Required to carry ID

[APatriot]

My friends,

How do we properly identify ourselves if we choose not to "carry ID"? Let's say I am engaged in an unlicensed activity....LOL, Lord knows if I get injured and unable to communicate with others I would like those "others" to know who I am and where I live. Wouldn't you?

As for me and my house, we carry ID at all times. Let common sense prevail.

 

[Renegade]

Texas Peace Officers, unless they have been specificically trained and deputized as Federal Officers, CANNOT enforce federal law.

Depends upon what you mean by "Enforce Federal Law". Conduct investigations, make warrant arrests and book into the system? No. But anybody can arrest/detain and hold suspects when a violation of Federal law occurs in their presence. Ranchers along the border do this all the time. When 50+ illegals were found at a truck stop near me a few years ago, the Sheriff detained them even though there was no violation of state law and turned them over to ICE.

 

[Renegade]

So if I have an AR15 that fires two round bursts, a Texas officer cannot arrest me? Because Texas penal code defines a machine gun as: (9) "Machine gun" means any firearm that is capable of shooting more than two shots automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

Marked difference compared to Federal law.

No, he cannot arrest you, take you down to the Justice Center, and book you into the system. He can detain you and wait for BATFE to show up and do it though.

 

[Texas1911]

No, he cannot arrest you, take you down to the Justice Center, and book you into the system. He can detain you and wait for BATFE to show up and do it though.

So the end result is the same, he ultimately is enforcing the law.

 

[Renegade]

So the end result is the same, he ultimately is enforcing the law.

Here is an example just last week of no Texas State laws being violated, but Federal Law (smuggling) being enforced by local police.

Huge Cache of Weapons, Ammo Seized in Texas Near Mexico Border - AOL News

 

[country_boy]

I always carry a form of I.d on me at all times. Just how I was raised.

 

[APatriot]

I always carry a form of I.d on me at all times. Just how I was raised.

+1. Me too. It must be a "country boy" thing...

 

[txinvestigator]

Depends upon what you mean by "Enforce Federal Law". Conduct investigations, make warrant arrests and book into the system? No. But anybody can arrest/detain and hold suspects when a violation of Federal law occurs in their presence. Ranchers along the border do this all the time. When 50+ illegals were found at a truck stop near me a few years ago, the Sheriff detained them even though there was no violation of state law and turned them over to ICE.

You are usually correct on this stuff. Can you show me that authority in the US Code?

 

[txinvestigator]

No, he cannot arrest you, take you down to the Justice Center, and book you into the system. He can detain you and wait for BATFE to show up and do it though.

Nevermind...same question

 

[txinvestigator]

Here is an example just last week of no Texas State laws being violated, but Federal Law (smuggling) being enforced by local police.

Huge Cache of Weapons, Ammo Seized in Texas Near Mexico Border - AOL News

What makes you think no state laws were violated? It could also have been a task force with Texas Peace Officers sworn as Deputy US MArshals.

The article is WAY to vague to make the conclusion that no Texas laws were violated.

 

[txinvestigator]

So if I have an AR15 that fires two round bursts, a Texas officer cannot arrest me? Because Texas penal code defines a machine gun as: (9) "Machine gun" means any firearm that is capable of shooting more than two shots automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

Marked difference compared to Federal law.

You are correct. If Renegade can source his "detain" statement I'll be wrong on this on. Don't think I am, but he is up more than I on federal stuff

 

[willygene]

any federal law that is a felony ie bank robbery is enforceable and arrestable by any texas peace officer. you detain and hold on imigration violations

 

[txinvestigator]

any federal law that is a felony ie bank robbery is enforceable and arrestable by any texas peace officer. you detain and hold on imigration violations

Texas Peace Officers arrest Bank robbers for violations of Texas Law. Robbery and Aggravated Robbery are violations of Texas law.

 

[Renegade]

You are usually correct on this stuff. Can you show me that authority in the US Code?

As you well know, Laws generally state what you cannot do, not what you can do. The US Code is huge and there are hundreds of Law enforcement agencies, each with their own laws. Then of course there is the Code of Federal Regulations, which is what is really used as a reference. There are some parts of US Code which specifically state who may enforce it, but they are small and the law clearly states a difference between enforce (investigate, collect evidence, arrest, prosecute), and merely a detention until relevant Federal authorities arrive.

Anyway, the bulk of the authority, comes from Case Law, where folks arrested by state officers have tried to evade prosecution by claiming an illegal arrest by state authorities. The courts have shown no sympathy, and have consistently upheld the right of states to arrest for Federal violations.

Manigault v. Springs, 199 U.S. 473, 480 (1905)
United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 591 (1948) " this arrest which, while for a federal offense, was made by a state officers."
Miller v. United States. 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958) "[state] officers have implicit authority to make federal arrests"
U.S. v. Janik, 723 F.2d 537, 548 (7th Cir. 1983) "Accordingly, they may initiate an arrest on the basis of probable cause to think that an individual has committed a federal crime."
Gonzales v. City of Peoria, 722 F.2d 468, 474 (9th Cir. 1983) "general rule is that local police are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes."
United States v. Salinas-Calderon, 728 F.2d 1298, 1301 n.3 (10th Cir. 1984) "state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations"
United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F.3d 1294, 1295 (10th Cir. 1999). "preexisting general authority of state or local police officers to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal law, including immigration laws."

 

[Renegade]

What makes you think no state laws were violated? It could also have been a task force with Texas Peace Officers sworn as Deputy US MArshals.

The article is WAY to vague to make the conclusion that no Texas laws were violated.

My comments are based on the facts presented in the article, which is all I have. Carrying those guns is not a State Crime.

 

[txinvestigator]

As you well know, Laws generally state what you cannot do, not what you can do. The US Code is huge and there are hundreds of Law enforcement agencies, each with their own laws. Then of course there is the Code of Federal Regulations, which is what is really used as a reference. There are some parts of US Code which specifically state who may enforce it, but they are small and the law clearly states a difference between enforce (investigate, collect evidence, arrest, prosecute), and merely a detention until relevant Federal authorities arrive.

Anyway, the bulk of the authority, comes from Case Law, where folks arrested by state officers have tried to evade prosecution by claiming an illegal arrest by state authorities. The courts have shown no sympathy, and have consistently upheld the right of states to arrest for Federal violations.

Manigault v. Springs, 199 U.S. 473, 480 (1905)
United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 591 (1948) " this arrest which, while for a federal offense, was made by a state officers."
Miller v. United States. 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958) "[state] officers have implicit authority to make federal arrests"
U.S. v. Janik, 723 F.2d 537, 548 (7th Cir. 1983) "Accordingly, they may initiate an arrest on the basis of probable cause to think that an individual has committed a federal crime."
Gonzales v. City of Peoria, 722 F.2d 468, 474 (9th Cir. 1983) "general rule is that local police are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes."
United States v. Salinas-Calderon, 728 F.2d 1298, 1301 n.3 (10th Cir. 1984) "state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations"
United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F.3d 1294, 1295 (10th Cir. 1999). "preexisting general authority of state or local police officers to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal law, including immigration laws."

Peace Officers need authority to arrest. So do private citizens. Under The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Peace Officers and Citizens are authorized to arrest under certain conditions. Without that, restraining someone against his or her will is a crime.

I am curious what Federal law would justify a Texas Peace Officer retraining someone for a violation of a non-Texas law, those for which which the CCP does not authorize arrest.

I'll look at the case law, but statutorily Texas Peace Officers cannot arrest for non-Texas crimes.

 

[Texan2]

There are numerous state and municipal LE agencies that have MOUs with the Feds and detain violators of Federal law until the feds take custody....perhaps statutorily there is no authorization...as Renegade stated, case law supports Texas LEOs authority to do so and it is done everyday all over Texas.

 

[Renegade]

My comments are based on the facts presented in the article, which is all I have. Carrying those guns is not a State Crime.

Update on that story.

FOXNews.com - Feds Sentence Two Illegal Immigrants for Carrying Nearly 150 Assault Rifles Into U.S.

Feds Sentence Two Illegal Immigrants for Carrying Nearly 150 Assault Rifles Into [sic] U.S.


Two Mexican nationals caught in Texas with 147 assault rifles, 10,000 rounds of ammunition, high-capacity magazines and bayonets have started serving short federal sentences after pleading guilty to entering the U.S. illegally.


McALLEN, Texas -- Two Mexican nationals caught in Texas with 147 assault rifles, 10,000 rounds of ammunition, high-capacity magazines and bayonets have started serving short federal sentences after pleading guilty to entering the U.S. illegally.
Federal prosecutors released the names of Damaso Alberto Rueda Cabrera and Arnulfo de la Cruz Sanchez on Thursday along with the unusual announcement that the men made their initial appearances in federal court, pleaded guilty and were sentenced to terms of 10 days and 45 days, respectively, all on Tuesday.
In a prepared statement, U.S. Attorney Jose Angel Moreno said the investigation continued and no further comment would be made by any of the agencies involved. U.S. District Magistrate Judge J. Scott Hacker sentenced both men. Marissa Perez-Garcia, head of the federal public defenders office in Laredo, said she had no comment on the case.
Laredo police pulled over the two men Saturday afternoon. Police said it was the biggest weapons seizure in the area in years and that while the investigation was ongoing, it appeared clear the guns were destined for Mexico.
De la Cruz, 53, of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, waded across the Rio Grande into Laredo on May 28, according to court records.
Rueda, 20, of Reynosa, Mexico, was the driver and had been in the U.S. since illegally crossing the border Dec. 15, 2008, according to court records.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Immigration and Customs Enforcement are conducting the investigation. The men remain in federal custody.
The seizure came just two weeks after Mexican President Felipe Calderon suggested in a speech to a joint session of Congress that the U.S. consider reinstating the assault weapons ban. Mexico has long argued that easily obtained weapons in the U.S. had escalated Mexico's violent drug war.
More than 23,000 people have died in drug-related violence in Mexico since Calderon declared war on drug traffickers after taking office in December 2006.