documentation (dog handling instruction manual) and the case was dismissed with prejudice.

Watch the first sixty seconds of these two video; I think this the point in which the defense had convinced the judge to dismiss the case. I was also surprised by the amount passion the defense attorney had throughout this proceeding. Wait until he starts slamming his finger against his paper. . .

1. Pt 4 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube
2. Pt 4 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube




For those that want to watch the entire motion:

Part 1: Pt 1 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube
Part 2: Pt 2 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube
Part 3: Pt 3 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube
Part 4: Pt 4 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube
Part 5: Pt 5 of 5 Pastor Anderson Full Trial (12/16/09) Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube

I gathered the following information after watching the trial motion:

1. Border patrol agents have no written policy or guideline regarding whether or not to send someone to secondary inspection; it seems to be completely at the agents discretion, unless the dog gives an alert to the vehicle.

2. Border patrol dogs are trained to alert upon detection of the odors of drugs or concealed persons.

3. There is no record, nor does the department keep track of the frequency in which a dog gives an alert but nothing is found.

4. Supervising border patrol agent has no idea how the dog differentiates between persons and concealed persons, but knows the dog is 'trained to do it'.

5. In part 3 of the video, the agent admits that there is a dog handling instruction manual issued to the department, but is not sure if he is legally allowed to discussed the contents of the documents. He argues that it may risk the safety of the agents by exposing the way they operate. The agent is then allowed to leave to retrieve the document (if his superior allows him to do so), in which the court will privately review before deciding if it should admissible.

6. Agent comes back with a letter from his superior giving the court permission to view the dog handlers instruction manual. At this point the defense attorney becomes angry because he specifically asked for that document 'months and months and months ago'. Defense attorney argues that he will now have to read the document, digest it, and re interview all of the witnesses. He contends that the state has wasted and continues to waste his time, and his client's time; defense then requests a dismissal of the case.

7. In part 4 of the video, you can see another agent nearly perjure himself. In past interviews he had always maintained that no dog handlers instruction manual existed; in this interview he admits that there is such a document but maintains that he never denied it existed. Defense than plays a recorded interview of him contradicting himself.



I'm currently watching the full jury trial a year after this dismissal of this case:

Part 1: Pastor Anderson Full JURY Trial (08/12/10) Part 1 - Border Patrol Checkpoint - YouTube

So far the defense has asked that the court refer to Mr. Anderson as Pastor Anderson. State does not object to the defense referring to him that way but objects to the state also having to refer to him in that way.

State intends to show youtube videos of Pastor Anderson preaching about controversial and political issues. Defense objects, contending that their clients political views has nothing to do with the case.

Originally Posted by dex71

When were the masses forced into the military by poverty?

Youths in Rural U.S. Are Drawn To Military

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

That was my point. Those that really believed they would be riding in a humvee, which I'm sure the recruiter didn't take great pains to make clear, were idealists. They would have made up the extreme minority. Most chose it as a means to earn a living and to receive other benefits that the military offers. When the military decides to only offer room and board, we can then say that it was really because of the 'mission'.

Military pay is decent, and better than minimum wage. But it is FAR from being a "good deal" for enlisted personnel. Most people who enlist in the military are not there for the money dude. They have seen over the last 15 years what it costs emotionally, physically and otherwise, and they continue to do it. The majority of these people are there for the mission as you call it and the love of the job, and the ability to get paid doing it. Even in this economy.

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Youths in Rural U.S. Are Drawn To Military

"Many of today's recruits are financially strapped, with nearly half coming from lower-middle-class to poor households, according to new Pentagon data based on Zip codes and census estimates of mean household income. Nearly two-thirds of Army recruits in 2004 came from counties in which median household income is below the U.S. median."

and...

"Senior Pentagon officials say the war has had a clear impact on recruiting, with a shrinking pool of candidates forcing the military to accept less qualified enlistees -- and presumably many for whom military service is a choice of last resort."


Exactly my point.