It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

4th of July DUI Checkpoint - Drug Dogs, Searched Without Consent. Is This Legal?

page: 6
88
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Sensitivity training. You will not question authority, ever again. See what it gets you.

Even the people that complied got an eyeful of what happens if you do.

I'd say that Operation Intimidation was a grand success.




posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   
How is that guy even qualified to be a cop in that shape? Doesn't he have to jump fences and stuff testing and training? That fat pig couldn't catch a basset hound let alone a criminal. But i guess he would just shoot them in the back or something



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I am one thousand percent against all forms of searches, especially home, vehicle and body, by all law enforcement employees, without a court approved search warrant or consent of the person to be searched. recently, I have read in the news that law enforcement conducting massive searches without proper warrants, such cases as the Boston Bombing and missing children.
I think it is both constitutionally wrong and morally wrong to execute those searches.
also, I do believe it is part of NWO, to take away our rights. indeed future generations will be poorly paid servants of Wall Street mentality. I do encourage the search victim in this case, to contact both civil rights attorneys and file a written compliant with the FBI.
edit on 6-7-2013 by harkna because: i erred by omission on first write.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
We have mobile random alcohol/drug testing crews here and the legal limit for alcohol is 0.05%, drugs (eg meth, coke, opiates, thc etc are virtual zero tolerance for operators of motor vehicles and you can fail that particular test days after partying. Failing the roadside test means you get transported to a location to undergo another test more accurate than the handheld devices. Refusal to submit to testing is an automatic arrest & conviction identical to what failing the test would require. The officers doing the roadside testing here are far more reasonable and polite in the way they go about it than what I read here as the US officers' general attitude but I guess our LEOs have less reason to be in fear for their lives at the hands of drivers they need to question. Be difficult, disrespectful or behave offensively and you'll quickly find yourself in handcuffs.

BTW that 0.05% is a fail IE you need to be less than that to escape a conviction but there are 3 general ranges (low mid high) of intoxication taken into account by the judge when sentences are handed out which also take into consideration any previous DUI offences to determine the appropriate harshness of the penalty, 3 time offenders will almost certainly see some jail time. The law here doesn't (or didn't at least) call it DUI (driving under influence) - the court cases were listed as PCA (prescribed content of alcohol).

I should add that significant dates and events are prime times for hostile actions (dare I say terrorism from foreign & domestic sources) and often warrant a tightening of security measures in today's climate although I can remember more innocent times as can most readers here. Let's suppose for a moment that there was an anonymous tip-off about some sort of attack being planned for that day & possibly in that area.
edit on 6/7/2013 by Pilgrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Playing kind of a devil's advocate here, but basically this is what you should expect when laws are passed that make a person's POTENTIAL for damaging actions to be a crime. Being drunk doesn't in itself cause someone else damage. But if you do something stupid while under the influence and assault someone, then you are charged with doing illegal damages. Same thing with driving. In itself it is not causing someone damage. But if you make a mistake in judgement or even purposely choose to cause someone harm while driving, then yes, that becomes an illegal event. In both cases, damages have to actually occur before you are considered as doing something legally actionable.

But combining drinking with driving and that has magically become an illegal event because of the potential for damages that MIGHT result. In effect, you are being charged for being potentially able to cause someone damage, not for anything that is ACTUALLY currently damaging from your actions.

Of course, this and other similar laws are just the camel's nose poking underneath the tent. Precedent has been set. Sit back and watch it grow as it's application spreads.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:22 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rikku
"is this legal?"
probably yes.
but if not sure, ask in a internet forum.

what is the problem?



The problem is he wanted to have a few beers and drive..then get mad when he runs into a DUI checkpoint




posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
If i am not mistaken the supreme court has deemed acts like
this flat out illegal and an infringement of our rights, i do not
remember the case but it had to do with law enforcements
desire to set up what they called drug check points, the
proper response to this was said to be call the ACLU and
inform them of the breach of law, they would do something
about it from there.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by bloodreviara
If i am not mistaken the supreme court has deemed acts like
this flat out illegal and an infringement of our rights, i do not
remember the case but it had to do with law enforcements
desire to set up what they called drug check points, the
proper response to this was said to be call the ACLU and
inform them of the breach of law, they would do something
about it from there.


# your rights. You don't have a right to drive drunk or high.

The only ones who have a problem with this are the ones who are getting caught breaking the law.

End of story.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Pilgrum
 





I should add that significant dates and events are prime times for hostile actions (dare I say terrorism from foreign & domestic sources) and often warrant a tightening of security measures in today's climate although I can remember more innocent times as can most readers here. Let's suppose for a moment that there was an anonymous tip-off about some sort of attack being planned for that day & possibly in that area.


The terrorism is crap and it is BS. The Boston Bombers blew people up and law enforcement did not give a damn. They shot one security guard and 9000 law enforcement officers shut down a whole city. So terrorism my ass.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Just a little comparison here....


I'm a pilot and being a pilot I know the ins and outs to flying. I need to know just about everything there is to flying, and that is a lot of stuff that I need to keep in my frontal lobes at all times. Not just flying the plane, but all the regulations dealing with all the aspects of what I do, weather, navigation etc...a lot of stuff...

Now lets take a cop, one would think he would know what to do in the event of anything dealing with our 2nd, 4th 5th etc and everything within his State dealing with that along with a very large amount of laws. Even with all those laws I would love to compare what I need to know to what they should know.

One would think the 4th would be a biggie to them, A REAL BIGGIE. Kind of like if I had an engine fire BIGGIE. Why do they AIWAYS come off either aggressive or totally dumbfounded and need to call the LT. COME ON PEOPLE its the 4th amendment! This is something they need to deal with EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK! How would any of you deal with the situation if I told you I forgot how to land the plane? The 4th to cops would be a lot like a pilot landing an airplane, it should be reflex...

So some guy comes a long and exercises his rights and they all freak out, and 1/2 of you on ATS freak out too...geez

This is just like the guy who walks down the street with a gun on his hip and the cops have no clue to what the State laws say or the 2nd....

This is what worries me the most as a result of all this. I don't care if the guy was an ass in a way it is his right and, more importantly, the cops should recognize it as his right do so.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Nothing like being forced to stop at a check point in the middle of the night and then asked questions under duress. So no one even see's anything wrong with this? All this happening on the 4th of July no less. Unbelievable! Monitoring motorists is one thing, but forcing stops with road blocks in hops to get a DUI? So everyone is guilty and has to prove their innocents at the hands of a bunch of thug cops and K9's. Yeah that cop invited the dog to smash up on the door with his paws and then lie and say yeah that's an indication of drugs on board. Seriously these guys have resorted to outright lies to escalate the situation in their favor. They wonder why they are under scrutiny all the time. Hope you enjoy digging through the garbage on the floorboard. Garbage meets garbage. Oh look we got evidence a stale a french-fry!! LOL



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Originally posted by Rikku
"is this legal?"
probably yes.
but if not sure, ask in a internet forum.

what is the problem?



The problem is he wanted to have a few beers and drive..then get mad when he runs into a DUI checkpoint



You have to ask yourself, if that was the case, why would he be filming it?



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 03:38 AM
link   
Very funny video.

This demonstrates what happens when YOU start questioning those who are trying to question you.

There is an over the top reaction because it happens so rarely.

Most people are compliant.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
The end of the video is the most telling when he sees they are being recorded.

They KNEW they were so busted and in the wrong at that point but trying so hard to criminalize this kid by finding ANYTHING that will help them not only meet their quota and move themselves up through the ranks but legitimize this act to begin with.

"look we found something! good thing we had this checkpoint" kind of deal.


You are absolutely right and I bet if any of them had anything to plant they would have!
Today if you are not on the home team or swimming in money you are just a worthless slave to the system!



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rikku
"is this legal?"
probably yes.
but if not sure, ask in a internet forum.

what is the problem?


It's not legal to give your dog a command that provides a false hit on a drug search, just so you can nail some kid to the wall because he's calling you out on your tyrannical behavior at your DUI check point.

While that officer wasted his time playing big boss in charge with this kid, maybe he could have busted someone who was really drinking and driving.

This country desperately needs more kids like him or this country will fall under tyranny. While people who sit on the internet and boast about how stupid this kid is, maybe someday we will be thanking him for having the gumption to stand up against these crooks.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by Pilgrum
 





I should add that significant dates and events are prime times for hostile actions (dare I say terrorism from foreign & domestic sources) and often warrant a tightening of security measures in today's climate although I can remember more innocent times as can most readers here. Let's suppose for a moment that there was an anonymous tip-off about some sort of attack being planned for that day & possibly in that area.


The terrorism is crap and it is BS. The Boston Bombers blew people up and law enforcement did not give a damn. They shot one security guard and 9000 law enforcement officers shut down a whole city. So terrorism my ass.



Boston was their golden opportunity to roll out their big toys and tanks onto residential streets and just see how far they could take the police state game. Looks to me like they achieved success, and found out how easily they can take it to the next level.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker78
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.







OP got butthurt



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Well because I was avoiding saying what I really thought.

But now I'm going to

He's some loser who thinks he's making the cops look silly when in reality ...he's the one who looks like a #ing moron.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 

remember when Obama said "reject those voices" of people who speak of tyranny? well this is the result. just like with the IRS's behavior, the police get that message too. I hate to be on the same side as the TEA party on this (because I don't belong to any group owned by the Kochs unless this one is) but all he has to do is plant that kernel in some peoples' heads (not all police are total dicks) and they know who the new target is.

it gives them a tangible purpose and validity of why they are there. because the alternative is to find something else to do with their lives and that may be all that person is good at so you are basically dealing with a cornered animal.



new topics

top topics



 
88
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join