AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-69 in TX  (Read 624761 times)

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1850 on: April 07, 2021, 01:24:01 PM »



Why does traffic on US-59, 77, and 281 have the US customs checkpoint not on the main lanes?

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that they still want to have the main lanes available to traffic if the checkpoint is closed for any reason.  I see from Historic Aerials that those checkpoint facilities have been off to the side of the highway mainline for decades, and there must be some reason they not only haven't torn up the other pavement, but they even maintain/repave it as part of regular road construction.  If you think about it, this isn't only true of the examples you provided, but also I-35 north of the Callaghan interchange:  all traffic is directed off the mainline into the checkpoint facility.

As evidence to support this theory, I present the fact that the mainline pavement is blocked off with mere road cones.  No big concrete barriers, no fences, just orange cones that can be easily removed as needed.

As further confirmation, a quick Google search returned an article from just two years ago, describing the shutdown of inland checkpoints and including this photo of US-62/US-180:



Quote from: Texas Monthly — Border Patrol Inland Checkpoints Shut Down So Agents Can Help Process Asylum Seekers (23-MAR-2019)
The El Paso Border Patrol sector has temporarily closed its system of highway checkpoints as it struggles to cope with a record influx of families crossing the border and requesting asylum. The agents who usually staff the checkpoints will be redeployed to process and transport the asylum seekers ... “We were told to go ahead and close down all the checkpoints,” one official said Saturday morning ... At a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 62/180 about 30 miles east of El Paso in Hudspeth County, orange cones that usually are used to funnel motorists off the highway and into the checkpoint had been repositioned Saturday evening to block the entrance to the checkpoint. The situation was repeated at several other checkpoints on major roadways in Far West Texas and Southern New Mexico, officials said.


Okay. Thanks for explaining! I would rather direct traffic onto the opposite bound lane.

Why would you rather remove an opposing lane from use?

What if the checkpoint facilities are closed for a whole month?  Indefinitely?

That wouldn't work very well on two-lane highways (such as the one pictured above).
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:43 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1851 on: April 07, 2021, 02:10:37 PM »



Why does traffic on US-59, 77, and 281 have the US customs checkpoint not on the main lanes?

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that they still want to have the main lanes available to traffic if the checkpoint is closed for any reason.  I see from Historic Aerials that those checkpoint facilities have been off to the side of the highway mainline for decades, and there must be some reason they not only haven't torn up the other pavement, but they even maintain/repave it as part of regular road construction.  If you think about it, this isn't only true of the examples you provided, but also I-35 north of the Callaghan interchange:  all traffic is directed off the mainline into the checkpoint facility.

As evidence to support this theory, I present the fact that the mainline pavement is blocked off with mere road cones.  No big concrete barriers, no fences, just orange cones that can be easily removed as needed.

As further confirmation, a quick Google search returned an article from just two years ago, describing the shutdown of inland checkpoints and including this photo of US-62/US-180:



Quote from: Texas Monthly — Border Patrol Inland Checkpoints Shut Down So Agents Can Help Process Asylum Seekers (23-MAR-2019)
The El Paso Border Patrol sector has temporarily closed its system of highway checkpoints as it struggles to cope with a record influx of families crossing the border and requesting asylum. The agents who usually staff the checkpoints will be redeployed to process and transport the asylum seekers ... “We were told to go ahead and close down all the checkpoints,” one official said Saturday morning ... At a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 62/180 about 30 miles east of El Paso in Hudspeth County, orange cones that usually are used to funnel motorists off the highway and into the checkpoint had been repositioned Saturday evening to block the entrance to the checkpoint. The situation was repeated at several other checkpoints on major roadways in Far West Texas and Southern New Mexico, officials said.


Okay. Thanks for explaining! I would rather direct traffic onto the opposite bound lane.

Why would you rather remove an opposing lane from use?

What if the checkpoint facilities are closed for a whole month?  Indefinitely?

That wouldn't work very well on two-lane highways (such as the one pictured above).
Actually, I would prefer that there be the checkpoint on the main lanes and the exit be an alternate redirection for when the checkpoints are down. It’s just me, I think.
Logged

zzcarp

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 240
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Westminster, CO
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 05:26:06 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1852 on: April 07, 2021, 09:06:18 PM »



Why does traffic on US-59, 77, and 281 have the US customs checkpoint not on the main lanes?

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that they still want to have the main lanes available to traffic if the checkpoint is closed for any reason.  I see from Historic Aerials that those checkpoint facilities have been off to the side of the highway mainline for decades, and there must be some reason they not only haven't torn up the other pavement, but they even maintain/repave it as part of regular road construction.  If you think about it, this isn't only true of the examples you provided, but also I-35 north of the Callaghan interchange:  all traffic is directed off the mainline into the checkpoint facility.

As evidence to support this theory, I present the fact that the mainline pavement is blocked off with mere road cones.  No big concrete barriers, no fences, just orange cones that can be easily removed as needed.

As further confirmation, a quick Google search returned an article from just two years ago, describing the shutdown of inland checkpoints and including this photo of US-62/US-180:



Quote from: Texas Monthly — Border Patrol Inland Checkpoints Shut Down So Agents Can Help Process Asylum Seekers (23-MAR-2019)
The El Paso Border Patrol sector has temporarily closed its system of highway checkpoints as it struggles to cope with a record influx of families crossing the border and requesting asylum. The agents who usually staff the checkpoints will be redeployed to process and transport the asylum seekers ... “We were told to go ahead and close down all the checkpoints,” one official said Saturday morning ... At a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 62/180 about 30 miles east of El Paso in Hudspeth County, orange cones that usually are used to funnel motorists off the highway and into the checkpoint had been repositioned Saturday evening to block the entrance to the checkpoint. The situation was repeated at several other checkpoints on major roadways in Far West Texas and Southern New Mexico, officials said.


Okay. Thanks for explaining! I would rather direct traffic onto the opposite bound lane.

Why would you rather remove an opposing lane from use?

What if the checkpoint facilities are closed for a whole month?  Indefinitely?

That wouldn't work very well on two-lane highways (such as the one pictured above).
Actually, I would prefer that there be the checkpoint on the main lanes and the exit be an alternate redirection for when the checkpoints are down. It’s just me, I think.

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.
Logged
So many miles and so many roads

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11834
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 10:39:27 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1853 on: April 07, 2021, 09:28:03 PM »

Was it originally envisioned that those checkpoints would only be used some of the time?  The impression I get is that they're essentially used all the time, to the point where it would make sense to just send the main lanes through them and have signs saying "no inspection, proceed with caution" in the rare event they're actually closed.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7775
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:37:29 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1854 on: April 07, 2021, 10:10:59 PM »

Was it originally envisioned that those checkpoints would only be used some of the time?  The impression I get is that they're essentially used all the time, to the point where it would make sense to just send the main lanes through them and have signs saying "no inspection, proceed with caution" in the rare event they're actually closed.

The "rear guard" checkpoints in CA on I-5 and I-15 are generally in operation 24/7(365); the facilities for those are essentially built into the freeway alignment, with a couple of bypass lanes available but normally coned off.  The ones on the secondary N-S roads:  CA 79, CA 86, CA 111 and CA 78 near Glamis, are "wide spots" in the road, with border patrol "mobile offices" parked next to the inspection lane(s).  The one on CA 86 (located immediately south of the west CA 78 junction) is rarely closed and actually has a small pass-through permanent structure (probably due to that route's 4-lane expressway status).   I've only seen that one closed once in probably two dozen passes through on that route -- but CA 111 generally stays open until about 11 pm and then shuts down until the next morning; and east toward Blythe on CA 78 as well as CA 79 near Julian are even more sporadic in operating hours -- and those are usually just a BP SUV or pickup truck parked off the pavement.  From what I know, there are a few other mobile-based setup sites, such as on County Signed S34 and S2, both just north of I-8, and the BP has been known to set up on random county highways in the Imperial Valley and in the hills around Pine Valley.  It seems that they want their presence known (and felt) by the general public using major highways -- but they want some semblance of an element of surprise as well.   
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:43 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1855 on: April 08, 2021, 12:13:49 AM »



Why does traffic on US-59, 77, and 281 have the US customs checkpoint not on the main lanes?

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that they still want to have the main lanes available to traffic if the checkpoint is closed for any reason.  I see from Historic Aerials that those checkpoint facilities have been off to the side of the highway mainline for decades, and there must be some reason they not only haven't torn up the other pavement, but they even maintain/repave it as part of regular road construction.  If you think about it, this isn't only true of the examples you provided, but also I-35 north of the Callaghan interchange:  all traffic is directed off the mainline into the checkpoint facility.

As evidence to support this theory, I present the fact that the mainline pavement is blocked off with mere road cones.  No big concrete barriers, no fences, just orange cones that can be easily removed as needed.

As further confirmation, a quick Google search returned an article from just two years ago, describing the shutdown of inland checkpoints and including this photo of US-62/US-180:



Quote from: Texas Monthly — Border Patrol Inland Checkpoints Shut Down So Agents Can Help Process Asylum Seekers (23-MAR-2019)
The El Paso Border Patrol sector has temporarily closed its system of highway checkpoints as it struggles to cope with a record influx of families crossing the border and requesting asylum. The agents who usually staff the checkpoints will be redeployed to process and transport the asylum seekers ... “We were told to go ahead and close down all the checkpoints,” one official said Saturday morning ... At a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 62/180 about 30 miles east of El Paso in Hudspeth County, orange cones that usually are used to funnel motorists off the highway and into the checkpoint had been repositioned Saturday evening to block the entrance to the checkpoint. The situation was repeated at several other checkpoints on major roadways in Far West Texas and Southern New Mexico, officials said.


Okay. Thanks for explaining! I would rather direct traffic onto the opposite bound lane.

Why would you rather remove an opposing lane from use?

What if the checkpoint facilities are closed for a whole month?  Indefinitely?

That wouldn't work very well on two-lane highways (such as the one pictured above).
Actually, I would prefer that there be the checkpoint on the main lanes and the exit be an alternate redirection for when the checkpoints are down. It’s just me, I think.

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.
It’s pointless to have it to the side of the highway when people will virtually have to show their passports.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2450
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 12:29:32 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1856 on: April 08, 2021, 12:49:56 AM »

This is going back more than 40 years (damn, I'm getting old), but I can remember checkpoints in Arizona and Southern California where my parents had to stop the car along Interstate 8. Officials weren't looking for illegals from Mexico. They were checking for contraband produce that could have certain bugs in it, such as fruit flies. The orange grove business was huge back then. I imagine it still is now. But I guess they have more modern pesticides and other tools to deal with vermin than they had back in the mid 1970's.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7775
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:37:29 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1857 on: April 08, 2021, 01:57:23 AM »

This is going back more than 40 years (damn, I'm getting old), but I can remember checkpoints in Arizona and Southern California where my parents had to stop the car along Interstate 8. Officials weren't looking for illegals from Mexico. They were checking for contraband produce that could have certain bugs in it, such as fruit flies. The orange grove business was huge back then. I imagine it still is now. But I guess they have more modern pesticides and other tools to deal with vermin than they had back in the mid 1970's.

Those were not federal checkpoints but run by the California Dept. of Agriculture; they've been in operation ever since I can recall (at least 65 years, probably more!).  Arizona had their own version which ran periodically when specific pests that could target their citrus crop (which centered around the I-8 corridor) were rampant.  They were specifically active along the CA entry points from about 1981 through 1985 as a result of CA's "Medfly" infestation that peaked '81-'82 that affected both citrus and deciduous fruit growing.  But CA's program is still active, although the inbound checkpoints have cut back their times of operation in recent years, often simply shutting down at night on several major routes.   Nevertheless, some checkpoint areas have themselves expanded and relocated recently; both SB I-15 and WB I-80 had their points relocated considerably closer to the state line than in previous years; the latter due to complaints from both Lake Tahoe residents who were annoyed at having to stop every time they went "over the hill" for shopping and other activities as well as truckers -- the original checkpoint was just west of the CA 89 junction and right at the foot of the heavy westbound grade up to Donner Summit, so trucks didn't have the opportunity to use momentum to surmount the hill from a dead stop.  In the case of I-15, the original checkpoint was at Yermo, just NE of Barstow, placed there to also collect traffic coming in from CA 127; that was later deemed to be insignificant, so the checkpoint was moved to right after the state line and expanded to several lanes to handle peak weekend traffic from Las Vegas. 
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1858 on: April 08, 2021, 09:48:09 AM »

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.

It’s pointless to have it to the side of the highway when people will virtually have to show their passports.

US citizens are not required to show any papers at those checkpoints.

Theoretically at least, the only question the agents are entitled to ask you is what your citizenship is.  Of the ten times I've driven through them, that was the only question asked more often than not.  The remaining couple of times, the agent merely asked where we had been and what we were doing there.  I've never once been asked to show any papers.  Even when I answered "Laredo" and then the agent pointed at my Mexican windshield sticker residue and asked if I had been in Mexico before that, my apparent misleading answer caused zero trouble.  On the US-277 checkpoint north of Del Rio, the agent sometimes doesn't even step out of the shack.  US citizens?  —  Yes, sir.  —  Have a safe drive!
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:43 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1859 on: April 08, 2021, 10:13:15 AM »

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.

It’s pointless to have it to the side of the highway when people will virtually have to show their passports.

US citizens are not required to show any papers at those checkpoints.

Theoretically at least, the only question the agents are entitled to ask you is what your citizenship is.  Of the ten times I've driven through them, that was the only question asked more often than not.  The remaining couple of times, the agent merely asked where we had been and what we were doing there.  I've never once been asked to show any papers.  Even when I answered "Laredo" and then the agent pointed at my Mexican windshield sticker residue and asked if I had been in Mexico before that, my apparent misleading answer caused zero trouble.  On the US-277 checkpoint north of Del Rio, the agent sometimes doesn't even step out of the shack.  US citizens?  —  Yes, sir.  —  Have a safe drive!
Okay, but I mean stop then. Every time I’ve gone through these, I’ve always had to stop. Except our school when we played in Mission, TX. But that’s about it. But now, thinking of it, my proposal doesn’t sound very cohesive.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 538
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 07:17:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1860 on: April 08, 2021, 10:18:27 AM »

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.

It’s pointless to have it to the side of the highway when people will virtually have to show their passports.

US citizens are not required to show any papers at those checkpoints.

Theoretically at least, the only question the agents are entitled to ask you is what your citizenship is.  Of the ten times I've driven through them, that was the only question asked more often than not.  The remaining couple of times, the agent merely asked where we had been and what we were doing there.  I've never once been asked to show any papers.  Even when I answered "Laredo" and then the agent pointed at my Mexican windshield sticker residue and asked if I had been in Mexico before that, my apparent misleading answer caused zero trouble.  On the US-277 checkpoint north of Del Rio, the agent sometimes doesn't even step out of the shack.  US citizens?  —  Yes, sir.  —  Have a safe drive!

While they don't have permanent checkpoints in states that border Canada, I have seen the Border Patrol set up mobile checkpoints along highways within a certain distance from the Canadian Border. Back in 2013, I was driving south on I-89 in Vermont and encountered one of the Border Patrol's mobile checkpoints south of Montpelier. Since the checkpoint was not a permanent fixture (they were diverting traffic into one of the rest areas along I-89; the agents sat in a trailer the Border Patrol brought to the rest area) , I figure the Border Patrol sets them up for a few hours (maybe a day) at one location, then move on to another spot.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Avalanchez71

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1390
  • Location: Middle Tennessee
  • Last Login: April 09, 2021, 04:02:46 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1861 on: April 08, 2021, 10:29:46 AM »



Why does traffic on US-59, 77, and 281 have the US customs checkpoint not on the main lanes?

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that they still want to have the main lanes available to traffic if the checkpoint is closed for any reason.  I see from Historic Aerials that those checkpoint facilities have been off to the side of the highway mainline for decades, and there must be some reason they not only haven't torn up the other pavement, but they even maintain/repave it as part of regular road construction.  If you think about it, this isn't only true of the examples you provided, but also I-35 north of the Callaghan interchange:  all traffic is directed off the mainline into the checkpoint facility.

As evidence to support this theory, I present the fact that the mainline pavement is blocked off with mere road cones.  No big concrete barriers, no fences, just orange cones that can be easily removed as needed.

As further confirmation, a quick Google search returned an article from just two years ago, describing the shutdown of inland checkpoints and including this photo of US-62/US-180:



Quote from: Texas Monthly — Border Patrol Inland Checkpoints Shut Down So Agents Can Help Process Asylum Seekers (23-MAR-2019)
The El Paso Border Patrol sector has temporarily closed its system of highway checkpoints as it struggles to cope with a record influx of families crossing the border and requesting asylum. The agents who usually staff the checkpoints will be redeployed to process and transport the asylum seekers ... “We were told to go ahead and close down all the checkpoints,” one official said Saturday morning ... At a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 62/180 about 30 miles east of El Paso in Hudspeth County, orange cones that usually are used to funnel motorists off the highway and into the checkpoint had been repositioned Saturday evening to block the entrance to the checkpoint. The situation was repeated at several other checkpoints on major roadways in Far West Texas and Southern New Mexico, officials said.


Okay. Thanks for explaining! I would rather direct traffic onto the opposite bound lane.

Why would you rather remove an opposing lane from use?

What if the checkpoint facilities are closed for a whole month?  Indefinitely?

That wouldn't work very well on two-lane highways (such as the one pictured above).
Actually, I would prefer that there be the checkpoint on the main lanes and the exit be an alternate redirection for when the checkpoints are down. It’s just me, I think.

I would prefer that there be no interior border checkpoints. The idea of forcing all travelers to stop for "papers, please" is just abhorrent for intracountry travel in a free society, and it violates the Fourth Amendment (not withstanding judicial opinions to the contrary). Until I traveled US 77 between Brownsville and Corpus Christie, I had no clue that such things even existed.

I agree with you on these papers, please checkpoints.  The SOCTUS has said otherwise.  Weird since the Fourth Amendment is easy to read and understand.

Your papers are not in order.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1862 on: April 08, 2021, 11:12:10 AM »

Okay, but I mean stop then. Every time I’ve gone through these, I’ve always had to stop. Except our school when we played in Mission, TX. But that’s about it.

So what?  You have to stop if a police officer pulls you over too.  It only invades your rights at a certain point after that, and the inland checkpoints don't get to that point.

I agree with you on these papers, please checkpoints.  The SOCTUS has said otherwise.  Weird since the Fourth Amendment is easy to read and understand.

Your papers are not in order.

What papers have you been required to show at these inland checkpoints, after telling the agent you were a US citizen?

I've never been required to show any.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 480
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 03:02:21 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1863 on: April 08, 2021, 11:29:35 AM »

I have not been in southern Texas in a couple of decades. The way it used to work is they would have a gatekeeper on the main-lanes. They would decide who needed inspection. It worked better if you held up your license as you passed the gatekeeper. He would ask "anything to declare?" If you said yes, you got diverted. 

 Still there were random checks of those who had nothing to declare, showed ID, and had no suspicious callouts.   We spent nearly a month down there. We passed through without being diverted probably close to 15 times. Once, though we were chosen for inspection.  You just pull the stuff in your trunk out and lay it on the pavement under a shed. They were matter of fact; maybe a little put out that we went too slowly to suit them. We were changing campgrounds and had everything we had with us (in a 2-door Grand Prix) There was a bunch... we actually had to replace the trunk lid after the trip because we damaged it by overstuffing it closed.

The bottom line is it isn't in the main lanes because (at least in the past) not everyone gets inspected.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1864 on: April 08, 2021, 11:40:15 AM »

I have not been in southern Texas in a couple of decades. The way it used to work is they would have a gatekeeper on the main-lanes. They would decide who needed inspection. It worked better if you held up your license as you passed the gatekeeper. He would ask "anything to declare?" If you said yes, you got diverted. 

 Still there were random checks of those who had nothing to declare, showed ID, and had no suspicious callouts.   We spent nearly a month down there. We passed through without being diverted probably close to 15 times. Once, though we were chosen for inspection.  You just pull the stuff in your trunk out and lay it on the pavement under a shed. They were matter of fact; maybe a little put out that we went too slowly to suit them. We were changing campgrounds and had everything we had with us (in a 2-door Grand Prix) There was a bunch... we actually had to replace the trunk lid after the trip because we damaged it by overstuffing it closed.

The bottom line is it isn't in the main lanes because (at least in the past) not everyone gets inspected.

Yeah, I don't think what exists now is the same thing.  I've never once been asked if I had anything to declare.  At the actual border, yes, but not an the inland checkpoints.  Same thing going south into Mexico:  at the inland checkpoints, all they've cared about was citizen/traveler status, and to make sure we had our personal and vehicle papers as non-Mexican citizens.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 480
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 03:02:21 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1865 on: April 08, 2021, 11:53:28 AM »

I have not been in southern Texas in a couple of decades. The way it used to work is they would have a gatekeeper on the main-lanes. They would decide who needed inspection. It worked better if you held up your license as you passed the gatekeeper. He would ask "anything to declare?" If you said yes, you got diverted. 

 Still there were random checks of those who had nothing to declare, showed ID, and had no suspicious callouts.   We spent nearly a month down there. We passed through without being diverted probably close to 15 times. Once, though we were chosen for inspection.  You just pull the stuff in your trunk out and lay it on the pavement under a shed. They were matter of fact; maybe a little put out that we went too slowly to suit them. We were changing campgrounds and had everything we had with us (in a 2-door Grand Prix) There was a bunch... we actually had to replace the trunk lid after the trip because we damaged it by overstuffing it closed.

The bottom line is it isn't in the main lanes because (at least in the past) not everyone gets inspected.

Yeah, I don't think what exists now is the same thing.  I've never once been asked if I had anything to declare.  At the actual border, yes, but not an the inland checkpoints.  Same thing going south into Mexico:  at the inland checkpoints, all they've cared about was citizen/traveler status, and to make sure we had our personal and vehicle papers as non-Mexican citizens.

Back then, there was quite a bit of free crossing going on. We never drove into Mexico on that trip (as far as that goes, we never crossed at an OFFICIAL  crossing. )  I agree that the primary question was about residency status. On some of the other trips through, they got our kids to answer questions. I am not sure what the threshold for English fluency was.  Mine all speak redneck.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6948
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:54 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1866 on: April 08, 2021, 01:07:14 PM »

Even in the recent past, I've been through Border Patrol checkpoints (e.g., I-10 near Deming in 2016) when most traffic was being waved through without inspection.

I've been asked to open my trunk for inspection on at least one occasion (US 70 just outside the White Sands in the mid-noughties).  This, of course, is not a check of the citizenship of any visible passengers.  But the Border Patrol is like other law enforcement agencies in that it will ask things and take advantage of citizens' impulse to comply with authority, just to avoid the potential hassle of being detained.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1016
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 11:00:40 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1867 on: April 08, 2021, 01:24:04 PM »

Unfortunately YouTube is rife of citizens exercising their right to remain silent at these checkpoints and it starting the border patrol paranoia schtick. (Hey BP, "silence is not guilt")

A few end up with windows broken and being pulled out by a BP officer, some end up with a state police trooper showing up and letting them go and reminding BP about how checkpoint rights work.

One guy even hung his license, insurance and registration on a stringed baggie out the window and the BP still made him pull over for "non-compliance".

It is first and foremost a training issue. Most of these BP officers have not been properly trained on how the laws work at non-border checkpoints.

You can't expect them to be constitutional scholars, but some training about how the 4th and 5th amendments work as it relates to non-border checkpoints would help solve this.

The US Supreme Court has ruled pretty definitively on how non-border checkpoints can operate and about half of them violate it constantly.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1868 on: April 08, 2021, 02:13:00 PM »

Exactly.  The checkpoints themselves do not trample on one's rights.  But individual agents might do so, just as any police officer might.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:43 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1869 on: April 08, 2021, 05:58:56 PM »

Now, regarding the highway, will there be frontage roads for I-69W, E, and C in those areas? If so, would the frontage roads curve separately from the checkpoints, or will the checkpoints be on the frontage roads?
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2923
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 10:40:27 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1870 on: April 08, 2021, 06:11:51 PM »

Are they ever going to eliminate/convert the at-grade intersections at the southernmost segment of Interstate 69E in Brownsville? Such as cul-du-sacing Courage St., removing the driveway just north of Courage St., and turning the University Blvd. intersection into a grade-separation or an interchange?
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:30:43 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1871 on: April 08, 2021, 07:19:11 PM »

Are they ever going to eliminate/convert the at-grade intersections at the southernmost segment of Interstate 69E in Brownsville? Such as cul-du-sacing Courage St., removing the driveway just north of Courage St., and turning the University Blvd. intersection into a grade-separation or an interchange?
I don’t see that as viable at this time, considering the right of way they have to acquire and the proximity of the highway to the toll plaza, and funding.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7775
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:37:29 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1872 on: April 08, 2021, 09:12:27 PM »

Are they ever going to eliminate/convert the at-grade intersections at the southernmost segment of Interstate 69E in Brownsville? Such as cul-du-sacing Courage St., removing the driveway just north of Courage St., and turning the University Blvd. intersection into a grade-separation or an interchange?
I don’t see that as viable at this time, considering the right of way they have to acquire and the proximity of the highway to the toll plaza, and funding.

If it hasn't been done at the southern I-35 terminus at Laredo, it probably won't be done at Brownsville either.  OTOH, if one wants free-flow right to Mexican customs, there's always the north Laredo/I-69W border crossing.  IIRC, there are long range plans to send I-69C down to a border crossing rather than its present terminus at I-2 -- so there's a possibility that may be eventually be configured as a "direct feed" rather than over local streets prior to the border facililties.   
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6948
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:54 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1873 on: April 08, 2021, 09:38:54 PM »

Now, regarding the highway, will there be frontage roads for I-69W, E, and C in those areas? If so, would the frontage roads curve separately from the checkpoints, or will the checkpoints be on the frontage roads?

I think it is too early to tell.  Using a crowdsourced checkpoints map and the 2018 I-69 implementation strategy report, I see three checkpoints are involved:

*  Sarita (I-69E/US 77):  This is covered by CCSJ 0327-03-048, which has not yet been advertised for construction.  I am not aware of any schematics that are available.

*  Falfurrias (I-69C/US 281):  This is covered by CCSJ 0255-04-096, which, as of 2018, was not scheduled for construction until 2025.

*  Freer (I-69W/US 59):  This is part of a length marked as "program status undetermined" (no CCSJ assigned) as of 2018.

I can promise, however, that any permanent infrastructure will be configured so that Border Patrol can prevent the frontage road being used to bypass a checkpoint that is in operation on the mainline.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17006
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1874 on: April 09, 2021, 11:49:37 AM »

OTOH, if one wants free-flow right to Mexican customs, there's always the north Laredo/I-69W border crossing.



That crossing is for commercial traffic only.  Kind of an important detail.

Crossing at the Colombia Solidarity Bridge, however, involves just three stop signs between San Antonio (I-35) and Monterrey (Carr. Fed. 85)—one at the I-35/TX-255 exit, one at the TX-255/FM-1472 intersection, and one at Carr. Fed. 2 immediately south of the border complex—and zero stoplights.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.