REFLECTOR: Special Report: AOPA demands answers on aircraft searches: Customs Pilot Perspective

Tue Jun 25 10:10:00 CDT 2013

I think the AOPA "Quick Reference Card" (link is on their page on this
topic) gives great advice.
Be polite. Comply, inform them of your rights and permissions granted or
denied and film with your iPhone!

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Mark Magee <edjonesbrady at gmail.com> wrote:

> I thought I was 'Right' of Attila the Hun.... :)
> Remember, these guys encounter -actual- bad guys routinely, daily. After
> encountering Bad Boys so often it can put them on edge. He mentioned the
> drugs flying from West to East, they did legalized pot in California, but
> not many other states. These guys are put in a fairly funky position.
> I know this guy well enough: he's a Patriot, active duty Navy pilot for 10
> years, now flying in the reserves.
> Customs has always been dirty business. Study the history, Customs service
> started as intercepting tobacco smugglers and began in England circa 1800.
> The Coast Guard evolved out of Customs in UK and became the model
> world-wide. Breaking up smugglers can get dicey, no?
> Are smugglers nice people?? :(
> I think Richard's post about having a liaison conduit with the local GA
> community to Customs and Local Law Enforcement is important. This situation
> is only going to get worse as our society degrades more, more states
> legalizing drugs that are illegal in other states etc. Lot's of money in
> flying a C210 load of pot from CA to Texas.
> I don't like the hassles either, we need to all be ready however. This is
> what our country has voted itself into. I fear it can only get considerably
> worse.
> I think the tips my friend shared are valuable: DON'T PROVIDE PROBABLE
> CAUSE!
> We don't flip off a highway patrolman when he pulls us over do we?
> At least not since me youth.... :)
> Mark Magee
> N34XL
> Brady TX
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 6:43 AM, Scott Baker <scottb33333 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/24/2013 11:07 PM, Mark Magee wrote:
>
> Mark,
> All is well.  I'm in the process of making al my FAA paperwork right for
> the airlines. I just finished my 737 type rating and finally picked up my
> ATP.
> As far as the ramp check stuff, I really don't have too much insight.  The
> topic probably would be better served if we could sit down and chat.  The
> biggest concern is ensuring that 4th amendment rights are not infringed
> upon, and balancing that with law enforcement.  There is a constant flow of
> drugs moving from the west coast and we are having a fair amount of luck
> intercepting it.  The problem arises when we talk with a law abiding
> general aviator who does NOT care for the government (and Texas is loaded
> with the Anti-govt type), and they do not care to try to understand the
> battle we are in. It is a VERY thin line, and a line that sometimes is
> wrongfully crossed.  Bottom line, if you don't want someone to look at your
> plane, you have the right to say no.  Law Enforcement Officials have the
> job of developing both reasonable suspicion and probable cause.  Once that
> is developed, there are a whole different set of rules that apply.  *With
> that being said, understand that flying is a privilege, and if you are
> witnessed exercising that privilege, LEO's (any city, state, federal) have
> the right/obligation to verify that you are properly certified* to
> operate the aircraft, and that the aircraft is properly registered with the
> FAA (standard ramp check stuff).  The guys in the office constantly go
> round and round since many of us exercise our general aviation privileges
> as well (perfect time to interject the fact that I bought a DELETED last
> year).  If you are approached on the ramp, be prepared to show your FAA
> docs and medical certificate.  If they ask to look at your airplane and you
> just don't feel like playing nice, say no.  Your freedom of movement should
> not be hindered if reasonable suspicion has yet to be determined.
>  Disclaimer..... It's a thin line that the LEO walks.  We all have our
> individual threshold for reasonable suspicion (with very little
> guidance....by design).  Probable cause, on the other hand, is fairly well
> established by various case laws (typically when judges start issuing
> warrants).  If RS/PC is established, the LEO can then continue with their
> "investigative detention" (restrict movement etc.) to satisfy their
> concerns.  RS is NOT enough to force their way into your personal property,
> but PC is (a dog that alerts satisfies PC by case law).  This rabbit hole
> continues on and on.  It is fantastic hangar talk that I would be happy to
> participate in (in uniform or not).  I hope this helps. Keep in touch and
> let me know if you need anymore info (or different explanation).
>
>  NAME DELETED
>
>
> "... LEO's have the right/obligation to verify that you are properly
> certified"
>
> Say again?!  What kind of logic is that?  Who among us does not take
> exception to this kind of thinking, i.e. 'guilty until proven innocent'?
> The actions and tactics use by law enforcement - as expressed in recent
> headlines - is just wrong and is also a major (in a big way) waste of money
> and law enforcement resources.
> I have had the 'pleasure' of interacting with local police, sheriff's
> department, fire department, FAA FSDO, and NTSB types at Sebastian (FL)
> airport.
> Eight out of Ten were judged in my opinion as being arrogant, power
> wielding, unintelligent regarding the topic at hand, and more concerned
> about their appearing to be 'in control' of things than in making good
> common sense observations and decisions.  As an exception to the rule, I
> give credit to the FBI as being professional, courteous, and only
> organization in the bunch that really knows what the _ell they were doing.
>
> When similar and incredibly stupid actions are added to the mix by local
> law enforcement officers - it is easy to adopt a disdainful
> guilt-by-association attitude towards every 'public servant' who wears a
> uniform - especially those who wear a badge and gun.
> From where I stand, these agencies have earned their reputation, and I
> believe are too arrogant to understand that the people they 'serve' do not
> like it.
> Federal (TSA, CBP, more) and local law enforcement have a long way to go
> to regain the trust they have lost to law abiding American citizens.  The
> question is, "Do they care?"
>
> Stepping off soap box now.
> Scott B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/private/reflector/attachments/20130625/cfe576fe/attachment.html>