Abusive border patrol agents "im pretty sure you are a terrorist" {video}

page: 9
51
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rjmelter
 





As a student enrolled in the Criminal Justice program

I'm sorry to hear that your views on law enforcement are what passes as an education these days. You speak of Fascism in your post, your views seem to be the product of a Fascist "re-education" program.

When I was educated in matters of "JUSTICE" It "STARTED" with,
("We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.")



People clinging to their "constitutional rights" are a threat to society,
It didn't say anything about clinging to ones rights as being detrimental to the general welfare of the nation. Actually I think that the tone was more in the direction that the rights in the Constitution are essential to the Republic and it's survival in later years.




Legally cops are not allowed to profile people but profiling is somewhere around 85% effective and accurate.

That's because profiling leaves the door open for a racist police officer to do things the wrong way. Although I will concede that profiling "would be" effective in situations such as looking for terrorist, or illegal aliens on our southern border. But if that were the case than we would even be watching this video in the first place correct???

I see the argument and have thought about it as any logical person would, it's just that we as humans are imperfect and have to worry about an imperfect police officer that will use the profiling in a racist way.



his combativeness and repetition of words shows that he was focused on one thing.
His rights under the US Constitution.


he rode up safe to that checkpoint and has done it numerous times this time he brought along a camera... why is that do you think? my intuition tells me he was hiding something,
My intuition tells "me" that he may be a person that "actually" knows his rights under the US Constitution and he was sick and tired of them being trampled upon. It couldn't be something as simple as that could it???
See the real issue is that you haven't seen people that aren't terrified of their police officers, he seems to be one that sees them for what they are, regular people just like us. Not gods to be feared.


no the Government doesn't let this fly so they created loopholes and one of the loopholes was that the Officers had the right to check this mans car because he was posing a threat.


Well there is the issue of, IF THE LAW IS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE CONSTITUTION IT IS ILLEGAL.

That is after all the basic guideline that the Supreme Court goes by. And then you have the notion of Nullification.

en.wikipedia.org...(U.S._Constitution)



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.

I don't know about you but I didn't see any warrant issued to search that mans property based upon probable cause. Did you??? And they weren't at a border crossing which would make the search valid in anther set of circumstances.

See, you are not taking into account that this is happening well away from any border. Had this been at the border I'd say send the guy to jail, the Border Patrol has every right to search his car, unfortunately this is not the case and when a LEO is wrong they are just as wrong as another person. Even more so, they take an oath. Here is a law for you to remember since that is the field that you are going into.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.




If he is whining and fussy to authoritative figures of the society he will be much more of a threat to the average member of society.
Man I don't think Stalin or Mao could have put it any better.



They caught him in a lie when the cops DID catch him later on, their alert dog which is highly trained and yes dogs can smell some amazing distinctions... he alerted them to HIS CAR...
You're' not this naive.. I'll make this very clear, you said your self that police are a power mongering group. They are also very cliquish by nature. So he messed with police and now he gets stopped again. I'll say it again, you're not this naive. So I'll be blunt, a dog can't be compelled to tell you if he indeed gave an indication of illegal substances in the car or gave no notification. However, a police officer can "say" that a dog indicated such things all he wants and that's the end all and be all. How does one repremand a dog for a false positive??? You don't, get it? So please stop being cute.


It is a very small group and most of them have power control issues, a well educated cop poses less of a threat than a less educated 1... thats statistically true and common sense wise true...
Actually it's been my observation that the older officers (you know the “less educated ones”) actually had balls and didn't feel the need to slap people around. They were the jocks and the tough guys of their time. They knew that they were men. I've seen the older CPD take many groups to task with little more than flying feet and fist, the occasional knight stick.

You're new breed of (bullied college boy yuppies and bull-dykes) are the ones that feel the power trip. They've never felt that sort of power and get drunk on it, I've seen a riot nearly started due to the actions of on “woman” cop that wanted to treat a man as if he were a servile dog. And then you have the nancy-boys that are scared. They don't know how to diffuse a situation without the threat of deadly force, and once deadly force has been presented you (as the authority) can only escalate. Now you have to shoot a person. This is part of the reason why you had such an increase in tasers when they were introduced. Scared officers that pull weapons first without any attempts to diffuse a situation. Then they are forced to escalate.




posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by rjmelter
 



b4 all of you say all cops have created a name for themselves, thats not true at all, it proves that whoever says that is uneducated, ignorant and again not very bright (because you should know that there are good cops out there).

Not all cops have created a name for themselves just the bad ones.

The good ones lump themselves right in there when they don't uphold their oath by giving up the bad cops. Get it??? Good. It's not a hard game to follow.

And yes, there are good cops out there, to an extent. The day will come in every cops career when he will have to choose if he is going to uphold the law and give up a dirty cop or keep the unspoken oath between officers. And that's when they all become "bad cops." Justice always has been and should always be blind, and should be not a respecter of persons.


all of you want these guys to come up to you and give you a pat on the back and tell you to have a good day.
The only thing that I ever wanted any police officer to do is perform the duties that he/she "took upon themselves." To do the jobs that we pay them to do, and go home safely to their families at the end of the day. Uphold the law, that is the only thing that I have ever wanted from a police officer.


They are like parents they are their to protect you and whether you understand it or not, they are doing a good job of it.
We all have parents and do not need another set, as I said all we need them to do is uphold the law and be not a respecter of persons (i.e do not protect their buddies).


Some are corrupt... most arent.
Granted.


Stop being paranoid, im getting tired of seeing that here on ATS.

Some will be paranoid, and some will not. That is the way of conspiracy theorist. I speak of the things that I have seen.


For all of you who are ignorant of the truth i figured Id drop this to think about... Atleast 1 terroristic plot is foiled in the U.S. every day.
For a person that is quick to call others ignorant of some fact you sure did forget to provide some proof that would corroborate this statement.




the officers tried to get him to pull over... he showed fear and was guilty


Wait, let's see where i heard about this before???



Most people are afraid of cops because some cops have abused their power.




It is a very small group and most of them have power control issues
So, you say that he was afraid??? Didn't you just explain to us why he was afraid......


its what preachers do they know how to sucker people into their scheme.
I think that you may have a predisposition to preachers, as you claim people have with cops. What's wrong with preachers????

Here this ones for you,

did you know he got I bonded. And we still haven't heard anything else about his "trial" if it will happen at all.

Here's one more,

This guy gets a $2,000 bond. Rest assured that if it was the two guys in the suv that had killed the CPD officer by driving drunk and then trying to flee on foot they would be in jail today as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow. Actually here in Chicago, they might have turned up dead after a long chase after they "brandished what appeared to be a weapon at the police."

But I digress, I just needed to make my point.







[edit on 20-4-2009 by lazy1981]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by AlienChaser
 


You make valid points,
But you know, at least I hope you know, that the media would love to get there hands on Constitutional Rights Violations. Come on, you know this as well. What a great story it would make for them and what a better story to get the American Citizen pissed off to watch more of the broadcast. Just look at some of the reply's to this video! I was taught in the academy that a federal officer (i.e. Border Patrol, U.S. Marshalls, F.B.I. etc.) has the authority to enforce all FEDERAL , STATE , AND LOCAL LAWS. And that was taken from the book my friend. Now, Border Patrol doesn't usually include stopping speeders, or going after suspects with warrants for their arrest in the scope of duties, but can they perform duties of a police officer, yes they can. And they have. I have backed several Fish and Wildlife Officers on traffic stops and such. Not Border Patrol, but they are state government. They also act as police officers during times of emergencies like Hurricanes. Granted its a state of emergency but they still have all the powers of a normal police officer. Police State!? HAAH, HAAH, HAAH! You know in some states you go to jail for less than a year for selling drugs, but get caught driving while your license is suspended habitually, your going to "PRISON." Heck!, you can't even get states like Georgia, and California to come pick up (extradite) their wanted felons, because they don't wan to spend the money to do it! I've seen it happen. I don't buy the police state crap! Our departments want us to give hugs, rather that place someone under arrest. "Black Helicopters hovering over the street interesection with black clad soldiers rapelling down to the streets throwing everyone down at gunpoint and taking them away in dark colored vehicles." Well, I gotta say that seems pretty far fetched to me, but isn't that what your talking about? You know, I think that if that were to EVER happen there would be someone there with a CELL PHONE (modern technology) that would be calling 911 in a panic. Now who do think would respond to the call? You got it, the Police. I'm here to tell ya, I enjoy all the freedoms that "YOU" have. In fact as a police officer I have to be very careful about how I conduct myself both on and off duty. Why? Becasue police officers are held to a higher standard by the public. Did this guy in the video commit any criminal violations, No. But, I think in the least that the agents had "mere suspicion" because of his behavior. What was wrong with it? Well let me try to enlighten. It would be a totally different situation that if every driver or I'll even say every 10th driver that came through the checkpoint behaved as this moron did. It becomes what? Accepted behavior, by all.., public and law enforcement alike. No big deal then right? You get one guy out of a hundred that acts, I'll say, strangely?! Now, I gotta tell ya that if I was on a checkpoint and I had waived one hundred or more through and then I get this guy who start's acting out of the ordinary?! Yhea, I'd be a little suspicious myself. So this checkpoint is on his way home, daily routine, whatever. So does it like block the entrance to his driveway, work, or does he live out in the middle of nowhere and there's only ONE ROAD to his house, what the....?! COME ON, I DON'T BUY IT!:lol



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


O.K. lazy1981, are you really?
Yhea, that cop that beat up the bartender was tatally out of line, and he was nailed for it as I recall, believe that he went to jail. And he needed to, no matter what type of personal problem he was having. That young girl didn't deserve that. An ex-buddy of mine that I worked with on the force got caught having sex with a sixteen year old. Guess what, PRISON for TWELVE YEARS. How's that for justice. Think the judge was to easy?, to stern? What would you have done to him if you were the judge? Tweleve years is a long time taken from someones life. I read the case file, this girl was no innocent little girl. She had already had multiple sex partners by the time she was sixteen. Still though, no one forced that ex-buddy of mine to have sex with her. So I hold him responsible for what he did. I've been doing this law enforcement stuff for ten years. And yes, there are great cops out there that love to help people. And yes, there are some bad ones. The bad ones usually aren't cops for very long. Gotta tell ya, that I often question how some of these people make through the academy. I got an offer for ya. Next time you come across a police officer walk up to that officer and ask them what its like being a police officer. You just might be surprised by what you hear.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by skyeyes
 


you make valid points but I have to say that this one is to be argued.




But, I think in the least that the agents had "mere suspicion" because of his behavior.


His behavior was exacerbated by the persistence of the border patrol that he submit to an illegal search. I'm really not trying to pick a fight here, but you know that what's right is right. He has a legitimate claim to his forth amendment right, and there is no law that supersedes the Constitution.

If this guy was at the border then fine, he would have been acting like an ass. But, as it is he was inland from the border and they really had no place in trying to search his car.

Quite frankly I think that these checkpoints are reminiscent of Nazi Germany and other totalitarian type governments. These are the fears of the people, that this is but a taste of what's to come.




It would be a totally different situation that if every driver or I'll even say every 10th driver that came through the checkpoint behaved as this moron did. It becomes what? Accepted behavior, by all.., public and law enforcement alike. No big deal then right? You get one guy out of a hundred that acts, I'll say, strangely?! Now, I gotta tell ya that if I was on a checkpoint and I had waived one hundred or more through and then I get this guy who start's acting out of the ordinary?! Yhea, I'd be a little suspicious myself.

See, this is what the problem really boils down to. The color of law is susceptible to what a LEO considers to be out of the ordinary. So, it would be fair to say that what one officer may consider to be out of the ordinary may be found by another Officer as perfectly normal base on a general canvas of the people crossing his checkpoint. So that leaves the "standard" where? Seriously jacked up.... It is based upon human conditions and viewpoints. Therefore, one mans definition of "suspicious behavior" could cause an otherwise innocent person to get in serious trouble if he decides to take a stand and defend his 4th amendment rights..



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by bringthelight
 


I really have to commend this guy for standing up for his rights and not cooperating with the police state but I also have to commend the officers for showing a great deal of restraint. Usually when we hear of someone standing up for the Constitution against cops its a story about how they were beat up, tasered, or even detained for years at Gitmo, but these cops luckily were quite reasonable with the guy and even tried to explain to him what their bosses told them they were allowed to do...

The man did his job as a citizen when most would just cooperate with the increasingly Nazi-like tactics being used.

I can think of only one phrase to describe these sorts of checkpoints

"May I see your papers please?"



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


Thanks for the reply,
I think your that your thoughts on this are just a little jaded. I'm headed for the house now. I'll post again tomorrow on what you just posted. It'll be great to hear back from ya. Take it easy.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by skyeyes
 



and he was nailed for it as I recall, believe that he went to jail.
We haven't heard a word of it yet in Chicago.




Think the judge was to easy?, to stern? What would you have done to him if you were the judge?


I honestly couldn't tell you. I'm not a judge and I really don't believe that I'd like to sit in judgment of any man when it concerns taking years away from them and their family. Although there are situations where it must be done. Who am I to usurp the un-exercised prerogative of the almighty?

I will say that I have pondered that issue before. There are many men and recently Female teachers
that are going to jail for getting involved with minors.

Government will charge some teens as adults at the age of 15 and 16 in capital cases, yet they still aren't legally adults. At some point government is going to have to figure out how old 16 really is. There seems to be a double standard.

But in regard to your buddy I think that alcohol probably played a roll. And some people mature faster than others. Like I said somewhere down the line they will have to see exactly where they draw the line, because I think in places like Indiana the concentual age is 16. But the fact that remains is that where he was at the time the law was the law and he broke it. 12 years is a bit much though. If it were rape I'd say take him out and shoot him.




Next time you come across a police officer walk up to that officer and ask them what its like being a police officer.
I know that this is not going to sound fair, but unless you come across the right sort (which is EXTREMELY rare) or know a CPD officer you will get a very obtuse response to say the least.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Since Mr. Skyeyes did not answer my response, I decided to post this You Tube Video of the Oath Keeper’s movement that is sweeping the nation. This movement was fueled by police and national guard troops that were ordered to carry out unlawful orders during Katrina and have sworn ‘NEVER AGAIN’. It is also pushed by veterans, like me, who have first hand knowledge of some of the population control contingency plans of the Armed Forces’ brass during civil unrest.

My hope is that all police officers, active duty and veterans will take the oath as we are the final shield for the people against tyranny; THIS I WILL DEFEND!

www.youtube.com...

May I add for this thread that there is always a ‘good’ reason given to strip away or ignore the Constitutional rights of a citizen, always some appeal to the ‘higher good’; but in our Republic the rights or opinion of the many never justify taking the rights from one. This is the only hedge that has kept us from being no better than the tin pot ‘democracies’ of South America.


[edit on 4/21/2009 by SGTChas]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by skyeyes
Well folks,
I've read most of the reply's to this video and the reply's to my own. Some of you make valid points, and some of you have asked if I'm a cop. Yes, I am. I've been patrolling the criminal streets of small town america. I've been in "knock down drag outs" with felons who have warrants for their arrest, arrested people for battery, theft, drugs, weapons, driving on suspended licenses, lewd and lacivious. Someone brought up the point of walking down the street and being stopped by the police. First of all its not a detention unless the cop says "Stop" or give the person some type of command that would lead that person to believe that he/she is no longer free to leave. The Supreme Court has ruled that the police can initiate contact with any person out on the streets because while out in public you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Now, does that mean that the contactee has to stay and converse with the officer?, no they don't. Officer continue to stay in contact with the contactee after they have made it clear that they do not want the contact are pushing the limits, and in most agencies there is a complaint process. The Supreme Court has also ruled that the police may stop and detain anyone who they believe may be going to commit a crime, is commiting a crime, or has commited a crime, (Terry v. Ohio). Like it or not there are people walking, running, driving, riding, our streets who are criminals and some who are wanted. What does a criminal look like? The criminals that I've come into contact with certainly don't look the McDonald's Hamburglar. Look, the BOTTON LINE is that this guy went to this check point to CONFRONT the border patrol agents and the policies that they have been instructed to enforce. I understand that he may have been trying to bring issues that he thought may be constitutional violations to the public's attention. I also understand the public's perception on this. But wouldn't a better way be to get the media involved? These checkpoints have been in place for years. If they were such Constitutional Right violations the media would be all over them. These checkpoints and the agents that enforce their policies are there because we put them there. If we as American's don't like the way the government is operating then our recourse is to vote and elect people whom we believe will hold our values and beliefs in place. NUFF SAID

Or, the BOTTOM LINE might be that there shouldn't be a boarder checkpoint 100 miles inland harassing citizens day after day.
I see you on a bad fear vibe standing behind a mound of legislation here. Legislation that is making your job easier on one hand and turning this country into a police state on the other. I see you also smugly lecturing us that there are so many criminals amongst us. I disagree with this assertion 100% as I've heard lawyers say similar things which I suspect is nothing more than good old job security bantering.


Could it be that more and more of the people are starting to see law enforcement as the lackys of white collar criminals and even behaving worse than the said criminals on many occasions as video cameras are catching again and again? I have relatives (who I like) that are cops and well respected. But all that those goons with all of their badges and guns were trying to do was intimidate those people in order to get their way or feed their God complexes that too many laws have obviously fostered. If any one of those guys would have told a lie then they would have been busted. It's too bad that it doesnt' work the other way around right? Those cops tried all measures of dishonesty at first. Can't you see the criminal element in that?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by skyeyes
reply to post by AlienChaser
 


You make valid points,
But you know, at least I hope you know, that the media would love to get there hands on Constitutional Rights Violations.

I doubt it. They didn't seem to be too interested with all the Constitutional violations committed during the bush administration.


I was taught in the academy that a federal officer (i.e. Border Patrol, U.S. Marshalls, F.B.I. etc.) has the authority to enforce all FEDERAL , STATE , AND LOCAL LAWS. And that was taken from the book my friend.

Could you point out the page that allows them to violate the Constitution?


Our departments want us to give hugs, rather that place someone under arrest.

If this is true, that's great. The reason is that the police in general have a bad name and your department may understand this and want to turn that around. Every other department could learn from yours.
When I was a kid, the police were your friend. They would stop and say hi, were always friendly, etc... NOT ANYMORE.


In fact as a police officer I have to be very careful about how I conduct myself both on and off duty. Why? Becasue police officers are held to a higher standard by the public.

This would indicate to me that you're a good cop. The problem is, there are many in the news that aren't and overshadow good ones like yourself. The bad ones ruin it for everyone and frankly put more police at risk.

People are now afraid of the police.
You'll see more police chases.
You'll see more people either refuse to stop or stop where THEY feel safe, in a public area, because they don't trust the police.
You'll see more people being verbally combative with police which may escalate the situation.
People used to respect the police. Now they fear them. That can't be helpful in the long run to the police.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by bringthelight
 


If you've done nothing wrong, then just pull over. This guy has rights, as do we all, but he is asking to be beat with his attitude. Not only that but what point has he made? "I know my rights?" Great...still got beat. Seams to me he has a beef with the checkpoints and that is fine. I live in San Diego and have to deal with the same thing he does, so I can understand his frustration, but he goes over board and is trying to be problematic.

Those searches only take a couple of minutes anyway. They look in your trunk, knock around for fake panels and run a mirror under your car. Would of taken 10 minutes tops, instead he sits on a single lane road making everyone behind him wait so he can fan his ego. Maybe he is just looking for a lawsuit. Either way, it does illustrate what knowing your rights means and how important it is, but this guy goes over the top.

Not only that, he's a Pastor...horrible example for a pastor. I'm gunna chuckle when he finds out Jesus was the one beating him...lol. "Nobody
fu#%s with the Jesus"...Lebowski

The only cops I know that are usually "ready for action" are the new ones. They seam to need to prove themselves to their peers and can go overboard.

My best friend was a police officer for 5 years, before going back to school to become a lawyer. His father was with NHP for over 30 years. I don't like being hassled by police, but who does.

I'm glad my friend was a cop, because I would have never known what kind of stuff they have to deal with on a day to day basis. He truly loves the law, and fights to uphold it and is one of the best people I know. He truly loves helping people and I believe most of them feel the same way. He would talk with detainees of crimes about how they can get help and worked with convicts to reform their lives, he sincerely wanted to make not only society better, but individuals better by being an example to them and someone they could come to that they knew wouldn't judge them....the best heart one could ask for looking over them.

Some of his drunk stories (people intoxicated) are the funniest I've ever heard. I pray if I am ever detained, it is by an officer like him.

Peace



[edit on 21-4-2009 by letthereaderunderstand]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


I am in no way sticking up for cops that abuse their power. It is despicable, and that guy who beat that woman up...I can't even tell you how angry that makes me, Cop or not. What makes me livid is the fact that MEN stood around and let happen...WTF?

Here is the problem with the fearing the cops issue. The media incites it. Seriously, before cameras were everywhere how often do you think things like this happened? I'd say more, yet people weren't intimidated and as jft123 states, "cops were your friends". I remember when I was a kid, cops would let me sit in their squad car and turn on the lights for me. When you saw the police you felt safe, not fearful. That has completely reversed and it is not because of the cops. This started with Rodney King as far as it being a national concern, only they never showed you the rest of the tape of Rodney evading the police and running cracked out of his mind. This is media driven to incite people to give them problems, with a predisposition that the police are going to in some why violate them...it stinks to me.

The perception of fear is fostered by the media to incite these very problems. If it wasn't for them, we wouldn't have people so afraid of cops. They paint them in a horrible light...I feel bad for them.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 


I agree that the driver was flexing his ego and obviously had a beef with the checkpoints. The thing is, the situations, people, or ideas you tend to fight the most, usually come back around to kick you in the as* the hardest. That's how some people have to learn their lessons.

I guess I dont like seeing cops so willing and ready to bash somebody's head in. These guys were more about flexing their egos that protecting the populace. It is about controlling people more than serving them. I just hope the good cops outnumber the bad.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
reply to post by lazy1981
 


I am in no way sticking up for cops that abuse their power. It is despicable, and that guy who beat that woman up...I can't even tell you how angry that makes me, Cop or not. What makes me livid is the fact that MEN stood around and let happen...WTF?

Here is the problem with the fearing the cops issue. The media incites it. Seriously, before cameras were everywhere how often do you think things like this happened? I'd say more, yet people weren't intimidated and as jft123 states, "cops were your friends". I remember when I was a kid, cops would let me sit in their squad car and turn on the lights for me. When you saw the police you felt safe, not fearful. That has completely reversed and it is not because of the cops. This started with Rodney King as far as it being a national concern, only they never showed you the rest of the tape of Rodney evading the police and running cracked out of his mind. This is media driven to incite people to give them problems, with a predisposition that the police are going to in some why violate them...it stinks to me.

The perception of fear is fostered by the media to incite these very problems. If it wasn't for them, we wouldn't have people so afraid of cops. They paint them in a horrible light...I feel bad for them.


That might make some sense if it weren't for the fact that both videos (especially the first in this case) were not offered by the media but by citizens who carried the cameras for their own protection. This is the sad state of affairs that we now find ourselves in. Where is your sympathy for the people who are getting bullied around at every turn these days as in those who have to deal with these legally entitled pricks? Let us not forget that these very cops followed this man after the fact so that they could (and did) bash his face in. This is the reality that we find ourselves in today. Not some lame excuse that it's the media causing all of these misconceptions.

If all of this harassment that we have to deal with and keep a smile on our faces these days begets some obnoxious people who buck the system which oddly enough wasn't in any way breaking the laws then so be it. I hope more people start fighting back too.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
reply to post by bringthelight
 


If you've done nothing wrong, then just pull over.

I honestly can't believe this mentality.
If you've done nothing wrong, you won't mind the police searching your house, car, computer, bank records, person, and check into your background. I mean it's ok right? You've done nothing wrong, right?
We don't need to protection of the Constitution, right?


This guy has rights, as do we all, but he is asking to be beat with his attitude.

So next time you're rude to someone, anyone, and if you're beaten, you deserved it and you should just forget it right?

Keep in mind that when they beat him, they broke the highest law in the land, our most sacred document-The Constitution.

Also just curious but does being rude mean your Constitutional right should be stripped away?


Not only that but what point has he made?

He was exercising his Constitutional rights. That's the point.


"I know my rights?" Great...still got beat.

And his Constitutional rights were violated.

So let's recap.
A "rude" person, attempted to exercise their Constitutional Rights and for that, he was beaten and tasered. Does it still sound OK to you?


Seams to me he has a beef with the checkpoints and that is fine. I live in San Diego and have to deal with the same thing he does, so I can understand his frustration, but he goes over board and is trying to be problematic.

You're missing the whole point. You are actually complaining that he is exercising his Constitutional rights. Do you get that? And on top of it, you're blaming him for the beating. Did he do ANYTHING violent? NO Did he do ANYTHING against the law? NO.


Those searches only take a couple of minutes anyway.

So do you think it's ok for police officers to search your house "in just a few minutes" too? Is that OK?
Would you be upset if a cop randomly stopped you on the street and patted you down, asked you a bunch of questions, etc... ???



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


O.K.
I read your thoughts on this. And it's always good to question "anything" the government does. It's not the officers who make the mold for suspicious behavior. It's the criminals. Don't think that for one minute that there were some criminals who crossed that same check point conducting themselves in a similar manner. This is where observation comes in. For years I've worked the streets making contact with known criminals, making traffic stops, responding to calls for service. Now the norm for a person who is engaged in the commission of a crime is to be extremely nervous when approached by law enforcement. Let me try to clarify. I conduct several traffic stops a week during my regular patrol shift. Out of the cars I stop, and driver's that I contact, I'll say that 90% of them are curious as to what they have done to get pulled over. About 1 to 2% of them may be nervous because they've never been stopped by the police before. The remaining 8 to 9% of them are nervous because they're commiting some type of crime and they're nervous because I'm there. 90% of the driver's I stop will hand me they're driver's license, insurance, and registration upon request. Now while in contact with these individuals I pay attention to they're verbal and non verbal reactions to my presence. 90% of the time I will not observe any nervous behaviour from the driver's I stop. Now the rest of the time give or take a couple percent are up to no good. Pull a car over for a traffic violation, make contact with the driver. Ask driver for D.L., insurance, registration. Hands me his driver's license, and when he does, his hand is TREMBLING. He keeps looking into the rearview mirror's, seems to be just not paying attention to what's going on. Answers my questions, with questions. Beads of sweat start to accumulate on his forehead even though the cars airconditioning is on, or it is quite cool outside. My friend, based upon my ten years of training and experience, my instincts are telling me that something is wrong here. And the end result is, more often that not, the driver's license is suspended, they have warrants for their arrest, there's dope in the car, the car is stolen, or all of the above. Now this is the norm that is encountered with people in the commission of a crime. However there are others. Some persons engaged in the commission of a crime wil be totally silent, or calm and cool, when the police are standing in front of them. Other's will try to be your best friend, "Hey officer, don't you remember me?" or something similar. And yet others will become standoffish(VIDEO), and act beligerant, rude. All attempts at trying to get me to back down or focus my attention somewhere else. Its really quite amazing to see all the different reactions to police contact. One of the border patrol agents at the checkpoint tried to explain all of this to this guy. Granted he didn't want to hear it, and some of the agents were getting irritated at the guy, heck I would. This guy had his own agenda which was to confront the agents at the checkpoint because of his own personal beliefs. Which is all O.K., it's a free country. He could've gone at it a smarter way though. Just looking for a confrontation if you ask me. His own actions gave the agents mere suspicion to at least try to find out just what his problem was. Hope this clarifies any confusion and makes it easier for you to understand just what those agents may have been thinking.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 





What makes me livid is the fact that MEN stood around and let happen...WTF?


I know exactly what you are talking about, it enraged me too that the guys just stood there and did nothing.

But, in hindsight people in Chicago know that it is entirely off limits to lay a finger on a Chicago cop for any reason. This was a bar that he went to frequently and the other patrons knew he was a cop.




The media incites it. Seriously, before cameras were everywhere how often do you think things like this happened? I'd say more,
You make a good point, but it's like the old saying. What you don't know can't hurt you. This old adage isn't really true.

It (the blissful ignorance) just made for better public relations between police and citizens.

It was really bad for BS conviction rates that eventually got overturned and created a huge crap storm. There is a serious problem with this at present in Chicago. Here's a link to the story.

www.trutv.com...





"cops were your friends". I remember when I was a kid, cops would let me sit in their squad car and turn on the lights for me.
Relics of a bygone era, at least in this damn city. Like I said befor unless you personally know the officer those days are long gone. Besides, I'm probably a bit younger than you so the "us and them" crap that the media and put in our heads and the government put in cops heads had already taken deep roots.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyeyes
Now the norm for a person who is engaged in the commission of a crime is to be extremely nervous when approached by law enforcement.

You can't say with any certainty that this is reliable in any way. For example, most people, when stopped by the police, get extremely nervous, even over a speeding ticket.


Let me try to clarify. I conduct several traffic stops a week during my regular patrol shift. Out of the cars I stop, and driver's that I contact, I'll say that 90% of them are curious as to what they have done to get pulled over. About 1 to 2% of them may be nervous because they've never been stopped by the police before.

This would be way out of the norm from my experiences of friends and family. 100% of them were extremely nervous when pulled over.


The remaining 8 to 9% of them are nervous because they're commiting some type of crime and they're nervous because I'm there.

Unless you already know that they have committed a crime and that is why you stopped them, you can only guess what you're saying is correct. From my experience through myself, family, friends, etc... like I've stated, 100% of those people have been nervous which would mean your stats are completely irrelevant and unreliable.


Now while in contact with these individuals I pay attention to they're verbal and non verbal reactions to my presence. 90% of the time I will not observe any nervous behaviour from the driver's I stop.

I'm sorry but I simply don't believe this statement.
You're making is sound like someone is going through a drive through.


Now the rest of the time give or take a couple percent are up to no good. Pull a car over for a traffic violation, make contact with the driver. Ask driver for D.L., insurance, registration. Hands me his driver's license, and when he does, his hand is TREMBLING. He keeps looking into the rearview mirror's, seems to be just not paying attention to what's going on. Answers my questions, with questions. Beads of sweat start to accumulate on his forehead even though the cars airconditioning is on, or it is quite cool outside. My friend, based upon my ten years of training and experience, my instincts are telling me that something is wrong here.

Yep. Your interpretation of the event is what's wrong.
People who are pulled over by police and the vast majority of the time, very nervous and it's not because they're felons. Everything you've stated above as something you'd consider wrong, I've seen happen because someone was speeding (10 over) and NOTHING MORE.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by skyeyes

Officers can also stop citizens even though they may not have any “basis to question the individual,” and can ask questions or verify a citizens’ identification, although the citizen being questioned does not have to answer, Van Hollen added.
BadgerHerald

--Wisconsin Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen, in a memo to the states district attorneys, Today! It references pedestrians and it's from an unrelated article but I thought it worth mentioning.

I appreciate the calm of your answer, a couple points on this

I was taught in the academy that a federal officer (i.e. Border Patrol, U.S. Marshalls, F.B.I. etc.) has the authority to enforce all FEDERAL , STATE , AND LOCAL LAWS.

That was my understanding too, but the more I look the more I see a narrower directive. The supreme court ruling I put up back a few. Also in the video in the OP the agents state that they were waiting for a cop to come arrest him. The same as well for the checkpointUSA.org guy, in one of his videos the pull him to secondary to await arrest by a cop enroute, then they let him go.


Police State!? HAAH, HAAH, HAAH! You know in some states you go to jail for less than a year for selling drugs, but get caught driving while your license is suspended habitually, your going to "PRISON." Heck!, you can't even get states like Georgia, and California to come pick up (extradite) their wanted felons, because they don't wan to spend the money to do it! I've seen it happen. I don't buy the police state crap!

This is convoluted, leaving out your perfectly true and agreed on points about uneven prosecution and punishment, I think your "black helicopter" remarks betray your half asleep self. No one is saying black helicopters, this is about real encroachments and steps toward a police state. Incramental steps taken over time. This doen't happen in a month or a year it happens over mabey a decade or so, very slowly at first and as the grip tightens, faster and faster. People are alarmed because the pace is quickening. We do not have a police state, yet. What I'm saying is if you look you can see the stage being set for a corporate elite controlled two class surveiled and policed system. This little things like the checkpoints are desensitizing factors, and while I question the guys tactics, I agree with his message.

FIRST 2 MINUTES... although I recommend the full movie (topic drift)



So this checkpoint is on his way home, daily routine, whatever. So does it like block the entrance to his driveway, work, or does he live out in the middle of nowhere and there's only ONE ROAD to his house,


Are you suggesting that he should go around? That in order to avoid a checkpoint on the main road or quickest route that he go around. These are placed strategicaly so as to force everyone through them, suggesting an alternet route is not fair and would probably get him stopped for suspiciously trying to circumvent a checkpoint.

~edit: embed

[edit on 4/21/2009 by AlienChaser]





new topics
top topics
 
51
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join