Good Example of How To Fight Tyranny

page: 1
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Just don't answer their questions.

You have the right to remain silent, especially when illegally stopped and harassed:



Of course, you need nerves of steel and the ability to stay focused. I'm sure the video camera helped too.

We don't have to answer their questions, checkpoints are evidence of a total police state on the rise....




posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Wow, they were only checking whether the drivers have been drinking or not, how is that even tyranny?
My grandpa died because some idiot hit him with his truck while drunk driving, maybe he'd still be alive if the truck driver was checked.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Yeah, I'm not sure this is a positive example of how to fight tyranny. As the other poster said, this was a DUI checkpoint so the cop was just making sure there were no drunk drivers on the road.

You have to pick your battles with this kind of stuff. If you aren't willing to be cooperative when they are honestly trying to help you, you're doing more harm than good. I appreciate the desire to stand up for your rights and it's something everyone needs to start doing but you just need to know when it's appropriate.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ssupp
 


I am truly sorry for your loss.

The solution, however, to what happened to him, and many others, is not armed checkpoints..

Armed checkpoints where drivers are forced to stop and answer questions is a tyrannical government gone awry, whether it be federal, state, or local, and infringes on our rights.

I would rather take my chances versus the drunks than submit to this, I think the guy in the video is an inspiration and did a great job.
edit on 18-2-2012 by Signals because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


You should understand that drunk people aren't very cooperative when it comes to the law, I'm pretty sure they're armed for a reason.

I'm just as opposed to the government as any poster on this site, but the law isn't always a negative thing.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I am usually always on the side of the common person vs. the police.

However, these two officers were polite, professional and answered the driver's question concerning their name and number.

All they asked was, "Have you had anything to drink tonight sir?"

Now, drinking, doing drugs and driving is killing innocent people. A lot of innocent people.

The police have every right, in my opinion, to ask that person that question.

If they had asked me, I would have replied no officer as I would have had nothing to hide as I do not drink and drive ever.

Too many people are drinking, doing drugs and getting behind the wheel of vehicles and killing people.

Ya gotta have a drink or do drugs - buy whatever, go home and party, don't put the rest of us in danger.

These police were not being bullies (and I'm the first one to cry police brutality if it warrants it) but they had every right to ask and that driver should have simply said, no officer - if he/she had nothing to hide.

I've put a two year old little girl in a morgue drawer decades back because a drunk driver ran her over.

I've put a eighteen year old boy who had a bright future ahead of him in a morgue drawer because of a drunk driver hitting him head on. He was his mother and father's only child. Three years later the mother of that young man committed suicide, so that drunk driver actually was responsible for two deaths. The father told us that the woman wanted to be with her son, she could not live any longer having buried him.

The police in this case were simply trying to keep the roads safe for the rest of us that have to deal with irresponsible people that drink and drive. They should have given the driver a breath analyzer test.

Driving is a privilege not a right.

Sorry in this particular case, I'm siding with the police.

They did not infringe upon this man's right, they were doing their job.

edit on 18-2-2012 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


If you ever had to place a little two year old child or a young man two years younger than you in a morgue drawer, all because of a stupid drunk driver maybe you would feel different.

Hopefully, you never get a phone call at 3AM telling you that your mother, father, sister, brother, wife, son or daughter were killed by a drunk driver.

The reason for the check points is that there has been a steady increase in the number of drivers that are under the influence and driving.

I also at this point wish to state that I can always tell when I'm driving around people yakking on their cell phones while driving - they are unpredictable and also putting everyone around them at risk.

Driving is serious business - and far too many people take this responsibility too lightly.

Every day I encounter people who can't drive sober much less with a few beers in them, talking away on their cell phone or to their passenger.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Surprised to see everyone so far on this thread saying they approve of checkpoints. But I guess if no one agreed with them or thought they were a good idea, they wouldn't exist in the first place. I just tend to think of ATS posters as more 'freedom' orientated, and against government control.

There is no reason to stop someone from traveling to ask if they're breaking the law. This video is great. If everyone did this, maybe they'd stop doing the checkpoint thing altogether. Obviously this doesn't mean I advocate drunk driving, just that I wouldn't give up my freedom to travel (which is a right, not a privilege) without being unlawfully stopped and questioned, even if it means getting drunks off the road. In most cases it just means insurance tickets and revenue generation, which just must be some lucky, unintended side-benefit of this whole "checkpoint" campaign.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ofhumandescent
 





The reason for the check points is that there has been a steady increase in the number of drivers that are under the influence and driving.


Sorry, but I haven't seen any evidence to back that up.

No amount of drunk drivers gives them the right to make all cars stop and answer questions...

For crying out loud I got stopped on a country road in Louisiana at a "seatbelt check". The officer told me he was checking for seatbelts and "suspicious activity".

They're illegal, hell even the TSA has become actively involved in checkpoints. They have nothing to do with getting drunk drivers off the road- It is conditioning, plain and simple.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:13 AM
link   
Are you kidding me? This is not a way to fight tyrany. If i were one of those officers i whould have put that guy in jail for 24 hours.

DUI checkpoints are a must because you have no idea how many drunk drivers are caught before doing any damage.

And they shoyld be armed because its the USA where everyone has a gun, and you have no idea which douchebag can point a gun and shoot at the officer ...

So stop being so paranoid about the police state.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by ssupp
Wow, they were only checking whether the drivers have been drinking or not, how is that even tyranny?
My grandpa died because some idiot hit him with his truck while drunk driving, maybe he'd still be alive if the truck driver was checked.


Maybe this works better for you:

Here in Atlanta they set up checkpoints where they check for ......... drumroll........ VALID LICENSES!!!!!

Argue that one. People with a suspended license aren't drunk drivers. Suspended licenses don't take away your ability to drive.....



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexIR
Are you kidding me? This is not a way to fight tyrany. If i were one of those officers i whould have put that guy in jail for 24 hours.

DUI checkpoints are a must because you have no idea how many drunk drivers are caught before doing any damage.

And they shoyld be armed because its the USA where everyone has a gun, and you have no idea which douchebag can point a gun and shoot at the officer ...

So stop being so paranoid about the police state.


Read my above post, this is no PARANOIA...

People like you are gonna be shocked as # when you have to show a license to buy groceries so your families can eat.

and you're supporting this police state too.... that's the messed up part about it..



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
The police in this case were simply trying to keep the roads safe for the rest of us that have to deal with irresponsible people that drink and drive. They should have given the driver a breath analyzer test.

Driving is a privilege not a right.

Sorry in this particular case, I'm siding with the police.

They did not infringe upon this man's right, they were doing their job.

edit on 18-2-2012 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)


Why is driving a privilege and not a right? The government doesn't own us, and doesn't grant us "privileges".

The way it's SUPPOSED to work is WE are supposed to give THEM privileges...



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Great Job by the man in the video! Another one who knows who he is! Yeah the officers were polite and good for them. However what most people do not realize is there is no law that you have to answer their questions or submit to them and really they cannot legally stop you in most jurisdictions without probable cause. These check points are just another violation of the right to travel freely without harassment etc.

Just because some idiot got drunk and kills someone does not give anyone a right to harrass others without probable cause. Some posters on this thread typify whats wrong with a majority Americans by their willingness to give up freedom for what they think is a little protection/security when in fact it is just conditioning. rest assured there is much more of this to come and not just for drunk drivers...

edit on 19-2-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:48 AM
link   

To the people who support these checkpoints:



Since you think it's okay for police to have checkpoints for drivers because a few got drunk and caused damage, or bodily harm - is it okay to monitor Masjids for Muslims that MIGHT be plotting.

Or is it okay to moniter all Iranians because they might be sleeper agents??

Why not strip students butt naked at school so they don't hide drugs or weapons! Eliminates the drug problem and shrinks the risk of school shootings to 0%!



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine

To the people who support these checkpoints:



Since you think it's okay for police to have checkpoints for drivers because a few got drunk and caused damage, or bodily harm - is it okay to monitor Masjids for Muslims that MIGHT be plotting.

Or is it okay to moniter all Iranians because they might be sleeper agents??

Why not strip students butt naked at school so they don't hide drugs or weapons! Eliminates the drug problem and shrinks the risk of school shootings to 0%!


Exactly... Why not just do house to house searches to make sure people do not possess stolen property, or drugs etc?



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Mandatory cavity searches??

And while you're at it, make sure women's breasts are real, and not bombs in disguise!



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Excuse me, are you breaking the law tonight? I'll take your word for it, promise...



Originally posted by AlexIR
So stop being so paranoid about the police state.


mmhmmm... well said?



"As the clock struck 13 we met one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the Thought Police, the stability of the Party depended. Often she was ready to accept the official mythology, simply because the difference between truth and falsehood did not seem important to her.

When the Warden started booming, she had inconspicuously swallowed half a gramme of soma, with the result that she could now sit, serenely not listening, thinking of nothing at all, but with her large blue eyes fixed on the Warden's face in an expression of rapt attention."

edit on 19-2-2012 by METACOMET because: fx



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:29 AM
link   
LOVE videos like this, S&F. Flexyourrights.org, also a great website. I'm a polite person and I will respect the police, but know your rights before they're violated. I've heard many stories of my friends having their rights violated (illegally searched) and they didn't even know.
edit on 2/19/2012 by dymiox because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:35 AM
link   
I think these were small town cops just doing their job. And being very polite I might add. I would like to see this guy pull up at a state trooper checkpoint and do this.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join