User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:49:21 AM EDT
[#1]
I don't know did you ask them? Was it because you are in Afghanistan and it was a Military roadblock? I don't think the Constitution applies in other Countries. (Thank you for what you are doing for us by the way) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:54:01 AM EDT
[#2]
If I am not bothering anyone else, just minding my own business, I want to be left alone. Simple as that.
You can catch the drunk driver that is weaving down the road. How can you be finding drugs? The war on drugs has wiped that out, right? DEA and those ever efficient Customs guys. Insurance? In most states with compulsory insurance, that is linked with other things: a. You can't get a drivers license without insurance. b. You can't get an inspection sticker without drivers license and insurance. c. You can't get a new license tag without drivers license and insurance. Plenty of opportunity there. Besides, if you DO catch a ROP'er or illegal alien, you'll just let them go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:55:32 AM EDT
[#3]
WTF! In the hundreds of illegal random searches I've been through, not a one has taken only seconds. How is the officer going to ask for you papers, you find them, him call in all of the information, call-in info from your license, do a check for outstanding warrants, check on your license plate, check all of the lights, (sometimes) measure the tread on the tires, and often have an animal search the car from the outside by smell in only seconds? Then multiply that times the number of people in front of you. The last one I went through took about two hours. One in Aug 2001 I ended-up with burns on my face, chest, and thighs after having to lay down on the pavement. The officer only received a verbal reprimand for that, and I've seen the same officer since then pulling the same crap at roadblocks. How do you figure that only takes seconds?z |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:56:47 AM EDT
[#4]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:57:21 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
ok you sound like a nice guy. (I really am) so lets say i drive through and that day the lucky number is 10... so you ask for my DL how is that not an unjust search at that point? You show your license, you drive off. It took as long as it would for you to make a full and complete stop at the stop sign you are at which has been there for 20 years and you would have had to stop at it anyway. mind you all my shit is in order, tags on straight, no cloud of weed in my car no beer cans on the dash etc. Then I say Thank you as you drive off. If it took 5 seconds for you to get your license out of your back pocket I am sorry. That is about how much you have been inconvienced. Out of over 3000 vehicles last check point, we had 3 or 4 arrests, 26 citations and 14 vehicles impounded. One of the arrests was a guy who was a passenger that I recognised. I knew he was a wanted parolee. He had a loaded gun, a glass pipe for smoking meth. He is in prison now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:57:49 AM EDT
[#6]
Amendment IV
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:58:15 AM EDT
[#7]
Reading these reminded me of one encounter I had at an Agriculture Inspection station, not a roadblock but an unwarranted interrogation. I was pulling a Uhaul shortly, had to stop for inspection as the sign stated and it went something like like this.
Me: Hey, how ya doin' officer Them: License, Reg., Ins. Them: So where are you headed today? Me: Tallahassee Them: Why ? Me: Moving Them: Whats in the trailer ? Me: Furniture Them: Open it up Me: (opens Uhaul) Them: (looking at the mass of shit packed from floor to ceiling) Them: Why do I smell reefer ? Me: What ? Them: Where are the drugs at ? Me: What in the hell are you talking about ? (I'm laughing at this point due in part to her actual use of the word "reefer"  )Them: Close it up sir, have a nice day Talk about a fishing expedition. I don't mind them checking out the trailer so much (shortly after 9-11) but the questioning was unexpected for sure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:58:34 AM EDT
[#8]
Sorry, random searches don't seem consistant with the Constitution of the US.
Listen, friend, if I am stopped by the cops for no reason except they are fishing, I god-damn well consider myself to be "searched", no matter what some black robed heathen on a bench calls it.
Doubtful. It may reinforce my opinion that we don't keep people in jail long enough, though.
Of course you do. It may not be for very long.....
Oh, so only 12.5% of the people going through the border crossing....er...checkpoint get their rights violated? Comforting.....
Sorry, the whole thing stinks.
It's not that i think that it's a waste of resources, if we had one every ten miles I bet crime would drop. It's just that, as I see it, no matter how you slice it, the whole thing reeks of totalitarianism. "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants, it is the creed of slaves."-William Pitt. BTW-I am not a cop basher. I am not a pothead, drunk driver, or leftist. On almost all other areas I support LE fully. But not on this issue. |
||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:59:45 AM EDT
[#9]
Great! You had PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE HE WAS A CRIMINAL. So what you did is legal. However, if you pull me over, for no reason, just to see if I MIGHT NOT HAVE A LICENSE, then you are fishing, and it is forbidden by the 4th amendment. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:00:55 AM EDT
[#10]
GREAT POST. |
|||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:01:04 AM EDT
[#11]
Now who is violating the Constitution? I did not know it was against the law to be Muslim (ROP) If I stop a Muslim, should I treat him or her differently just to show them? How about if they are Black? Should I rough them up a little? What if it is a woman? Should I treat them like less of a citizen? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:02:17 AM EDT
[#12]
you really dont get it, let me try again. I have done nothing wrong... why should you have to see my liscence if I am not suspected of anything??? why??? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:22:23 AM EDT
[#13]
Because the law says you will produce your license upon request. When you accepted the license you agreed to those terms. Change the law if you wish but I am not doing anything wrong or illegal. We can disagree on what violates and what does not violate our Constitution. I can't prove you are wrong any more than you can prove I am wrong. (Although I believe I am right) I have to go to work now...................... Did I mention we are conducting a checkpoint tonight? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:32:12 AM EDT
[#14]
I'm a former LEO, and I couldn't agree more. I'd have a hard time justifying the probable cause to myself to make an arrest under those circumstances. Fortunately, WA State doesn't "do" checkpoints. If the checkpoint is the result of exigent circumstances (I.E. DC Sniper) I can understand that, but to see if you have a valid DL??? As TimJ pointed out, "as I see it, no matter how you slice it, the whole thing reeks of totalitarianism." and I have never desired to be a JBT. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:32:16 AM EDT
[#15]
good luck with your violations of rights, but your wrong.... P.S. do you remeber Jim Crow laws?? they were laws!!! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:37:50 AM EDT
[#16]
Try not to get shit on your fingers as you wipe with the Constitution. Hope you guys generate lots of revenue for new Mag-Lites. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:40:04 AM EDT
[#17]
And those laws were changed. Slavery was also legal in this Nation once. It was changed.
Driving is not a right, it is a priveledge and with it comes responsibilities and obligations. I do not support walking down the sidewalk checkpoints, but having one drivers license checkpoint every 4 ot 5 months when the date and time is advertised is not unreasonable. I think some of you are confusing un-reasonable search and siezure with "the cops have no right to ever stop me or search me" Checkpoints have been deemed reasonable as long as we follow strick guidelines. Change the laws, change the judges that interperet the laws that is fine with me. Have a great day, I will try to post the numbers later so you guys can have something else to argue about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:40:57 AM EDT
[#18]
Well, stay safe and doubletap a dog for your buddies on arfcom Me, I've always thought the real action was on the sidestreets leading up to the checkpoint. I've been through one in PA and a funny little shakedown afterward due to pulling off ahead of the stop (I happened to be staying there that night). I did learn a lot about the nice breathylizer machine that night though. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:15:48 AM EDT
[#19]
I see no difference in a checkpoint and the police randomly pulling cars over to check licenses, etc. One is ok the other is not ? If I am stopped at a checkpoint I am not allowed to just leave until I prove my innocence correct ? Therefore I am in an officer's custody at that point seeing as I am not permitted to remove myself from that situation. That sounds like seizure of my person to me, unreasonable because I have done nothing wrong. Just because I have agreed to present my license when asked for it doesn't (edit) MEAN that automatically gives consent to waive all my other rights so that result can be obtained or does it ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:33:01 AM EDT
[#20]
Been a few years since my last law classes, but... The problem with most 'random' checks was that they weren't random. Whether intentional or not, in many cases, the searches were targeted towards certain non-criminal groups and were discriminatory. Now, if you search EVERYONE passing a certain spot, you can't be hit with an accusation of hassling just women, or hispanics, or people with cheap cars, etc. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:42:45 AM EDT
[#21]
So say they go door to door through an entire town and run warrant checks on EVERYONE, it would be ok under this logic seeing as how they didn't single anybody out and everybody was subject to it. What was that movie with Bruce Willis were everyone had to place their hands in the circles and be scanned through the wall in their apartments, I think Chris Tucker was in it also ? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:43:49 AM EDT
[#22]
Unless the person is reasonable suspected of doing something wrong, a cop HAS NO RIGHT to stop or search someone. It's the constitution. Right there in black and white. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:51:43 AM EDT
[#23]
+1 on that I don't see anything confusing either. They must have left the part about the 4th not applying to LE operations out of my copy of the Constitution 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 12:17:56 PM EDT
[#24]
'No sir, I am a meat popsicle.' Fifth Element. Look, I'm not a lawyer. I don't want to be a lawyer. I stopped doing that shit after I worked for one for several months. Suffice to say in my experience 90% REALLY DO give the other 10% a bad name... That said - I can see a distinction between raiding houses and doing an ID check on highways. Whether or not it's a violation of founding principles, your conduct when driving on public ways really is restricted. Speed, direction, sobriety, signaling, etc. If you want things to get really messy, it also involves reasonable expectations of privacy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 12:19:46 PM EDT
[#25]
wow, three pages about one of the lamest 'criminal' arrests, EVER.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 12:52:53 PM EDT
[#26]
The only checkpoints in Southeast Michigan that I've ever been through has been in the more rural areas, where the least crime takes place. Why not create checkpoints in the ghettos in Detroit and get some real criminals off the streets? I bet just about every car there has something illegal in it. I think that would be a better use of resources, would'nt it???
I say put checkpoints in the high crime areas and leave the decent, hardworking people alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 12:56:11 PM EDT
[#27]
Back under your bridge. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 12:59:01 PM EDT
[#28]
It's been fun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:01:10 PM EDT
[#29]
for whom???? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:01:56 PM EDT
[#30]
For me at least. I get a big kick out of reading the comments. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:06:39 PM EDT
[#31]
Drivers license check point? You mean thy run a checkpoint under the pretense of checking to see if you have papers?
Dont you feel dirty after doing such a thing? Hell the local sheriffs know I dont have a DL, cause they let me go for it before and when they see me out driving THEY WAVE. Great bunch of guys, havent met a dickhead one yet. The state police on the other hand I wouldnt piss on if they were on fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:08:36 PM EDT
[#32]
Kool thing about Police checkpoints is that they dont have 360 degree security and its easy to sweep the objective of all resistance.
 (kiddingofcourse )I can imagine if they started doing that stupid sh$t in our area of the state, the Farmers would come unglued.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:13:21 PM EDT
[#33]
I'm betting those deputies had a big laugh about you "choking" the chicken... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 1:31:49 PM EDT
[#34]
You have violated your oath if you have intentionally stopped ONE car without PC...(real PC not made up crap). I am sorry to be so blunt. I know how hard it would be to refuse to perform such an assigned task, but the fact remains the Constitution makes no allowance for random application of unprovoked interrogation. I assist the police from the air and you know how we spot a drunk from the air? We watch for erratic driving corroborated from a primary contact on the ground! The drunks we catch are thoroughly baked. We caught a lady earlier this week who the reporting party had said was having difficulty getting her child into the car seat! She then spent two minutes getting out of the parking lot. We kept eyes on her (driving a nice new Explorer) until the ground units got there and made the stop. If we directed intercepts to every car that came close to the fog line once or twice the national guard would run short of manpower performing the stops. I appreciate intercepting criminals and blatant law breakers but the system is slow for a reason. Efficiency will be the end of the republic. Planerench out. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 2:51:40 PM EDT
[#35]
Yeah my friend...you wanna be careful. Illinois is not friendly to CCW's. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 3:09:02 PM EDT
[#36]
Wow. You really don't get it do you? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 3:52:03 PM EDT
[#37]
I feel so much safer now that those people without seatbelts and drivers liscence aren't on the road.I know that the terrorists are shaking in their shoes now.I am certainly not a LEO basher but come on,we all know where the bla.. ,I mean bad side of town is and you can get all the whores,crack etc you want and these guys are concentrating on seatbelt use????
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 3:59:08 PM EDT
[#38]
Did you miss the part about how the two drivers in first post were both DUI? Drunk driving is bad. Too many people die from it. As one of my senators has proven, it's usually the wrong people that die from it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 7:21:50 PM EDT
[#39]
If he got it, he'd either quit his job or wouldn't be able to sleep at night. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 7:35:53 PM EDT
[#40]
I can't believe all the people agreeing with this.
The very next thing to happen is they stop by your house to make sure you don't have any drugs out on the table or you don't have an arrest warrant. After that they search thru your daughter's panty drawer for drugs and guns. Next they lead you out of your house into a camp while they take your property because you just might have done something wrong once upon a time. Really... How far is it from randomly stopping and questioning you in your car to doing the same in your home??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 7:57:47 PM EDT
[#41]
You are a complete fucking idiot. take your 'sobriety' checkpoint and stick it pointy end first up your surely gaping asshole.  Presumed innocent until proven guilty? Oh...I see. You're all just doing this for our protection, because it might take one bad guy off the street. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:36:21 PM EDT
[#42]
I think some of you are confusing un-reasonable search and siezure with "the cops have no right to ever stop me or search me"
To stop and frisk a guy who was simply walking down the street, perhaps walking to work, school, grocery store, who knows?, just to see if you can find contraband on him (drugs, a concealed weapon, or a counterfeit $20 in his wallet) would be unreasonable. It would be unreasonable even if you only stopped and frisked every 7th person. Ditto, a person merely driving down the street. To stop and frisk a guy at 2 am walking away from a from the back alley of a store which you were just notified had an alarm go off, and you can see he is carrying a bag in one hand, and a crowbar in the other would be reasonable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:45:56 PM EDT
[#43]
When you're right, you're right. Plus One |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 9:50:20 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Besides, if you DO catch a ROP'er or illegal alien, you'll just let them go. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now who is violating the Constitution? I did not know it was against the law to be Muslim (ROP) If I stop a Muslim, should I treat him or her differently just to show them? How about if they are Black? Should I rough them up a little? What if it is a woman? Should I treat them like less of a citizen? Gotcha! So you DO think the Constitution stands for something. Now we're getting somewhere! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:09:25 PM EDT
[#45]
Hell you can't understand it in English. If you want cheese with your whine, why don't you try to explain to the audience why you thing a process enacted by your elected representatives is making you unhappy AND what YOU have done to get it changed. Other than cry and evince a minimal understanding of how things work in this country. You do vote regularly don't you? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:25:44 PM EDT
[#46]
You ever notive all the mouthbreathers that have no clue what the word unreasonable means, what a search is, waht a seizure is and haven't a fucking clue about what their rights and RESPONSIBILITIES are.
First the Constitution (btw usually spelled with an upper case C )has nothing to do with your complying with privileges as granted by the State you are in. Even Fla should remember the Constitution AND BoR are restrictions primarily on the FEDERAL Government. The states are restricted by their constitutions as to how they enforce the state laws on Firearms, Searches, driving privileges. Until these bozos can understand the difference between state laws and the Bill of Rights they will continue to appear to be bricks on this and other threads. Driving is a privilege not a right. If that concept is difficult or impossible to understand stop here. You need to concentrate on breathing. That privilege is administered by the State based on the laws enacted by you, via YOUR representatives. One of the administrative requirements for getting a license is your agreeing to abice by the Vehicle Code. (Not that tough is it?) If you decide that those requirements are too onerous (look it up if it's too big a word.) than you can walk, take a bus, etc etc etc. Most constitutions are silent on any specific right to travel, and they damen sure don't say how you can travel. So if you don't like one method, because you might have to show your license find another. Or get YOUR representatives to change the laws. Just don't come here and broadcast your ignorance and expect sympathy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 10:27:08 PM EDT
[#47]
Gimme a second to stop laughing............let me guess, unobstructed travel in the U.S. ? Don't need and drivers license or registration, right ? Here in California, this ploy has been around for years. After the "Bill of Rights" routine, I would tell them to exit the car since they are "Traveling" and not driving, therefore they are no longer in need of a car. Tow, enroute. I would also direct them to the nearest stable for a horse and buggy. The look on these constitutionalists faces is great. When they argue, I asked them this simple question. I ask them if they would stop at stop signs and stop lights ? and they say "yes". I point out they don't get to decide which laws to follow and which they don't. The "founders" of the Bill of Rights had no concept of cars in their time and could not forsee the future with them in it. ETA: By the way, I'm a LEO and have participated in one(1), yep that's right one(1), DUI checkpoint. I did not like it constitutionally speaking of course, but it does serve a useful purpose. This is one of the questions that needs to be answered by the US Supreme Court, if it hasn't been already. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:22:56 PM EDT
[#48]
update!!! on my way to my friends resturaunt i found a checkpoint and turned around so i could go through!!!! wheeeeee.
went like this cop: hey where doing this to bring awarness blah DUI blah blah... you have anything to drink? me: no (it was only 8pm) cop: whats your last name? me: why? cop: huh? me: why do you want to know? cop: you look like someone familiar me: (me looking at his name badge) I dont recognize yours I dont think you know me but its #### cop: (pleasant goodbye stuff) all and all not bad, now they were not actually checking DL's that is where I start to have a problem. And for the folks that think the constitution is only about the federal government you missed a lot of history. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:41:53 PM EDT
[#49]
Wanna bet? The Constitution is ONLY about the Federal Government. Certain of the Amendments have been incorporated as applying to lower levels. You understand the concept of incorporation don't you? Try explaining how the Constitution applies to the State Governments. This oughta be interesting. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2005 11:43:06 PM EDT
[#50]
has the federal gov not forced the member states to abide by the constitution? |
||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
