A new danger for everyday drivers

[AG98RT10]

This is what they were going to do to SEASNAKE.

That is really scary. Granted, the woman was clearly not cooperating, but that whole scene just seemed very wrong. To me, the whole idea of cops being able to make traffic stops (for less than criminal, life-threatening, clear and present danger kinds of situations) has always seemed to be one of those gray areas that borders on violation of the 4th amendment. But, what the hey, I'm not a lawperson.

Here's the Fourth, in case you haven't read it in awhile:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[gthomas]

Gthomas that video was great. The woman in the video got what she deserved. They tell you to get off the phone and get out of the car, they mean it.

+1

The whole point is you should always do what the police tell you to do (within reason).

+1 When I am pulled over, I get off the phone (if on it) before I am even fully stopped. Also I let my window down, turn off the car, and have my hands on top of the steering wheel before the cop is out of his car. (Can you tell I have alot of experience with this. ) Also, I never start trying to get license, registration, insurance card, etc., wait for the cop to ask for it, and then retrieve it. Also, before reaching for the glove compartment, it is a good idea to let the cop know there is a gun there.
I have gotten out of alot of tickets. Also, I can't figure out people like the lady, who act like that, or run from the cops because of a suspended license.The lady knew it, so accept the arrest.
And for the runners/potental runners, I was pulled over, I asked what I did wrong, as I handed him my license (suspended) I told him 'Sir, I am going to be honest with you, my license is suspended, this is why I am driving...'. He came back 'Jail is full, and I don't feel like going downtown, so here is a summons, and drive straight home'.
Also, I will stay at a scene if I have info to give to the cops, will call if necessary, etc..
But, when it comes to me, having not done anything wrong, gets upsetting. Basically, I haven't done anything wrong, I am not obligated to give up my rights and allow a search. And yes, it is giving up your rights, because they would have a warrant if they had probable cause.
And yes, I have been asked to submit to a vehicle search (multiple times), and I have never allowed it.

cop: do you mind if I search your vehicle?
me: no, I don't mind, when you show me the warrant.
cop: why won't you let us search the vehicle? what are you trying to hide?
me: I used to believe that way, but the fact is, if you had probable cause you wouldn't be asking me.

And if they threaten to hold me while they get a dog, etc., I only say that I know how long it takes to get a ticket, and anything over the reasonable time will be viewed as harrassment, and my lawyer will be getting ahold of them.
Never been held for the unit to arrive.

Just because they are 'investigating' something and you happen to be someone they question, other that a few basic, I don't feel obligated to give a detailed autobiography for the last couple of days. Nor to allow them into my home/car, to basically search it when they don't have enough for a warrant.
I know, I am just making it easier for them, and it will be worth the trade off. HA it would be easy to allow cops into every home without a warrant to search for drugs in drug zones, but it doesn't mean you should allow it.

 

[gthomas]

This is what they were going to do to SEASNAKE.

That is really scary. Granted, the woman was clearly not cooperating, but that whole scene just seemed very wrong. To me, the whole idea of cops being able to make traffic stops (for less than criminal, life-threatening, clear and present danger kinds of situations) has always seemed to be one of those gray areas that borders on violation of the 4th amendment. But, what the hey, I'm not a lawperson.

Here's the Fourth, in case you haven't read it in awhile:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

We don't have a constitutional right to drive. And we have to obey traffic laws. If I knew I wasn't going to be pulled over for basic traffic infractions, it would be more dangerous to be on the road.
It's like drugs, alot of people thing we shouldn't even arrest druggies. It is nonviolent right, like prostitution? But when you scratch beneath the surface, that is not the case. Arrest them.

 

[Cop Magnet]

We don't have a constitutional right to drive. And we have to obey traffic laws. If I knew I wasn't going to be pulled over for basic traffic infractions, it would be more dangerous to be on the road.
It's like drugs, alot of people thing we shouldn't even arrest druggies. It is nonviolent right, like prostitution? But when you scratch beneath the surface, that is not the case. Arrest them.

G, you are right. My most recent understanding of this issue is that they do NOT need probable cause to stop and search a vehicle. By participating in the use of public roadways you are in an area where there is no REASONABLE EXPECTATION of privacy. This is how they get away with roadblocks, stopping and searching every vehicle for drugs/intoxicated drivers. There is no individual probable cause at work there. That may be a state-by-state issue, not sure, but it is legal.

Interesting how your views differ on this issue and the original one regarding the cops showing up at the home to look for a speeder.

 

[Cop Magnet]

That is really scary. Granted, the woman was clearly not cooperating, but that whole scene just seemed very wrong. To me, the whole idea of cops being able to make traffic stops (for less than criminal, life-threatening, clear and present danger kinds of situations) has always seemed to be one of those gray areas that borders on violation of the 4th amendment. But, what the hey, I'm not a lawperson.

Did you watch the whole video, as in the smaller parts broken up? He stops her and she says he has no right to do that, runs over a garbage can or something as she's pulling over, asks for his "car number" instead of giving up her license, has an expired license, refuses to get out, gets on the phone AFTER being pulled over, refuses to get off, pulls away from him and tells him to get off when he tries to get her out of the car, and then he warns her about 4 times before TASER'ing her. The second jolt, though, was just for fun Also amusing is the woman that walks back and forth between the squad car and the woman's car at least twice -- sounds like a great place to get caught in a crossfire. I freaked out too when I just saw the short clip, but the other clips tell the whole story. This biotch deserved it. I'd test her for crack.

 

[gthomas]

We don't have a constitutional right to drive. And we have to obey traffic laws. If I knew I wasn't going to be pulled over for basic traffic infractions, it would be more dangerous to be on the road.
It's like drugs, alot of people thing we shouldn't even arrest druggies. It is nonviolent right, like prostitution? But when you scratch beneath the surface, that is not the case. Arrest them.

G, you are right. My most recent understanding of this issue is that they do NOT need probable cause to stop and search a vehicle. By participating in the use of public roadways you are in an area where there is no REASONABLE EXPECTATION of privacy. This is how they get away with roadblocks, stopping and searching every vehicle for drugs/intoxicated drivers. There is no individual probable cause at work there. That may be a state-by-state issue, not sure, but it is legal.

Interesting how your views differ on this issue and the original one regarding the cops showing up at the home to look for a speeder.

I think they are two seperate issues.
If you are in your home with an opened blind while changing, people can stand outside and not be charged for looking at you, because since you left the blind opened, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. That changes if you closed the blind and they are peeping.
The roadstops, I'm out on that one, because I always get profiled to stop for them. They have a cop stand in the road pointing to cars, if you get pointed to you pull over. They pull over less than 1 in 10. Not fair to me. They have never been 'everyone gets stopped'.
At the roadblocks they get you to give up your rights so they can search your car.
As to nonwarrant searches, it's only what is in plain view.
Your car is still private property, you cannot be searched without a warrant, unless you've commited a crime(not speeding). However driving with a suspended license would.
If you 'invite' a cop into your home, if they find something, it is legal to use against you, but they can't open a drawer, move paper, etc., unless you give up your rights and allow them to do it.
This is why when they pull you pulled over, and they don't have enough for a search warrant, they have you sign a paper authorizing a search of your vehicle.

 

[gthomas]

[quote
Did you watch the whole video, as in the smaller parts broken up?
The second jolt, though, was just for fun
I freaked out too when I just saw the short clip, but the other clips tell the whole story. This biotch deserved it. I'd test her for crack.

[/QUOTE]


+1

 

[AG98RT10]

This is what they were going to do to SEASNAKE.

That is really scary. Granted, the woman was clearly not cooperating, but that whole scene just seemed very wrong. To me, the whole idea of cops being able to make traffic stops (for less than criminal, life-threatening, clear and present danger kinds of situations) has always seemed to be one of those gray areas that borders on violation of the 4th amendment. But, what the hey, I'm not a lawperson.

Here's the Fourth, in case you haven't read it in awhile:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

We don't have a constitutional right to drive. And we have to obey traffic laws. If I knew I wasn't going to be pulled over for basic traffic infractions, it would be more dangerous to be on the road.
It's like drugs, alot of people thing we shouldn't even arrest druggies. It is nonviolent right, like prostitution? But when you scratch beneath the surface, that is not the case. Arrest them.

Well, as I said, I'm no lawyer, but I'd think that at least some consideration would be given to what constitutes your "person," and the security and right not to be stopped and questioned/searched. Does that extend to the horse your forefather was riding? If so, then why not your auto? Just playing devil's advocate; I know there has to be some ability to intervene for traffic offenses...

But consider what they do around these parts on occasional Saturday nights. State troopers blockade an entire highway (both lanes) and stop EVERY car, check for proper tags/licenses, stick an alchohol-sniffer flashlight in the driver's face and ask the question: "Have you had anything to drink tonight?" Anyone seen turning around to avoid the roadblock is then pursued and receives special attention. Since I run into this at least twice a year, always around 11PM on a Saturday night, and I don't often stay out that late, I figure it's going on at least monthly...

Sorry, to me that's a clear violation of 4th and 5th amendment. It appears, since no one has successfully challenged their practices, that we, in fact, do not have those rights. At least, not anymore, or not while operating our motor vehicles. Interesting...

 

[2001 Sapphire Blue]

Bottom line is that if Seasnake said it wasn't him and "no" you can't check my car...the cops would have thought it was him and harrassed him forever.

 

[Warfang]

But consider what they do around these parts on occasional Saturday nights. State troopers blockade an entire highway (both lanes) and stop EVERY car, check for proper tags/licenses, stick an alchohol-sniffer flashlight in the driver's face and ask the question: "Have you had anything to drink tonight?" Anyone seen turning around to avoid the roadblock is then pursued and receives special attention. Since I run into this at least twice a year, always around 11PM on a Saturday night, and I don't often stay out that late, I figure it's going on at least monthly...

Sorry, to me that's a clear violation of 4th and 5th amendment. It appears, since no one has successfully challenged their practices, that we, in fact, do not have those rights. At least, not anymore, or not while operating our motor vehicles. Interesting...

By law... at least in California, it is illegal to have secret checkpoints that pop out of nowhere. That's what the commies used to do. By law, the police have to announce ahead of time when and where the checkpoints will go up. Stupid, but that's the law. Seeing how you know it's every weekend. They've already done their job informing the public they are there. The point is that you gotta be REALLY drunk to know that they are there every weekend and STILL drive up to them.

 

[Cop Magnet]

Ag98RT10,
(How many people "get" your handle?)
I agree completely that this type of search is unconstitutional. I was only pointing out the current interpretation of this issue, not supporting it. We live in a car culture, where driving is more or less part of our existence. Sure, you could get by without a car but it is generally the two extremes of our society or someone living in a very dense urban environment that can get away with this. Our government and society has perpetuated this, and that's just the way it is, like it or not. Crazy as it may sound, it is EXACTLY like the "horse culture" of our forefathers, and any infringement in that era would not have been tolerated. A horse thief was the worst thing a man could be, and no government even considered regulating horse use. Now we vote for our rights as drivers to be taken away without a second thought. No one's to blame for the current state of affairs but us. It says right there regarding abusive government that it is "the duty of the people to alter or abolish it".

 

[gthomas]

This is what they were going to do to SEASNAKE.

That is really scary. Granted, the woman was clearly not cooperating, but that whole scene just seemed very wrong. To me, the whole idea of cops being able to make traffic stops (for less than criminal, life-threatening, clear and present danger kinds of situations) has always seemed to be one of those gray areas that borders on violation of the 4th amendment. But, what the hey, I'm not a lawperson.

Here's the Fourth, in case you haven't read it in awhile:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

We don't have a constitutional right to drive. And we have to obey traffic laws. If I knew I wasn't going to be pulled over for basic traffic infractions, it would be more dangerous to be on the road.
It's like drugs, alot of people thing we shouldn't even arrest druggies. It is nonviolent right, like prostitution? But when you scratch beneath the surface, that is not the case. Arrest them.

Well, as I said, I'm no lawyer, but I'd think that at least some consideration would be given to what constitutes your "person," and the security and right not to be stopped and questioned/searched. Does that extend to the horse your forefather was riding? If so, then why not your auto? Just playing devil's advocate; I know there has to be some ability to intervene for traffic offenses...

But consider what they do around these parts on occasional Saturday nights. State troopers blockade an entire highway (both lanes) and stop EVERY car, check for proper tags/licenses, stick an alchohol-sniffer flashlight in the driver's face and ask the question: "Have you had anything to drink tonight?" Anyone seen turning around to avoid the roadblock is then pursued and receives special attention. Since I run into this at least twice a year, always around 11PM on a Saturday night, and I don't often stay out that late, I figure it's going on at least monthly...

Sorry, to me that's a clear violation of 4th and 5th amendment. It appears, since no one has successfully challenged their practices, that we, in fact, do not have those rights. At least, not anymore, or not while operating our motor vehicles. Interesting...

You do have your right to be secure in your home from illegal seizures/searches/etc., then why do we have building codes? Do we get rid of them because they interfere with our right to do what we want on our own property.
Same with cars. There were lots of accidents because anyone could by one and they usually didn't know how to drive. I have to say there is a major difference between horses and cars.
BTW horses are regulated for, usually by state law, and as long as you meet the criteria you too can own one. Ohh, the criteria does not really have to do with licensing the individual, but requirements for the horse.
Did you know that on your own private property you can carry a weapon concealed and you can't be arrested for it? Or that you can get around the Class 3 license and own a fully auto weapon (can't take it off the property, and yes, I know of someone that did do this). You can also allow someone to drive on your property, even if they don't have a license. Yes, for the latter two you need acreage to take advantage of it, but it can be done.
Regearding the video, a car was speeding (against the law), the police stopped her to give her a citation (fine). During the course of calling in the ladies information, it was determined she was driving with a suspended license, which is against the law, and is an arrestable offense.
At that point, when she was told why she was under arrest, and she refused to cooperate. That's still resisiting arrest. Ever heard of resisting arrest without violence? And if she does not cooperate and allow herself to be arrested, then after asking 3 times, take her into custody.
Here is a website for you. click click Go to the 'What to do' section.
I seem to recall something about turning around at roadblocks but can't seem to find it now.
However, if you are going somewhere where they have checkpoints (federal courts, stadiums, airports/metal detectors), you have the right to turn away. You do not have to submit, you can leave, and that is not considered probable cause for a search.
My roadblock stops have been 'have you been drinking', see license/registration/insurance. That's it. At the website, it has where the cops ask why are you here, blah blah blah. I would not answer those. And I would not allow them to put a breath analyzer to my face.
Well, after reading the section at the site I provided a link, I will not answer ant question in the future. I will provide L/R/I cards, that's it.
And look, it says the courts will allow up to 20 minutes of 'holding' you as reasonable, but that's it. That's why they didn't wait for the dogs (from my previous post).
As I stated or alluded to in my previous posts, if you have evidence I commited a crime, arrest me. Otherwise it is not my obligation to give you the evidence or to try to clear myself.

 

[AG98RT10]

Ag98RT10,
(How many people "get" your handle?)
I agree completely that this type of search is unconstitutional.

Never had anyone mention it, really. I guess most have had HS chemistry.

 

[SEASNAKE]

All of this is worthwhile info guys. I guess if it can happen to me, it can happen to about anyone. I know every officer around this area has had a chance to observe me driving around town, obeying the law. I drive very conservatively back and forth to work (maybe six years ago it was a little different - the first few months of Viper ownership...)for this very reason. I value my health and my car's health way to much to do any serious high speed drving around town. I prep my car and go to the track where I can enjoy it as much as possible in the safest environment. It was just so unexpected and of course I had done nothing wrong and had nothing to hide. If this ever happens again I will explain this to the officers and ask them politely to leave and not bother me at 3 am again. It won't be me on the road that late and if my car is stolen-it will wait til I get up.

If nothing else get every officer's name and badge number that shows up, ask who is filing the report and who identified the car. That way you know who is out to cause you problems in the future.

Learn something new everyday.

 

[joe117]

"My roadblock stops have been 'have you been drinking', see license/registration/insurance. That's it."

I always wondered why they get to ask for L/R/I when they stop you at an alcohol checkpoint.

Seems like that would be reserved for stops due to something other than random selection.

 

[prodiver]

Reasonable cause is a pretty broad statement. 6 years ago I had a housekeeper that received a speeding ticket and went to traffic court and was released by the judge if she attended traffic school. She failed to appear for traffic school and I have no idea how they found out she was at my house but they came there to arrest her. I was at work at the time. She answered the door and they followed her in the house to get her purse. I had 4 slot machines 2 were antiques and 2 were not. All totaled with the money that was in the machines they were probably worth about seven grand. Reasonable cause, they confiscated all the machines and they followed her into the bedroom the get her purse where they saw a Colt 45 on the nightstand. Ran a numbers check on the 45 and it was hot. I had a receipt for it that I got when I purchased it. Not only did I loose the 45 and the slot machines but they would not even return the money that was in the machines. I talked to a couple of attorneys and they both said to just let it go. Her speeding ticket cost me about 8 grand. I won't let a cop in my house or vehicle without a warrant after that.