Worst Interstate drive you have experienced

[Pete from Boston]

Are there still border patrol checkpoints on 91 in Vermont below White River Junction?

I had no idea that there ever was one.  that said, I have not driven I-91 very many times.  I would imagine this checkpoint would be fairly easy to avoid by taking US-5 strategically - or, in general, any number of roads.  Vermont, unlike certain parts of the southwest, has a pretty well-connected road network.

the only northern border checkpoint I know of is the one on I-87 mentioned by jeffandnicole.

It was put in place after 9/11 when there had been some talk of nefarious persons crossing into New England from Canada. It remained there sporadically for at least several years, though I have no idea if it is still ever used. I never saw it myself. 

I do remember there being a lot of public surprise at a border checkpoint so far inland, but apparently this is within their hundred mile jurisdiction from the border.

[roadman]

The I-87 border checkpoints were the scene of at least two serious multi-vehicle pileups in the mid 2000s

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2005/HAB0503.pdf

[J N Winkler]

It was put in place after 9/11 when there had been some talk of nefarious persons crossing into New England from Canada. It remained there sporadically for at least several years, though I have no idea if it is still ever used. I never saw it myself.

The I-87 Hudson checkpoint did see more intensive use after 9/11, but (per the NTSB report linked to in Roadman's post upthread) has been in operation since 1988.  A contributing factor to the two 2004 accidents discussed in the report was a lack of signage advising motorists of an upcoming obligatory stop for Border Patrol inspection.

From memory, the standard advance signing sequence for Border Patrol checkpoints in Texas says just "Inspection" without stating specifically that the Border Patrol is the inspecting agency, while the advance signing for the Telegraph Pass checkpoint on I-8 in Arizona does say "Border Patrol."

Edit:  Now confirmed--the current I-8 Telegraph Pass signs were installed as part of Arizona DOT TRACS H774701C (an I-8 sign rehabilitation job).  The approximate sequence is as follows:

*  Three mentions of "Inspection Sta" on interchange sequence and confirmation signs, beginning from 6 1/4 miles away

*  "US BORDER PATROL Inspection Station 1 MILE"

*  "US BORDER PATROL INSPECTION STATION AHEAD -- BE PREPARED TO STOP"

Other border states could do far worse than copy Arizona's approach.

Edit II:  Thinking about the NTSB report some more, it sounds like the Hudson checkpoint has no permanent facilities.  Instead, the Border Patrol uses the High Peaks rest area as a staging point; the New York State Police also uses the same rest area to carry out commercial vehicle enforcement.  Given the Border Patrol's desperately unprofessional approach to temporary checkpoints (for example, they slap vague messages like "US OFFICERS" on homemade signs whose sloppiness would embarrass a first grader), it is surprising there haven't been more problems at Hudson.

[mefailenglish]

Next came the an array of classic lines such as "You look nervous" and "Do you mind if we search your car?" plus a seemingly endless string of questioning, with some of the questions repeated. 

I just got back from a 10,000 mile loop from Florida, up to Cleveland, across to San Fran, down to San Diego, and back to Florida via DFW and Little Rock.  I went through several border patrol checkpoints because I took roads down to the border to visit National Park Service units (Organ Pipe Cactus, Tumacacori, Coronado, etc.).  My experiences varied from a cursory glance and a wave-through, to a few questions about my Florida license plate and my trip.  This was at the checkpoint going out US 62/180 from El Paso to Guadalupe Mtns NP and, as it turned out, the agent happened to be from the same city I live in now. 

However, heading west on I-80, I got pulled over for "speeding".  (Okay, I had the cruise set at ~78 in a 75, and I didn't do a brake check when I saw the cop sitting in the median.  So I was certainly in the wrong.  But, there were three of us in a line, there was no tailgating going on, and he picked me instead of the two 18-wheelers.)  The cop was nice at first, said he was only going to give me a warning.  Then, he went through the same song and dance that stridentweasel describes upthread.  He even went as far as to read me my Miranda rights, though I was never formally charged with anything.  Turned out he pulled me over because of my Florida tag (well, he didn't state it outright, but highly hinted at it), thought I was drug running between FL and San Fran.  My story ends much like stridentweasel, with me standing in the grass while my car was searched.  After he found nothing but clothes, maps, and NPS brochures, I was finally sent on my way.  I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.  (The cop had a dog in the back; why didn't he just walk the dog around my car and let me go instead of wasting 20+ minutes of my life?)

[Brandon]

Other border states could do far worse than copy Arizona's approach.

They, and the Feds could do better.  Just remove the damn checkpoints and stop violating the 4th and 5th Amendments.

[Ned Weasel]

Stridentweasel--many thanks for the detailed account.  The experience you had sounds quite traumatic and is far worse than any checkpoint transit I have done, including the one where I was in a borrowed car, thought I was being waved on, and moved forward, only to look up in the rearview mirror and see agents in hot pursuit.

Wow, I think that scenario wins in terms of the Border Patrol's complete lack of clarity in instructing motorists how to proceed through those things!

*  Checkpoint on I-25--I suspect this is a temporary checkpoint similar to the one on I-10, but I have never actually gone through it myself (in fact, I have not travelled the length of I-25 between US 70 at Las Cruces and the NM 26 interchange at Hatch).

I'm pretty sure that, technically, it was a temporary checkpoint, because there was an identical one several miles north, closer to Truth or Consequences (now there's an apt name: the Truth or Consequences Checkpoint!), but it was closed at the time.  I figured they alternated between the two.  The format of both these checkpoints is what I would describe as being nearly identical to that of a barrier toll plaza with high-speed ETC lanes on the mainline and a traditional toll plaza on the right-hand side.  At each of these two checkpoints, the freeway mainline was unobstructed by any permanent apparatus, but when the checkpoint was open, the mainline was blocked off, and all traffic had to exit to the right to go through the checkpoint.

I think the New Mexico ones were signed simply as "Inspection Station," but I seem to remember the Arizona one having better signage (it's possible that the Arizona one even said "U.S. Border Patrol" when I drove through, and I just didn't understand why at the time).  Still, I don't remember any signage at any of the checkpoints themselves that told motorists what to do.

Now, in regard to the choices you had when you were stopped and questioned, the basic rule is that any searches they do must be with your consent unless they have probable cause.

Thank you for the tips.  I did actually seek some trustworthy advice from a personal contact, shortly after the incident.  I certainly appreciate your additional input.

[mrsman]

I've never had any problem at the internal checkpoints, but I hate them.  If the Border Patrol did their job at the border there would be no need to have a second checkpoint further in.

The only internal checkpoint that I went through relatively regularly was the checkpoint near Camp Pendleton on I-5 between San Diego and L.A.

[DevalDragon]

78 is too fast in New Mexico - they can suspend your license for 3 over in a 75 zone. The thought behind this is 75 is fast enough.

A lot of out of staters find this out the same way you and I did.

I just got back from a 10,000 mile loop from Florida, up to Cleveland, across to San Fran, down to San Diego, and back to Florida via DFW and Little Rock.  I went through several border patrol checkpoints because I took roads down to the border to visit National Park Service units (Organ Pipe Cactus, Tumacacori, Coronado, etc.).  My experiences varied from a cursory glance and a wave-through, to a few questions about my Florida license plate and my trip.  This was at the checkpoint going out US 62/180 from El Paso to Guadalupe Mtns NP and, as it turned out, the agent happened to be from the same city I live in now. 

However, heading west on I-80, I got pulled over for "speeding".  (Okay, I had the cruise set at ~78 in a 75, and I didn't do a brake check when I saw the cop sitting in the median.  So I was certainly in the wrong.  But, there were three of us in a line, there was no tailgating going on, and he picked me instead of the two 18-wheelers.)  The cop was nice at first, said he was only going to give me a warning.  Then, he went through the same song and dance that stridentweasel describes upthread.  He even went as far as to read me my Miranda rights, though I was never formally charged with anything.  Turned out he pulled me over because of my Florida tag (well, he didn't state it outright, but highly hinted at it), thought I was drug running between FL and San Fran.  My story ends much like stridentweasel, with me standing in the grass while my car was searched.  After he found nothing but clothes, maps, and NPS brochures, I was finally sent on my way.  I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.  (The cop had a dog in the back; why didn't he just walk the dog around my car and let me go instead of wasting 20+ minutes of my life?)

However, heading west on I-80, I got pulled over for "speeding".  (Okay, I had the cruise set at ~78 in a 75, and I didn't do a brake check when I saw the cop sitting in the median.  So I was certainly in the wrong.  But, there were three of us in a line, there was no tailgating going on, and he picked me instead of the two 18-wheelers.)  The cop was nice at first, said he was only going to give me a warning.  Then, he went through the same song and dance that stridentweasel describes upthread.  He even went as far as to read me my Miranda rights, though I was never formally charged with anything.  Turned out he pulled me over because of my Florida tag (well, he didn't state it outright, but highly hinted at it), thought I was drug running between FL and San Fran.  My story ends much like stridentweasel, with me standing in the grass while my car was searched.  After he found nothing but clothes, maps, and NPS brochures, I was finally sent on my way.  I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.  (The cop had a dog in the back; why didn't he just walk the dog around my car and let me go instead of wasting 20+ minutes of my life?)
[/quote]

[jeffandnicole]

I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.

Well, yes, until someone sues them.  Finding drugs in a single car one time somewhere isn't a valid reason to search every car.

[Avalanchez71]

Next came the an array of classic lines such as "You look nervous" and "Do you mind if we search your car?" plus a seemingly endless string of questioning, with some of the questions repeated. 

I just got back from a 10,000 mile loop from Florida, up to Cleveland, across to San Fran, down to San Diego, and back to Florida via DFW and Little Rock.  I went through several border patrol checkpoints because I took roads down to the border to visit National Park Service units (Organ Pipe Cactus, Tumacacori, Coronado, etc.).  My experiences varied from a cursory glance and a wave-through, to a few questions about my Florida license plate and my trip.  This was at the checkpoint going out US 62/180 from El Paso to Guadalupe Mtns NP and, as it turned out, the agent happened to be from the same city I live in now. 

However, heading west on I-80, I got pulled over for "speeding".  (Okay, I had the cruise set at ~78 in a 75, and I didn't do a brake check when I saw the cop sitting in the median.  So I was certainly in the wrong.  But, there were three of us in a line, there was no tailgating going on, and he picked me instead of the two 18-wheelers.)  The cop was nice at first, said he was only going to give me a warning.  Then, he went through the same song and dance that stridentweasel describes upthread.  He even went as far as to read me my Miranda rights, though I was never formally charged with anything.  Turned out he pulled me over because of my Florida tag (well, he didn't state it outright, but highly hinted at it), thought I was drug running between FL and San Fran.  My story ends much like stridentweasel, with me standing in the grass while my car was searched.  After he found nothing but clothes, maps, and NPS brochures, I was finally sent on my way.  I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.  (The cop had a dog in the back; why didn't he just walk the dog around my car and let me go instead of wasting 20+ minutes of my life?)

Why did you relinquish your rights?  Never allow a law enforcement officer to search your vehicle.  It is you right not to.

[kkt]

Next came the an array of classic lines such as "You look nervous" and "Do you mind if we search your car?" plus a seemingly endless string of questioning, with some of the questions repeated. 

I just got back from a 10,000 mile loop from Florida, up to Cleveland, across to San Fran, down to San Diego, and back to Florida via DFW and Little Rock.  I went through several border patrol checkpoints because I took roads down to the border to visit National Park Service units (Organ Pipe Cactus, Tumacacori, Coronado, etc.).  My experiences varied from a cursory glance and a wave-through, to a few questions about my Florida license plate and my trip.  This was at the checkpoint going out US 62/180 from El Paso to Guadalupe Mtns NP and, as it turned out, the agent happened to be from the same city I live in now. 

However, heading west on I-80, I got pulled over for "speeding".  (Okay, I had the cruise set at ~78 in a 75, and I didn't do a brake check when I saw the cop sitting in the median.  So I was certainly in the wrong.  But, there were three of us in a line, there was no tailgating going on, and he picked me instead of the two 18-wheelers.)  The cop was nice at first, said he was only going to give me a warning.  Then, he went through the same song and dance that stridentweasel describes upthread.  He even went as far as to read me my Miranda rights, though I was never formally charged with anything.  Turned out he pulled me over because of my Florida tag (well, he didn't state it outright, but highly hinted at it), thought I was drug running between FL and San Fran.  My story ends much like stridentweasel, with me standing in the grass while my car was searched.  After he found nothing but clothes, maps, and NPS brochures, I was finally sent on my way.  I did some googling that night and found a story where they actually did find drugs in a car so I guess they feel enabled to keep up this practice.  (The cop had a dog in the back; why didn't he just walk the dog around my car and let me go instead of wasting 20+ minutes of my life?)

Why did you relinquish your rights?  Never allow a law enforcement officer to search your vehicle.  It is you right not to.

In many law enforcement officer's eyes, it's a Catch-22.  If the motorist doesn't allow law enforcement to search, that's because they have something to hide.  It's suspicious and grounds for a search.

[hbelkins]

In many law enforcement officer's eyes, it's a Catch-22.  If the motorist doesn't allow law enforcement to search, that's because they have something to hide.  It's suspicious and grounds for a search.

That's what I was going to say. They'll kick the dog to make it bark and then use that as probable cause.

[Pete from Boston]

In many law enforcement officer's eyes, it's a Catch-22.  If the motorist doesn't allow law enforcement to search, that's because they have something to hide.  It's suspicious and grounds for a search.

That's what I was going to say. They'll kick the dog to make it bark and then use that as probable cause.

It's very easy to cry "rights!" when you're not at the side of the road being harassed.

[J N Winkler]

It pains me to say it, but if you can be sure there is nothing for them to find, allowing them to search usually costs less in lost time and money.  They don't have to carry out the search by the side of the road--they can detain you and damage your car towing it to an impound facility.  Some of the resulting costs can be claimed back through the courts since police misconduct is covered by various torts, but what the courts cannot and will not do is compensate you for the time and stress of suing the police, by "remote control" if you do not even live in the jurisdiction.

Most states have some residue of sovereign immunity and this can further restrict your ability to claim compensation for police misbehavior.  Also, if the police are not acting alone but are working with a DA who is abusing prosecutorial discretion (think Linda Fairstein and the Central Park Five, or the Tenaha forfeiture conspiracy), then you have the doctrine of prosecutorial immunity to contend with.

[SidS1045]

In many law enforcement officer's eyes, it's a Catch-22.  If the motorist doesn't allow law enforcement to search, that's because they have something to hide.  It's suspicious and grounds for a search.

That's what I was going to say. They'll kick the dog to make it bark and then use that as probable cause.

It's very easy to cry "rights!" when you're not at the side of the road being harassed.

It's actually very easy, even if you are on the side of the road being harassed.  "Are you detaining me for probable cause?  Am I free to go?"

This is a textbook-perfect illustration of how our rights are frittered away, by degree, until they're gone for good.  Allowing a search because it's somehow "easier" or "costs less" makes me gag.

The first line of defense of our constitutional rights is...us.  If we don't make a stand...if we don't make our representatives in government understand how important our rights are...if we don't stand up for them every single time, without fail, then those rights exist only on paper.  Or to put it another way...  (see signature)

[agentsteel53]

I do remember there being a lot of public surprise at a border checkpoint so far inland, but apparently this is within their hundred mile jurisdiction from the border.

I feel like I'm the only one that has noticed - or is at the very least outraged by - the fact that I've seen border patrol operating in Needles, CA.  you'd really have to fuck with the fabric of spacetime to call that "less than 100 miles from the border".

[J N Winkler]

It's actually very easy, even if you are on the side of the road being harassed.  "Are you detaining me for probable cause?  Am I free to go?"

Easy to say.  Not so easy when they respond by blanking the questions, reading you your Miranda rights, taking you to their detention facility, and towing your vehicle to their impound lot (probably doing expensive-to-repair damage in the process).

This is a textbook-perfect illustration of how our rights are frittered away, by degree, until they're gone for good.  Allowing a search because it's somehow "easier" or "costs less" makes me gag.

If your reaction is one of disgust (and I am not saying that is an unreasonable response), then are you offering financial support to those who have incurred heavy costs while asserting their constitutional rights?  Do you donate to the ACLU, for example?

[corco]

It's actually very easy, even if you are on the side of the road being harassed.  "Are you detaining me for probable cause?  Am I free to go?"

I had to do this in Soda Springs, Idaho a few months ago when I was pulled over for, not for failure to activate my blinker, but failure to activate my blinker for a full five seconds prior to making a lane change on Idaho 34 just north of US 30 before it turns east. Cop pulled me over, said immediately that he wasn't going to give me a ticket, but asked for my license anyway. Ran my license, a second cop car pulls up behind him. Cop 1 comes back, asks for my registration while visually snooping around my car, asking questions about where I'm going and why I'm travelling. He takes my registration, talks to Cop 2, then they ask me to step out of the vehicle.

Cop 1 then gives me back my license and registration and says "we would like to ask you a few more questions," I said "Am I free to go?" and the cop said "Yes" and as I started to walk away he says "We're wondering what's in your trunk." I said "You said I was free to go, right?" and he says "Yes, but we'd really like to take a look in your trunk." I said "You said I was free to go, right?" Cop says "Yes, but if you continue up the highway you will likely bump into some drug dogs at a checkpoint" (on Idaho 34 heading up to Wyoming, a road with basically no traffic). I said "You folks have a nice day" and walked back to my car- never did see those dogs.

That was the local Soda Springs yokels, and I will never give that town a dime more of my money (I had just bought lunch and gas there!). A google search indicates they do this way too frequently for a town this small as a matter of course - if they've had three busts in the last year on alleged turn signal violations, think of how many innocent people they pulled over on alleged turn signal violations.

So it can be done- but from them I was strongly getting the vibe that they were full of shit and wouldn't do anything if I left. Because I was answering entirely unrelated questions (why is your car so clean? where did you get your car? Oh, you bought it from your Grandma, where does your Grandma live?), I think they thought I would just consent to a search, and by the time I got to that point I was already getting less nervous (which I was at first, you get pulled over for a weird reason and then a second cop car pulls up, I think everybody gets nervous- especially in a town that is barely large enough to have its own police department, and definitely isn't large enough to have two patrol officers on a Sunday afternoon) and more just pissed off. In other situations, I might not have been so willing to pull that.

[J N Winkler]

I had to do this in Soda Springs, Idaho a few months ago when I was pulled over for, not for failure to activate my blinker, but failure to activate my blinker for a full five seconds prior to making a lane change on Idaho 34 just north of US 30 before it turns east.

That right there is a giveaway it is a bogus stop.  I haven't checked to see whether Idaho is an UVC direct adopter in this respect, but you are normally obliged to give only 100 ft advance notice with the turn signal on low-speed roadways, a value which increases to 300 ft on high-speed roadways.  Five seconds at 60 MPH is 440 ft.  Plus the usual enforcement standard for turn signal usage (as opposed to pretexting for drug stops) is turn signal seen to be on before the actual maneuver begins, with no attempt to measure distance.

Were the Soda Springs cops running video in their cruisers?  I bet they weren't since footage would have been evidence a defense attorney could subpoena to get the traffic stop (and any other evidence found as a result of it) thrown out.

[SidS1045]

Do you donate to the ACLU, for example?

To the tune of several hundred dollars a year.

[SidS1045]

Easy to say.  Not so easy when they respond by blanking the questions, reading you your Miranda rights, taking you to their detention facility, and towing your vehicle to their impound lot (probably doing expensive-to-repair damage in the process).

Those actions would answer my questions, but in that case, their probable cause had better be airtight, or I will own them.  At this point in my life I don't care what it costs in time or money.  We edge ever closer to a police state when crap like this continues to occur.

[Pete from Boston]

In many law enforcement officer's eyes, it's a Catch-22.  If the motorist doesn't allow law enforcement to search, that's because they have something to hide.  It's suspicious and grounds for a search.

That's what I was going to say. They'll kick the dog to make it bark and then use that as probable cause.

It's very easy to cry "rights!" when you're not at the side of the road being harassed.

It's actually very easy, even if you are on the side of the road being harassed.  "Are you detaining me for probable cause?  Am I free to go?"

This is a textbook-perfect illustration of how our rights are frittered away, by degree, until they're gone for good.  Allowing a search because it's somehow "easier" or "costs less" makes me gag.

The first line of defense of our constitutional rights is...us.  If we don't make a stand...if we don't make our representatives in government understand how important our rights are...if we don't stand up for them every single time, without fail, then those rights exist only on paper.  Or to put it another way...  (see signature)

There are tremendous personal risks in taking a principled stand on the side of the road to "defend liberty."  There's really no way to fairly judge someone who decides those aren't risks they can't take unless you have been that person.  The police and prosectuors need not convict you to complicate your life, just charge you.  Society likes the simple answer that charged means guilty (why would they have charged you otherwise?).  And for some segments of society, the likelihood of nuisance charges and likelihood of perceived guilt is a lot higher than average.

In a just and/or simple world this would not be a problem.  In this one, regardless of the principles that are at stake, it's not enough to say that it's people's responsibility to put it all on the line because it's the right thing to do.

[corco]

I had to do this in Soda Springs, Idaho a few months ago when I was pulled over for, not for failure to activate my blinker, but failure to activate my blinker for a full five seconds prior to making a lane change on Idaho 34 just north of US 30 before it turns east.

That right there is a giveaway it is a bogus stop.  I haven't checked to see whether Idaho is an UVC direct adopter in this respect, but you are normally obliged to give only 100 ft advance notice with the turn signal on low-speed roadways, a value which increases to 300 ft on high-speed roadways.  Five seconds at 60 MPH is 440 ft.  Plus the usual enforcement standard for turn signal usage (as opposed to pretexting for drug stops) is turn signal seen to be on before the actual maneuver begins, with no attempt to measure distance.

Were the Soda Springs cops running video in their cruisers?  I bet they weren't since footage would have been evidence a defense attorney could subpoena to get the traffic stop (and any other evidence found as a result of it) thrown out.

When I was in drivers ed in Idaho in 2003, we were taught 5 seconds or 100 feet, whichever is more and in this case 100 feet would be less as I wasn't going more than 25 or so, so it may have been valid, if what I was taught in drivers ed in Idaho is the law in Idaho.

As far as video, I'm not sure. The second cop said nothing though, it seemed like he was there as a witness, which possibly made my decision not to comply after I was told I was free to go riskier.

[texaskdog]

Billings to St Paul via I-94

[mcmc]

Has anyone ever heard of this happening: Cop pulls a motorist over, says "I clocked you going five miles an hour over the speed limit. I'm inclined to let you off with a warning. Would you mind letting me take a look inside your car?" The implicit deal being, you consent to a search and I won't hit you with a bullshit ticket.

If this is a trick used by cops, I wonder if it's ever been challenged in court.