4409: Nazi Checkpoint. The citizens stand up. Five part series (with bonuses)

I don't at all buy the NAZI crap
But I am glad that the boarder thing is finally gettin done.
People barked for years about the insecure boarders and non-US citizens getting across and stealing American jobs.
And when that finally gets established,.. people scream Nazis,.. what a joke. Also is the drug cartel thing just fiction? hmm must be

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
I don't at all buy the NAZI crap
But I am glad that the boarder thing is finally gettin done.
People barked for years about the insecure boarders and non-US citizens getting across and stealing American jobs.
And when that finally gets established,.. people scream Nazis,.. what a joke. Also is the drug cartel thing just fiction? hmm must be

you must not have watched all the videos if you think this has anything to do with illegal immigration. Watch video 5, the author says over and over again that this is not about illegal immigration

reply to post by seeashrink


even though there may not be partiality shown to a certain race or group, if it is unconstitutional, it can not be done. Cops are not supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner. Just because a cop thinks there is probable cause, does not mean they should be able to detain someone without a burden of proof. And, as the MIAC reports reveal, certain groups are being targeted, like the Ron Paul supporters who are being targeted as domestic terrorists. Not to mention that when you call someone a terrorist, you are then targeting a specific group, most of which has no probable cause or even any crimes against them.

In addition, I do not call the cops. I can take care of myself and although I have a security system in my house, I have it programed so that I am called first, rather than it automatically contacting the police. So I take every step possible to protect myself rather than have others protect me.

However, I have met many good cops, and appreciate those who are peace officers.



[edit on 21-7-2010 by filosophia]

reply to post by filosophia
what the two guys talkin at the desk?
yeah after I realized they have zero credibility of anything important I moved on..
All they had to talk about was opinionated bla bla

reply to post by filosophia

I appreciate you posting a video of a cop being nice. Many of us are. But we get lumped in with the bad cops on a regular basis. When our founding fathers wrote the constitution there was no such thing as "driving while impaired" and there was not an illegal alien problem (except for them of course against the indians). There has to be a way to catch and stop drunk drivers and there has to be a law against drunk driving. Should we wait until someone is crippled or killed before we investigate a drunk driving charge? If I am behind a car and it touches the right or left line three times I stop it and check it. Let me clarify, if it does so within a short distance, I don't follow it for miles waiting for a mistake.
Where is the happy medium? Between enforcing a law that keeps someone from getting killed and not doing anything at all until after the fact, where is the medium that will satisfy people???
You will need law enforcement some day unfortunately and I hope that you get a good one. Also, like I told the other poster, get out there a be a cop and show the rest of us how it is done, set the example, trust me, it's a piece of cake.
Seeashrink

Originally posted by seeashrink
reply to post by filosophia

 

I appreciate you posting a video of a cop being nice. Many of us are. But we get lumped in with the bad cops on a regular basis. When our founding fathers wrote the constitution there was no such thing as "driving while impaired" and there was not an illegal alien problem (except for them of course against the indians). There has to be a way to catch and stop drunk drivers and there has to be a law against drunk driving. Should we wait until someone is crippled or killed before we investigate a drunk driving charge? If I am behind a car and it touches the right or left line three times I stop it and check it. Let me clarify, if it does so within a short distance, I don't follow it for miles waiting for a mistake.
Where is the happy medium? Between enforcing a law that keeps someone from getting killed and not doing anything at all until after the fact, where is the medium that will satisfy people???
You will need law enforcement some day unfortunately and I hope that you get a good one. Also, like I told the other poster, get out there a be a cop and show the rest of us how it is done, set the example, trust me, it's a piece of cake.
Seeashrink

I understand that there has to be a happy medium of law enforcement. I do not entirely agree with the use of the phrase "Nazi," and I am sorry that good cops get lumped in with bad cops. I kept the title because I wanted to preserve the original author's title (I'm not the author, just a fan). I think your rule is reasonable, that if a car touches the line 3 times, you pull them over. But is that an official rule written in the book, or do you base it off of common sense? I do not deny that you have common sense, but common sense has a large gray area. It could be someone's common sense to assume they have to taser young and old people, and even though these officers get reprimanded for it, (not as much I believe), it still happens, begging the question: how do you police the police?

I do not have a problem with most laws, because I am smart enough to remain legal. However, the legal system is complex, and it preys on stupid people who have a hard life and find the justice system so perplexing that they fall into it based off their own stupidity. In this regard, government is no longer protecting the innocent, but praying on the stupid, whether this is right or wrong, it happens. I am a philosopher so I think about these things in the abstract sense,

if you want to know the truth, and I am not afraid to admit it, because I have a thread based off of it, that I think the Nazi phrase is much over used. The nazi symbol, the swastika, is a 5000 year old Hindu symbol, so I find there to be a lot of propaganda surrounding the use of the word Nazi. Basically, both sides do it. The president calls Iraq or Iran "Hilter," and so people call the leaders the same term. It's a much over used phrase, but it has its political purpose on either side. I do not fully endorse that term, because I have opinions on world war 2, but I only put up that title because it is the original title. I didn't try and change it at all.

reply to post by seeashrink


you mentioned a few times that sooner or later I will have to call the police, and I will say that the only reason I would call the police, is because if I deal with a situation on my own, there is always a chance I will have legal ramifications against me, the victim, it's happened before.

otherwise I would see no reason to want the police. I live in a big city where police, fire, ambulance are constantly rushing passed my house. I don't doubt that the majority of people need the police, but I try to be self sufficient.

[edit on 21-7-2010 by filosophia]

reply to post by seeashrink


I really don't give a crap what the law says, because clearly the law is in violation of the US Constitution.

Therefore it is not a law at all.

If you uphold laws that blatantly violate the US Constitution, you are no better than the criminals you arrest.

reply to post by filosophia

My rule on stopping cars is my own.
You know, people make decisions on their own. You can only blame society but just so much. I took a girl to jail last night on a trespassing warrant. She was HIV positive and a crack addict. About everyone she hangs out with are either addicts or dealers. She is living with a guy now that is niether. She is living there because she says she has no where to go. The man she lives with takes the rent out of her when she is on her back. I always encourage these people to get help and offer suggestions for them getting out of the life style. But, they have made a choice. For whatever reason, they have made a choice.
We have laws, not all are right and not all I agree with. People have the option, most of the time to obey or disobey any given law.
I'm not even sure where I'm going with this anymore.
Seeashrink

Click here for more information.

Oh and as for this:

The truth of the matter: 1) the next time you need a cop you will call one and when he/she gets there you will cry like a third grade little girl who has soiled her panties. 2)you will not become a cop because it requires more balls than hiding behind a keyboard. If you are in NC send me a u2u with a phone number and I will set up a ride along. However, I want hold my breath waiting on you..

I don't know why I bother responding since I don't need to justify myself to you, but what the hell, this is the internets.

1. I own a gun, therefore I don't need police for anything. I will never, ever, need to call the police unless I am forced to because the law says I have to, such as a traffic accident in CA.

2. I am a veteran of the gulf that was engaged in direct police actions for several years. So I'd say my balls are fairly intact.

reply to post by seeashrink

A DWI check point is legal as long as it is conducted without showing partiallity to any particular race or group of people. So if we check every car or every third car and we treat everyone equal there is no violation of the constitution.

Not in my state, thank goodness we have held that dwi checkpoints are unconstitutional.

I can search you without probable cause, it's called a Terry Search or a pat down and I can do it immediatley after I stop your car with probable cause of reasonalble suspicion.

Well, legally, you can't search without probable cause.

For their own protection, police may perform a quick surface search of the person’s outer clothing for weapons

if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed.

This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a "stop and frisk," or simply a "Terry stop". The Terry standard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops.

Link

Now, however you justify your "hunches" with "specific and articulable facts" seems to hold up in court, but that you come out and claim that
"I can search you without probable cause"

speaks volumes about your actions.

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Oaktree]

reply to post by mnemeth1

All disagreements aside, I too am a vet and you have my respect on that sir. And, yes, you will call the cops one day and when you do, I suggest you put your gun up.
Respectfully,
Seeashrink

- there all sorts of new rule that OBAMA NATION put in place making it harder to do there jobs.
-Its a major route near a border
-all the liberals who are gay for obama piss and moan when one of our men in service shoots an illegal assaulting him
-We've already given up that section of the boarder to Mexico, either let Arizona secure the boarder or shut up
-I do not support a police state, but would like the boarders secured. Maybe I'm a hypocrite

reply to post by Oaktree


My point is: If I stop your car for a justifiable reason I can pat you down, yes, even on a hunch. It is done for my own protection. Trust me I know the law and The Constitution. I've had my rights violated on several occasions. One occasion in particular ended in a lawsuit that took about 4 years and justice was still not served. I am very sensitive to people's rights. I write about 10 citations a year, because I don't like screwing with people's money. I will write a citation to a teenager in a heartbeat because I want them to live another year.
I am a good cop. I don't screw with people because I have the power to do so, I just do my job. I try to correct young officers in the proper way to do their job. I let them know that putting on the badge does not make them a man, but that they had better be a man before they put the badge on.
Why I post on threads like this: I simply get tired of people putting down cops and lumping us all together. I know there are bad cops, I fired one from my office over a year ago. All I ask is that people open their tiny minds just a little and realize that we are all different.
I don't know what you or anyone else's job is that has posted on this particular thread, but I bet each and everyone of you have some bad eggs in your business. The problem with cops are that we live in a fish bowl. It's a little like what I have experienced being a drummer. If the singer or the lead guitar player messes up, unless you have an ear for music you may not catch it. But, let the drummer mess up and everyone hears it. It's the loudest instrument in the band.
Seeashrink

reply to post by seeashrink

If I stop your car for a justifiable reason I can pat you down, yes, even on a hunch. It is done for my own protection.

Justifiable being the key word.

No one is arguing about the constitutionality of a Terry stop and pat (although I have problems with how the courts have interpreted this), we are talking about illegal checkpoints.

Checkpoints that have no probable cause.

Checkpoints that blatantly violate the 4th amendment of the US Constitution.

Do you know what would put an end to all the police bad-mouthing that goes on? - All the cops need to do is act exactly like the fire department.

Only come out when you are called.

Everyone loves firemen.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I see your point about cops and firemen and I have a lot of respect for those guys.
I want to apologize for some of the ways I have addressed you tonight. I get too passionate about this subject to begin with. Add to that, I've had a bad day and the two together are a bad combination. I'm sure that you are a fine intelligent man and I am more intelligent than the tone of my recent post indicate.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on some things.
Seeashrink

Originally posted by seeashrink
You know, when we set up a DWI check point we don't do it in front of the local bar. Is it just possible that this was a good idea to catch illegal aliens?
[]
is there any way that could have done this that would not have offended your sense of liberty?
[]
It's not like our borders are not wide open enough, I frankly am glad to see them doing anything.
[]
Lighten up!
Seeashrink

Glad to see them do ANYTHING?

What an absolutely foolish crock.

Don't you think if there is an illegal alien issue... THE BORDER PATROL SHOULD FIRST AND FOREMOST DEFEND THE DAMN BORDER. instead of HARASS AMERICANS 50 MILES FROM IT.

this is a "problem, reaction, solution" situation that the infamous David Icke speaks about.

PROBLEM:
Create the problem by not doing anything about border security and offering glorious benefits to illegals.

REACTION:
Wait for the masses to cry when boarder security is breached.

SOLUTION:
and then initiate the solution tptb always wanted anyway:

POLICE STATE

Just another step down the line from "Dudley Hiibel"

papers, papers, please...

This has gone too far.

What happened to "right to remain SILENT?"

What about the 4th amendment requirement that "search and arrest warrants be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause."

I feel like at this point in history there is no "America" as I understood the concept.

Our borders are undefended, our credit is crashing, our water, land, and air are poisoned, our military fights illegal wars, our people are fascistly policed, our rights, freedoms and privacies are lost.

did I mention I feel like our mchomes are toothpick supported paper-machete in a plastic wrapped cardboard box?

...and a growing part of the world hates us?

What happened to this country?

Sri Oracle


[edit on 22-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Do you know what would put an end to all the police bad-mouthing that goes on? - All the cops need to do is act exactly like the fire department.

Only come out when you are called.

Everyone loves firemen.

Did you come out with that yourself?

Sri Oracle