They're always trying to blur the boundaries and move them away from liberty. Government in action. The 'and dangerous' part is particularly significant, hence they almost always 'forget' that part.
Sadly, it is law. If a cop orders you out of the car during a traffic stop and you don't comply, they can arrest you. Now, the cops are only supposed to order you out if there is a reason to believes that you are armed AND dangerous. For example, if the car is stolen, or if the car was reported in a road rage incident where a firearm was displayed, or the car was used in a bank robbery, then any reasonable cop would believe that the occupants may be armed and dangerous. That is the way it is supposed to work, but the courts allow this requirement to be abused. I would say it is one of the most abused laws on the books. If a cop does not like that you challenge them, they will order you out of the car and look for a reason to beat you.
@@shenmisheshou7002 You sound like a law enforcement officer. There are no laws that allow an officer to order you to do something for them to safe. The police can order somebody out of the vehicle to conduct a pat-down to check for weapons IF there is a reasonable threat to their safety or if they have reasonable articulable suspicion that an occupant of the vehicle may have a weapon. They cannot just order somebody out of the vehicle for no reason. Regarding your scenarios, an officer would have the RAS to believe the occupants in the vehicle would be armed. That same officer would never attempt to approach that vehicle alone; they would almost always have a backup.
I agree we can thank the 1968 Supreme Court ruling terry v Ohio the 3 Pilar’s of this are for officer safety reasonable articulate suspicion and detainment which the black robe tyrants said it’s only a mere intrusion of our 4th amendment while it shits all over it pathetic
It kills me every time the wife/girlfriend sides against their man while he's in a high tension adversarial situation with another man. These women need to just keep their mouths closed and let their man lead. ANYTHING coming out of her mouth works AGAINST her man. And they only do it because THEY are nervous. So they take it out on their own man instead of the adversary. Disgusting.
They're signaling they're ready to jump to the more dominant male. She's saying 'Mr cop, if you kill him don't kill me because I'll be your bitch.' A woman has to really love you to take you side 100% in this type of situation. It's a good test, actually.
I believe that if the officer doesn't have reasonable cause or a traffic violation within a certain distance/range of following an individual their POLICY REQUIRES the 'Tailing/Following' be halted.
Unfortunately Mr. Guardian’s experience driving while black is not unique. Qualified immunity is not a law - it’s a judicial ruling. Cops are assuming guilt until civilians prove their innocence. Didn’t know that about the steering wheel - thanks for the education.
Qualifications for being hired for law enforcement: 1. Must be scared of just about everything including your own shadow. 2. Must not have any knowledge of laws or rights. 3. Must be able to be triggered by anything and everything. 4. Must have a fragile ego. 5. Must follow any orders and not think for yourself or question any directives no matter how unlawful. 6. Psychopathy is not necessarily a requirement but it's definitely a plus. Now tell me I'm wrong or missed any. 🖕🐖
Another example of the huge problem caused by the go along to get along crowd. They have bowed to the self-appointed authority of these people to the point they just expect it. Its a blow to their ego anytime someone questions it or stands on their rights. They dont know or care about the law because they have never had to. People really need to wake up.
And why did the little coward cop, standing near the rear on the passenger side, have his gun out in a threatening manner during the entire stop? Even after the stop ended, he continued to hold his firearm. And why was he violating the passenger's rights by shinning his flash light at the women's camera. I sure hope these people filed complaints against these pos cops.
I'm convinced most of them know that they're not supposed to be saying it, but they're banking on the fact that the average citizen will comply out of fear and lack of knowledge.
Pig sure making a big deal out of not knowing a lot. And his girlfriends shining their flashlights into the camera should also get a complaint and charges for prior restraint.
When we get puleed over, we are not responsible for officer safety. They shouldn't pull us over if they are so scared . Just following orders is not worth it if it could put you in danger
THOSE COP'S ARE SCARY! THOSE 1ST TWO DEFINITELY WOULD MAME OR KILL IN A HEART BEAT AND SHOULD NOT BE HOLDING BADGES AND WEAPONS!!! WHERE WAS THIS? THIS SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES! WE ARE IN DEEP TROUBLE PEOPLE!!! I'M TERRIFIED!!!
All police take notes from the Ma State police I came to this conclusion after watching the Karen read trial. It shows how smart and trained police really are lmao
Get that officer some therapy, he is delusional that everyone is a bad guy and a liar. How the hell do these people make it through the day on a regular basis. I hope the fast food worker tells him “I did not spit in your food”, do that every day until the cop starts to believe the fast food worker.
If those poll overs were all by the same department, I would be filing a complaint for harassment and then a Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit for that harassment
What happened to innocent until proven guilty, basically the TYRANT just accused him of being guilty by say “I don’t know who to believe.” Well if he were a true Police officer and not a tyrant he would believe the driver (i.e innocent).
Take it back.....take your degree back. Throw the whole thing away! Start over! If you tell somebody to do something is not always a lawful command. Use logic and deductive reasoning. Lawful order versus order or command. For an order to be lawful it has to be tied to a law!!!! For instance give me your ID can only be a lawful order if a crime is involved (thus allowing you to legally ID that person). No suspicion or investigation....but a crime. Telling someone not to move on a traffic stop is not lawful. Show me a law that says occupants cannot move unless told to do so for officer safety. Where that statute at?!
3:24 I hear this man, so if he did have a weapon what should he say or do the officer? Probably say he had one! So, if he doesn’t have one, what should he say or do what? Even more of a reason why unqualified officers [ those that doesn’t work according or in sync with or to the US Constitution ] should NOT make stop they should keep that to qualified officers [ those who worker within or according to the US Constitution ]!
