Is that a Drill Sergeant or a Police Officer? Belligerent Cop Loses it On Man for Knowing His Rights

a reply to: nighthawk1954


IIRC, police officers are public servants. You know who are also public servants? Grocery store clerks, fast food cashiers, and waitresses. If any of the latter speaks to the public in such a way as the police officer in question, they would be fired. While on the job you are to act in a professional manner, no matter how bad your day has been or how frustrated you are with the person in front of you.

originally posted by: OneManArmy

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: L.A.B
a reply to: nighthawk1954

I'm British and happily abide by the law in my country. If I were to travel to the states and got a car to travel around in AND just happened to fall by one of these 'road safety' checkpoints you guys have, what are my rights?

I am assuming I have no constitution under your state laws, thus not a leg to stand on.. would an English traveller or indeed any tourist get bullied in these situations?

curious..

I'm sure if you showed them your passport, rental car documents etc and told them about why you were in the US..ie, Holiday, business whatever...they would let you go on your merry way..

I dont get it...Has the morning of 9/11 faded from memory in just 13 years. These traffic stops are there to serve a purpose. To catch people up to No Good. If one of these stops results in the capture of a terrorist cell about to commit mass murder, Then i'm pretty sure everyone will think a lot differently about having 3 minutes of their oh so important time wasted.

"Oh, my rights are being violated because a bad man with a badge asked for some ID,"......Give me a break.

The way to fight terrorists on the other side of the world is to terrorise your own civilians?

Interesting use of logic!

So a cop pulling you in and asking for some ID Terrorises you?.....Man, I would hate to be that scared everyday.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: OneManArmy

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: L.A.B
a reply to: nighthawk1954

I'm British and happily abide by the law in my country. If I were to travel to the states and got a car to travel around in AND just happened to fall by one of these 'road safety' checkpoints you guys have, what are my rights?

I am assuming I have no constitution under your state laws, thus not a leg to stand on.. would an English traveller or indeed any tourist get bullied in these situations?

curious..

I'm sure if you showed them your passport, rental car documents etc and told them about why you were in the US..ie, Holiday, business whatever...they would let you go on your merry way..

I dont get it...Has the morning of 9/11 faded from memory in just 13 years. These traffic stops are there to serve a purpose. To catch people up to No Good. If one of these stops results in the capture of a terrorist cell about to commit mass murder, Then i'm pretty sure everyone will think a lot differently about having 3 minutes of their oh so important time wasted.

"Oh, my rights are being violated because a bad man with a badge asked for some ID,"......Give me a break.

The way to fight terrorists on the other side of the world is to terrorise your own civilians?

Interesting use of logic!

So a cop pulling you in and asking for some ID Terrorises you?.....Man, I would hate to be that scared everyday.

No, lets get this right......

Being shouted at and treated like an insolent child when I was just going about my business not breaking any laws is being terrorised.

Whether you see it like that is irrelevant, "lesser" people will be terrorised.
As for fear, I got past fear of these thugs about 10 years ago when I put a police officer abusing his power into his place.
Fear is the biggest weapon of the NWO, why am I going to be scared?
Problem is, kids dont play out on the streets much these days, they dont go out on long adventures into the woods and they dont climb trees, we have cameras everywhere, police are gradually adopting more militaristic tactics and hardware and just let me tell you why....

BECAUSE THERE ARE ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT ARE DAMN TERRORISED INTO LETTING THINGS GET THE WAY THEY ARE. They are scared, being fed a daily dose of fear by the media is a way of life for the majority not the minority.
And yes, Id hate to be that scared every day too. I have foresight, I can see where this is all going, and it will make what people are scared of today seem like a walk in the park. Theres a thought that does truly scare me.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
What is the deal about picking a fight with LEOs by DENYING to show ID and Insurance? I've DONE it for YEARS.

The Cop got the ass about that alone I don't SEE why someone refuses to be IDENTIFIED in THIS day and age.

The cop said "I've asked you for your driver's license" which he actually hadn't. But the driver was technically wrong when he said he doesn't have to provide his license. Since he is operating a motor vehicle, he DOES have to provide the license.

Why do people keep posting this crap? It's flat out wrong.

A citizen operating a motor vehicle is not required by law to provide a drivers license or registration IF the stop is not initiated by a violation. Driving through a DUI checkpoint is not a violation in and of itself nor does it equate to probable cause.

Outside DUI checkpoints when pulled over for not wearing a seat belt, rolling through a stop sign, not signaling, speeding, etc, that equates to the act of being pulled over having been initiated by a violation. Therefor, for traffic stops you certainly ARE required to provide your license and registration.

This isn't that difficult to understand yet those in this thread making the most noise are ignorant of the law.

Driving down the road in and of itself in NOT a violation. Demanding a license and registration without having committed a violation is unconstitutional unless there is reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct, such as smelling like alcohol or slurred speech when driving through a checkpoint.

The Sitz vs Michigan case says as much, that cops at DUI checkpoints are "not allowed to make a driver pull over and show his/her license or check the driver's registration unless the officer noticed signs of intoxication."

In general, I find it quite concerning how many posters here believe standing up for your rights by asking simple questions against an unconstitutional request is seen as "being difficult".

Demanding a license and registration at a DUI checkpoint is unconstitutional, and illegal by the way, unless an officer notices signs of intoxication or there is reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct, neither of which this driver displayed.

If you support the cop demanding a license and registration in this scenario, by default you support a cop demanding a state ID in this manner when walking down the sidewalk, when hiking on a trail, when running in a park, etc, as there has been no violation or suspicion of illegal conduct. They're simply stopping you on your way from point A to point B without any probable cause, the same way as if you support this, you could be stopped in this manner after grabbing a sandwich on your lunch break and walking back to the office. How about that, checkpoint on 5th and K streets in your nearest city where you're stopped and asked for a picture ID and if they smell wine on your breath from lunch, they can give you a breathalizer test and possibly arrest you for being intoxicated in public.

Would standing up for your rights in that scenario also being considered "being difficult"? Those who are being difficult are the cops whom a) can't be bothered to read and understand constitutional law after giving an oath to uphold said constitution or b) do know the constitution but ignore it anyway while bullying citizens in the hope that they don't know their constitutional rights.

I guess those who oppose Obama engaging in military action all over the world without the authorization or consent of congress are also "just being difficult".

Truly embarrassing given what our founding fathers fought for centuries ago.

I've noticed from watching various videos or even watching cops, when the police stop people
they feel they need to be in control (Rightly so in their mind) as soon as that Authority starts being remotely questioned
the heat gets turned up 1000%.

Even the subject of the driver first saying he didn't have to hand over the card, then he remembers he does,
even if he was misguided into thinking he did not have to it should not get a response like that but questioning authority that will happen.

I'm sure it's a tough job, he didn't look like a young man, so maybe he's had a hard career and a bad day but it's still too
prevalent. Who knows maybe he had a better rank and done something stupid and got put on Safety stops for a while, just a long shot.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
All i see is a guy, a bit cocky blabbing on about rights or something, When Gunnery Sergaent Hartman Rips open the Door, Mr Cocky suddenly turns into Mr Jelly Doughnut here

SO because a bully was successful in forcing compliance by having to react to a militarist d-bag you consider this a win?

Since I have vast experience in dealing with veterans (really) I would have thought that this cop had issues and should have never been allowed to carry a gun,or to have become a cop. These emotional wretches love hierarchical formats because someone always has their backs. Backs that could stand some metaphorical lashing from sane sorts.
In a combat situation why would you want Mr Ballistic? To inspire the troops with crazy overreaction?
This was traffic stop which inconveniences the folks who pay for a service. When does anyone pay for being mishandled at best or abused like here?

originally posted by: largo

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
All i see is a guy, a bit cocky blabbing on about rights or something, When Gunnery Sergaent Hartman Rips open the Door, Mr Cocky suddenly turns into Mr Jelly Doughnut here

SO because a bully was successful in forcing compliance by having to react to a militarist d-bag you consider this a win?

?

No, I Consider it Hilarious they way the guy went from a Patriot standing up for his rights as a American Citizen to a most compliant Big Girls Bottom in a nano second because a Old Man Shouted at him...

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: largo

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
All i see is a guy, a bit cocky blabbing on about rights or something, When Gunnery Sergaent Hartman Rips open the Door, Mr Cocky suddenly turns into Mr Jelly Doughnut here

SO because a bully was successful in forcing compliance by having to react to a militarist d-bag you consider this a win?

?

No, I Consider it Hilarious they way the guy went from a Patriot standing up for his rights as a American Citizen to a most compliant Big Girls Bottom in a nano second because a Old Man Shouted at him...

No, what happened was this. The Officer was highly over aggressive, you could almost say "crazy".
The Officer is also armed with a gun. Now if you are not intimidated by a "crazy man with a gun" getting all red faced, up in your face, then you are not brave, you are a fool. Too many kids already lost their lives to these "crazy" cops.

originally posted by: HandyDandy



Bull#.



If a cop can't do his job while someone is being "belligerent" then they need to find other work.



IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO MOUTH OFF TO A COP!!!!!!!!



Get it yet?

Now I don't know about the US, but in the UK there is an offence of using threatening words and behaviour which I understand (I am no expert on law) can fall foul of the Public Order Act or the Criminal Justice Act.

Although it is undoubtedly encouraged that the police do not arrest on the basis that thy were shouted at; I would be very surprised if there was not a similar offence in the US(?)

a reply to: loveguy

Words used to describe an 'outfit' are inaccurate these days.
The gentleman you refer to as a 'peace officer' is actually not a peace-officer, he is a policy-enforcer enforcing a new policy of brute force?

The 1st was informed of video taking place; a courtesy extended to a peace-officer. The 2nd officer didn't receive the memo, nor the courtesy. He's probably pissed about having to enforce this new policy and doesn't know how to properly deal with it?

Listen, nobody and I mean nobody is more disgusted with the state of affairs with our out of control and ever militarized police force than I am, trust me. I do not condone the actions of that cop but we can't control the actions of others, we can only control our own and control them with the proper knowledge of how to do so.

I use the term peace officer as it pertains to law only. A border patrol agent in almost all cases is not a peace officer and unless he has been granted that special privilege inside the state he is operating the checkpoint, you are not obligated to show him identification when asked. He may then contact state or local authorities and request them to do a secondary screen and if they ask for your identification, you better believe you will need to produce it.

These cops are not border agents, they are peace officers despite the irony of that as shown in the video. None the less, the driver got it wrong when he responded that the cop was outside of his right to ask for identification because they didn't suspect him of a crime and you know what, the cop used his ignorance to invoke fear and indecision. It worked too, didn't it.

Had he been fully informed of the law and his rights / obligations, this situation could have gone a lot better for him and who knows, maybe even got a douchebag cop fired.

a reply to: Helious

It should be noted that Illinois is a Stop and Identify state. The driver, whose clearly seen too many youtube videos, decides to test legal boundaries with "Am I being detained". While the officer's reaction is BS... The driver was mostly at fault for setting off the event.

For People chiming about constitutional rights.

Remember that your constitutional rights still apply in a roadblock situation. Though police are permitted to stop you briefly, they may not search you or your car unless they have probable cause that you’re under the influence or you agree to the search. As such, you are not required to answer their questions or admit to breaking the law.... Sobriety checkpoints are generally permitted by the courts, but only if conducted properly. If you’re arrested at a police roadblock always consult an attorney before confessing or agreeing to a plea bargain. There might be some legal options that your lawyer can pursue. Source

originally posted by: theNLBS
a reply to: Helious

It should be noted that Illinois is a Stop and Identify state. The driver, whose clearly seen too many youtube videos, decides to test legal boundaries with "Am I being detained". While the officer's reaction is BS... The driver was mostly at fault for setting off the event.

For People chiming about constitutional rights.

Remember that your constitutional rights still apply in a roadblock situation. Though police are permitted to stop you briefly, they may not search you or your car unless they have probable cause that you’re under the influence or you agree to the search. As such, you are not required to answer their questions or admit to breaking the law.... Sobriety checkpoints are generally permitted by the courts, but only if conducted properly. If you’re arrested at a police roadblock always consult an attorney before confessing or agreeing to a plea bargain. There might be some legal options that your lawyer can pursue. Source

I'm no lawyer but what is the law pertaining to Police opening your door and shouting at you like a dog?

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: jhn7537

What's wrong with just getting your id ready, show it to them and be on your way? If they asked him to step out and starting making a fuss about nothing then perhaps he would have a point.

And THIS right here is exactly why we're at where we are today. It's called incrementalism. Next year it won't be just showing ID at a checkpoint. It'll be getting out of your car & getting frisked while another officer searches your car. 5 years from now it'll be supplying DNA via mouth swap. It will never stop. It will only get worse until we say NO.

a reply to: nighthawk1954

Wow.. what a jackass.. Im talking about the driver.

This is the kind of stuff, people behaving like this, that will cause the rest of us to loose more and more of our rights. The Police officers are trying to do their jobs, and someone comes along and has to be a jerk, just cause they can..

a reply to: Taggart

I'm no lawyer but what is the law pertaining to Police opening your door and shouting at you like a dog?

There isn't a law that directly pertains to that but... There should be! I'm surprised that as big of a jerk as that cop was he didn't arrest the guy for failure to identify or something equally stupid. It never would of held up in court but cops like that very often don't care, they take pleasure in towing your car and you going for the ride.

There is almost never any negative consequences for the officer for that type of arrest either, that is another thing that should be changed and I have written posts on the that exact subject here on ATS.

a reply to: milkyway12
Hey there buddy. Couldn't help but reply to your post. TRAVELING IS NOT A PRIVILEGE. All free men and women have a right to travel on their own roads in their own vehicles. This is called TRAVELING. We have a right to travel in and out of states freely without prevention by our servants. This is a Constitutionally guaranteed right. Being forced to carry a driver's license is a violation of that law. The entire purpose of the law is to prevent states from taxing (i.e. requiring a driver's license) individuals to travel. It is not only the right, but the duty of free men and women to stand against unconstitutional laws. Whether the corrupt Supreme Court says that pigs have the permission to stop free men and women without actually having committed a crime or not, it is unconstitutional. Any law that violates the Constitution is NULL and VOID. By the way, pigs do NOT have rights to do anything. They have permission, which is derived from the People. When on the job, you act under the rule of the people, with permissions authorized by them.

Also, you should be aware of the following: although the Supreme Court may have authorized some checkpoints, this does not mean that citizens waive their rights because they happen to drive into one. We are not required to roll our windows down to your liking (it was also ruled just recently that this particular situation is as stated, and it CANNOT be used as suspicion to detain), we do not have to answer any of your questions, you may frisk for weapons (although this is also unconstitutional), but you may not search our cars or person.

Let's not forget here, the basic premise of cops and government are illogical and tired concepts. We hire thugs, murderers, rapists, kidnappers, and extortionists to protect us from thugs, murderers, rapists, kidnappers, and extortionists.

Would someone, ANYONE, be kind enough to create a chart of "what to do" and "what not to do" when being pulled over by LEOs?

The chart should also include DUI stoppoint do's and don't's and what to do when they request your license and registration.

I think there is more mass confusion than needed and we need to educate ourselves more if faced with this situation.

a reply to: carl6405
How is he being a jerk? He has rights. He is the only one that protects them, because the government and cops certainly do not. He is being detained on the side of the road, having committed no crime, and is being searched unlawfully. In a better society violating civil rights would be one of the highest crimes imaginable.

a reply to: Jaellma

Check this one out: www.online-paralegal-programs.com... ads/2013/11/know-your-rights.png