Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Hangar Talk
Pilot Detained by DHS for 2 hours >

Pilot Detained by DHS for 2 hours

Search

Notices
Hangar Talk For non-aviation-related discussion and aviation threads that don't belong elsewhere

Pilot Detained by DHS for 2 hours

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-22-2013, 11:01 AM
  #1  
Part Time
Thread Starter
 
undflyboy06's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Chief Pilot PC-12NG
Posts: 629
Default Pilot Detained by DHS for 2 hours

A wonderful story about how Big Brother is starting to get pretty nosy towards GA pilots that have broken no rules.

I would have definitely pooped my pants with all of those assets on the ground. Good for him for knowing his stuff, and sticking to his guns.

Annals of the Security State: More Airplane Stories - James Fallows - The Atlantic
undflyboy06 is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 11:07 AM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
N9373M's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 2,115
Default Here's another one

Glider Pilot "near" Nuke Plant. (power plant, not boom! plant)

Secret 'no-fly zone'?
N9373M is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 11:40 AM
  #3  
Working weekends
 
satpak77's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Default

Interesting article. This isn't Kansas anymore. Some think it still is. Post 9-11, post-Boston, etc. The chances of this happening to Joe Pilot, however, are like 1 in 10,000. Use IFR and/or flight following and/or open a VFR flight plan to stay off the radar. Nobody wants their freedoms infringed, but it is what it is.

Lack of a TFR or lack of a R/P airspace over a power plant or similar critically important structure does not preclude using good judgement or common sense.

Not banned, does not then equal "should." Petting stray pit bulls is not illegal, but should you ?

Oh, and a Texas police officer yes, can ask to see your pilots license.
satpak77 is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 12:34 PM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,262
Default

Originally Posted by satpak77
Interesting article. This isn't Kansas anymore. Some think it still is. Post 9-11, post-Boston, etc. The chances of this happening to Joe Pilot, however, are like 1 in 10,000. Use IFR and/or flight following and/or open a VFR flight plan to stay off the radar. Nobody wants their freedoms infringed, but it is what it is.
Wrong, on so many levels. At what point will you finally push back?

Originally Posted by satpak77
Oh, and a Texas police officer yes, can ask to see your pilots license.
About 15 years ago a buddy of mine actually got violated by the FAA for failing to present his certificate to a cop. I don't remember the circumstance but he called the local FSDO, they sent out an inspector (while the cop waited) and when he told the inspector the circumstances, and that he had refused to present his certificate until said inspector arrived, he was promptly cited.
Grumble is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 01:30 PM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 492
Default

You noob you took my post! I know the guy. He was flying to Oshkosh
Hawker445 is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 02:25 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 516
Default

Isn't it in the FARs that you have to show your license to a law enforcement officer upon request?
morerightrudder is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 02:38 PM
  #7  
Working weekends
 
satpak77's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble
Wrong, on so many levels. At what point will you finally push back?



About 15 years ago a buddy of mine actually got violated by the FAA for failing to present his certificate to a cop. I don't remember the circumstance but he called the local FSDO, they sent out an inspector (while the cop waited) and when he told the inspector the circumstances, and that he had refused to present his certificate until said inspector arrived, he was promptly cited.
Grumble, I agree with you. I am on your side. But the fact remains, the world is different now. I don't agree with some of the things but do understand (somewhat) where they originate from.

Originally Posted by morerightrudder
Isn't it in the FARs that you have to show your license to a law enforcement officer upon request?
Yes. FAR Part 61 Sec. 61.3 effective as of 10/20/2009

(l) Inspection of certificate. Each person who holds an airman certificate, medical certificate, authorization, or license required by this part must present it and their photo identification as described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section for inspection upon a request from:

(1) The Administrator;

(2) An authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board; or

(3) Any Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer.

(4) An authorized representative of the Transportation Security Administration.
satpak77 is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 03:30 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 4,026
Default

Google "illegal border checkpoints" if you really want to see how the constitution has become abused...

The videos also show you how to handle such "detaining" as an american citizen.
JamesNoBrakes is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 04:32 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
LowSlowT2's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 484
Default

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
Google "illegal border checkpoints" if you really want to see how the constitution has become abused...

The videos also show you how to handle such "detaining" as an american citizen.
There is a 200 mile buffer zone around the entire border (which encompasses entire states in many instances) where DHS has authority under executive order to search w/o warrant, seize property (such as laptops) w/o warrant, and several other insane powers/authorities...
LowSlowT2 is offline  
Old 05-22-2013, 05:05 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 4,026
Default

Originally Posted by LowSlowT2
There is a 200 mile buffer zone around the entire border (which encompasses entire states in many instances) where DHS has authority under executive order to search w/o warrant, seize property (such as laptops) w/o warrant, and several other insane powers/authorities...
Watch the video. You'll see they have no authority to detain (at least where they are at in the video).

Supreme court has also already ruled on this and threw it out: Google Scholar

It is not enough to argue, as does the Government, that the problem of deterring unlawful entry by aliens across long expanses of national boundaries is a serious one. The needs of law enforcement stand in constant tension with the Constitution's protections of the individual against certain exercises of official power. It is precisely the predictability of these pressures that counsels a resolute loyalty to constitutional safeguards. It 274*274 is well to recall the words of Mr. Justice Jackson, soon after his return from the Nuremberg Trials:

"These [Fourth Amendment rights], I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government." Brinegar v. United States, 338 U. S. 160, 180 (Jackson, J., dissenting).
The Court that decided Carroll v. United States, supra, sat during a period in our history when the Nation was confronted with a law enforcement problem of no small magnitude—the enforcement of the Prohibition laws. But that Court resisted the pressure of official expedience against the guarantee of the Fourth Amendment. Mr. Chief Justice Taft's opinion for the Court distinguished between searches at the border and in the interior, and clearly controls the case at bar:

"It would be intolerable and unreasonable if a prohibition agent were authorized to stop every automobile on the chance of finding liquor and thus subject all persons lawfully using the highways to the inconvenience and indignity of such a search. Travellers may be so stopped in crossing an international boundary because of national self protection reasonably requiring one entering the country to identify himself as entitled to come in, and his belongings as effects which may be lawfully brought in. But those lawfully within the country, entitled to use the public highways, have a right to free passage without interruption or search unless there is 275*275 known to a competent official authorized to search, probable cause for believing that their vehicles are carrying contraband or illegal merchandise." 267 U. S., at 153-154.
Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is

Reversed.
The various agreeing and dissenting opinions are within that document.

Last edited by JamesNoBrakes; 05-22-2013 at 05:20 PM.
JamesNoBrakes is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Colonel S
United
25
05-04-2022 03:46 AM
TonyWilliams
Regional
62
02-27-2011 10:49 AM
FLW2003
Cargo
44
02-24-2011 10:08 PM
ebuhoner
Flight Schools and Training
35
10-10-2009 09:02 AM
Moe Rudda
Regional
21
02-16-2008 04:50 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices