Years ago, when I was in college in Oklahoma, 4 of my friends and I went to a coffee shop to hang out, as we couldn't smoke on campus, only to discover it was closed for remodeling. I had just parked and noticed, so we sat for a moment to decide where else to go, and just as I was about to leave, a cop rolled up behind us. That cops held us there, running all our IDs "for outstanding warrants" for over two hours. We almost didn't get back to campus before the gates closed. (We were students at a Christian college, so no smoking on campus and a curfew, and a ton of other rules.) This reminded me of that incident. Some cops just like to abuse their authority.
I was once pulled over for "license plate light too dim". Not out, just dim. Without making any changes to the car or lights I was also pulled over for "license plate light too bright". The real point was just to spend 30 minutes running my ID for everything under the sun. Don't drive a car that has unconventional paint or they will know you are a dangerous felon on the way to your next crime. F the blue because it will happen to you.
Felony kidnapping charges. Only three minutes? Don't give a fuck. If I kidnapped a cop and held them at gunpoint for only three minutes I'd never know another day as a free man.
At this point it is safe to assume every traffic stop is pretextual. I've never seen nor heard of a single cop pulling someone over without asking multiple questions (where you going, where you coming from, anything in the vehicle I can arrest you for, etc). We live in a police state.
I got pulled over a few months ago, without all the rigmarole. I was in my work van, which was brand new and lacked plates. It also lacked a rear window, so the temp registration was in the front window. Cop pulled me over because he couldn't see a registration or a plate. For both of our safety, I pulled into a parking lot, which he seemed to appreciate. When he walked up to my side of the van, he could see there was a temp registration in the front window. He told me that the lack of registration was why I was pulled over (and for the benefit of my dash cam, I asked him to confirm that it was the ONLY reason, which he did.). After he reviewed it, he gave it back, and acknowledged that with no rear window, the front window was the appropriate location for the temp registration. He told me to have a nice day, and went about his business. Stop took all of 5 minutes, if that.
Yes. I've been through the Gestapo roadside interrogation. People think that since it happens to other people it will never happen to them. That's the way people are. If it happens to others, too bad. When it happens to them, it's an outrage! LOL If you don't speak up for others who are being wronged, it will be too late when they come for you.
@@scslre Ever been stopped? They start with some stupid variant of "Why are you so nervous," as if it isn't stressful being stopped by an armed thug that is a member of violent criminal gang.... This is why people don't think cops know. Because every time you see them, they say stupid things like "why do you have a problem with authority" is the most sincere and ignorant tones. If they keep pressing this narrative, like it isn't normal to be afraid of an armed authoritarian that will face no consequences for virtually anything, then we are going to continue to believe they are too stupid to understand that we do hate them, let alone the why.
We are at a point in the U.S. that any driver stopped by the police should be prepared to say, "I wish not to engage in conversation, so let's just get on with the reason for this stop. I'm prepared to receive a citation for a faulty light, and I will get that fixed expeditiously." It seems as though if we civilians are not prepared to hold the police to the standard set by the Supreme Court, we are _de facto_ consenting to the extension of the stop.
@@terryjwood Following the SCOTUS ruling that you must affirmatively assert your right "to remain silent," I believe we would probably also be held to that standard in keeping a traffic stop "on mission." That's what is behind my original comment.
Well, you can thank drug prohibition for most of that....seriously, do you HONESTLY think the cops would be fishing for guns or explosives at every stop? No....this is how drug prohibition has literally given the police more power than any other domestic policy in that last 100 years, maybe in all of American history. Just consider this: with half of all arrests annually being drug related, what would happen without drug laws? Well, half those arrest numbers would evaporate, right? And then so would the justification for half their budget? Or consider that 96% of all no-knock raids are drug related....do without drug laws they'd lose a lot of the justification for those swat teams, huh? Or how about that the most cited justification for requests of military equipment from local police departments to the Pentagon is "drug enforcement"? Or that since 1971, the Supreme Court has made more rulings eroding the 4th amendment on drug cases than any other type of case. Or that the Cato Institute has predicted that if drug prohibition was ended, upwards of One Million jobs in law enforcement would be made redundant! Drug prohibition has destroyed the 4th amendment, militarized the police, bloated their budgets and the cops KNOW THIS, this is why Police Unions have spent more money than any other entity or group on opposing legislation and ballot initiatives aimed at drug law reform...because without drug laws they'd lose most of their arrests, their most common used tactic for warrantless vehicle searches, and most of their budgets. There cannot be meaningful police reform without drug law reform.
It’s worse. Given the precedent set by stuff like the Philando Castile thing, we should be prepared to put the cop(s) six feet under before they do so to us without consequence. Arguing the ticket or arrest or whatever in court later is nice IF YOU MAKE IT TO COURT to argue your case! I’m not saying this as a criminal either. Most criminals I know are happy to bend over for the police. I’m saying this as a wholly righteous engineer, doctor, and upstanding citizen and patriot. It’s probabilistic risk assessment. The probability albeit small is non-zero and the severity is huge. Morality and ethics support relieving cops of their mortal coil too. I don’t know about you but I know I didn’t sign up to be subservient to them and take on unnecessary risks for them to feel safe. In fact, I know that each and every one of them signed up for it; they put on that badge not only knowing there’s risk but they do so welcoming it.
@@goldencyclone4984 Change would be good for sure, but the two parties you guys keep having don't want that change as it would only hurt them. I guess you're screwed then.
About one third of the people eligible to vote, don't vote. A lot of the people that vote repukian, don't benefit from any repukian policies but they are ignorant and want to stay ignorant. If you want to start a legitimate third party, you have to start electing third party state representatives. Then add third party state senators. Then United State third party representatives. And so on. The current small parties are not in touch with reality. Voting for any of those parties is insane at best.
Yes, however the are generally more honest since they accountability to the state bar, law enforcement has no accountability, even if they are charged or get sued they hide behind qualified immunity…
@@stephendrake8145 Yep, the ol’ qualified immunity. Which doesn’t stop prosecutions ever and lawsuits only against the officer personally (not the agency) if he didn’t violate the law or clearly established case law.
It's only because this case involved decriminalized green stuff, had it involved scary black metal things they would have rubber stamped the lower courts opinion.
The judge did say they made the correct decision because of a recent Supreme Court ruling, and could have made the wrong decision if it weren't for that.
The last time an officer started asking if i had a laundry list of unlawful things unrelated to the stop....i asked to see his fishing license. He gave me the most incredulous look and told me to get the F out of his face. In light of the more recent rulings from SCOTUS, it would be nice to hear from you your thoughts on what one should say when they go on a side quest.... something that won't necessarily offend, but put it on record that it seems they are unlawfully extending the stop.
5th amendment issue? Take the 5th and watch the reaction. Taking the 5th is not an admission of anything but would probably "extend" the stop beyond "minimus". 😉😉😉😄😄😄
@@manlybaker3098 Can't use 5th unless the answer will incriminate you. Read Hiibel v Nevada, as that was one of his arguments, his lawyers really, to not state his name. They should have moved a 1st Amendment right not to speak when you don't wish to.
I usually say..." I don't answer questions that don't pertain to the particular traffic offense that you suspect I've committed...Did you stop me to do a weapons and drug search or for a traffic offense.
Cop:"are there any illegal drugs in the car?" Driver: " when you beat, your wife Do you hit her three or four times?"; "How many beers did you have before work today?"; "have you been touching children inappropriately?". Cop: "why are you asking me questions?" Driver: " I'm a freelance journalist. I'm conducting an investigation. Why are you obstructing me? ."
When a line is drawn and then is stepped over, the space between the line and the stepper is quantifiable, measurable. Three minutes is 3 too many minutes.
First thing that popped in my head while watching this was the case of the retired Marine getting pulled over in Nevada for "following distance behind commercial vehicles" . Then it turned into Civil Asset Forfeiture and had nothing to do with the reason of the stop.
Cops in America have superhuman abilities to smell non-existent substances. If you can smell bullshit all the way in Europe from here, any agency will hire you. Since you can smell all the way over there, you can even work remotely! And since you're not in America, they can't even sue you. But that's just a moot point because cops are almost always immune to prosecution and lawsuits in the USA anyway.
Well, you're half right, as such, half wrong. Officers in the US learn the correct way to do things in the academy, at least they did when I went through it. They learn the Supreme Court rulings. They learn how to do traffic stops. They learn self-defense. Etc. It is when they graduate and get back to their department, are given a Field Training Officer (FTO), that it goes sideways. The rookie gets told to forget what they learned at the academy and the FTO will teach them to be "real cops". These things the FTO teaches them contradict what they were taught at the academy. It's not a matter of "they need more training" as many claim. It is that many MANY departments in the US are corrupt and they corrupt the new officers who either quit, try to move to another department, or just accept their initiation into the corrupt culture.
I once got pulled over by a campus cop on a fishing expedition. Very strange experience. He was on a bicycle and so didn't look like a cop. I only pulled over to find out what was wrong, I was worried that he needed help. He said it was because I was speeding and couldn't comprehend why I would be using a campus road if I wasn't a student. Nevermind that it was a multi lane road, down that very road was non-student apartments, and it was the fastest way to get to the freeway in that area. I don't think he had the ability to issue a normal ticket, because he was VERY upset that I couldn't (in his mind wouldn't) give him a student ID. He yelled at me for a good 20 minutes before bluffing that it was his idea to let me go. I should have just ignored him and never pulled over. He didn't have radar so didn't know my speed. I'm pretty sure I was only pulled over because I was in a sporty car. It only looks expensive, that broken down car was the only decent stick shift I could find at the used car lots. I have ADHD, driving stick helps me focus on driving.
In my state, campus police have the same powers & jurisdiction as state troopers. People have tried to play the "you're just a college cop! You can't do anything!" game before, never works as they hope. Campus police held me for 10 minutes before, running my ID over & over, asking why I gave them a fake ID when it isn't illegal to not have a college ID on campus. I insisted I hadn't until the radio operator finally admitted he looked up the wrong name.
That's an interesting reason to use a standard transmission; I can understand. I am getting on in years, and am more easily distracted than when I was young, but my wife has never driven anything but an automatic and would flat out refuse to change.
@@alanjameson8664 I like driving a manual because long trips get boring. Its at least something else I need to give a little bit of attention to. Too bad they are hard to find, new or used. I taught my wife to drive a manual recently because she wanted a small car, but I didn't want anything with a CVT, or a weak automatic, so we ended up with a small manual car that I trust to never give me any real issues.
When you get a drivers license, you sign papers agreeing to provide insurance, license, registration during a legal traffic stop. You also agree to the possibility of having to take one of the DUI tests at the station. You can refuse all on scene DUI tests, but not one of the 3 at the station if they find probable cause to arrest you and take you to the station for testing.
@@marcuslinton310 Depending completely on state law. They can vary quite a bit. A person can refuse a test at the police station but the police can get a warrant to draw blood just like any other warrant.
@@tvc1848 I should have clarified that you can't refuse the station testing without consequences. Your license will be suspended and you can get fined if you refuse. Refusing field sobriety tests have no consequences and are 100% against you no matter what, they serve ZERO value to proving anything in your favor, but can easily be manipulated by the officer to claim intoxication. People are always fooled in to taking the field tests because the officer lies and says they'll let you go on your way if you pass. But field tests are stacked against everyone in some way or another, they can always find a fault and claim you failed.
@@marcuslinton310 That I get. I call it a second charge, one criminal and one civil. The first is DWI and the penalty is a fine and/or jail and the second charge is refusing a test and the penalty is the loss of your license.
@@marcuslinton310 Key words: "if they find probable cause." They will very often arrest you without probable cause, which makes even the tests at the station inadmissible against you.
I once got pulled over bc my the light over my license plate was out. I suspect the real cause was bc i had a hole from a recent accident (i forget if i had patched it by this time), and i suspect fishing for if i had fled a scene. He asked if i knew my light was out, i stated no but i would have it fixed by the next day. He wrote me a warning, and i was on my way. Well, wouldnt you know, in the span of the 3 miles to my house, my light must've fixed itself bc it was working fine. I did a check on all my lights. Everything worked, lit on command, etc.
About 20 years ago I got pulled 3 blocks from my apartment due to a "license plate light" that was "out." I had a 16-17 year old car at the time that wasn't smashed or having broken/cracked glass, but was not in good condition either. I hadn't been speeding at a rate that would warrant being pulled over, there weren't many of my model of car running around anyway, so hard to assert my car was associated with some event. I wasn't weaving, drinking, or doing anything else that should have attracted police notice. It wasn't like I was in a high-end subdivision even, just a working-class suburb that had other old beat-up cars around. I basically went with "you gotta be kidding me, I just had those replaced!" Cop assured me that, yep, they were out. If I were to try this now I'd be shot on the spot, but I said something to the effect of "I gotta see this, they must have scammed me!" and I got out and looked. Sure enough, they were glowing away. Cop claimed me closing my door must have made them work again and told me to go get them fixed.
Kind of weird there is never published camera footage...% a 90 chance his brake lights were working, amd they made the whole "registration" BS up...Which, was the whole premise behind registering in the first place..."We need a way to make sure the car is legal???" = "Our system is not working, so???" "So WHAT???" Do you have anything that says it's stolen???
@@metamorphicorder they make up bogus reasons to get the driver outta the safety of their vehicles to perform unlawful searches and to put the driver in a pain submission/ compliance hold. Then they yell "stop resisting" which is rehearsed and a premeditated act!! The cops putting on assault gloves is another dead giveaway of a premeditated assault about to happen.
A retired state patrol I worked for 20 tears ago told me. In the academy they teach them that dysfunctional people drive dysfunctional cars. So if they can see something wrong with your vehicle they were taught to assume they will be able to find something else you are doing wrong
Same arsenal of tricks include trained dogs directed to "hit" on command and the always popular I smell what seems to be...Road pirates are a lot more sophisticated and even more dishonest thieves these days.
"Likewise an officer can arrest you without telling you why" I like to think its a mark of a civil society that the police make it clear why you are under arrest the vast majority of the time. If I ever got arrested for something trivial without being told why, I am pretty sure I would have to email that officer a copy of Kafka.
In the context of the conversation, is they don't have to tell you the cause of the arrest at the time of arrest. In the US they have (generally) 48 hours to do so.
It's the us VS them mentality. The judges side with the police, because they deal with criminals all day, and after a while they just start thinking (incorrectly) that if you are before them you must have done something. This is a mindset that is very hard not to fall into. And judges are people, after all, not super humans (no matter how swelled the judges head, they are still just people at the end of the day). I work in a maintenance field, and it's very easy to fall into the trap of "the operator broke it," because a lot of times that's exactly what happened. But not always, and it doesn't help anyone to immediately start accusing people of wrongdoing before establishing if they did or not. But it's bloody hard, sometimes. But you have to rise above that urge to not think it through. Going with the flow is lazy thinking, and no judge should be lazy in their thinking. Those that are need to be replaced with better people.
Because they are not actually judges, but magistrates. A judge is educated and experienced in the law; a magistrate is hired/elected to the position at the high chair. At least in WV. Your mileage may vary.
We can no longer afford underprepared, undertrained police. Our constitutional rights and the laws of the country are complex. A police academy is no longer enough unless we all want our rights trampled. 4 year college degress in criminal justice and an academy at the minimum. Or you can get a lawyer and a pay dearly, because it is not really a right if you have to spend a night in jail and hire a lawyer.
Yes. I'm so tired of hearing people say, "fight it in court". It's expensive and all the cops, lawyers, and judges are corrupt butt buddies with each othet.
Police unions are mainly the reason we have bad cops. The other officers and the supervisors know who is a bad cop but it's near impossible to fire or even significantly discipline a union employee so bad cops get to keep doing what they do their full career.
This isn't a training issue. They know what they're supposed to do. They also know what they can get away with. And the clown judge in the lower court rubberstamped their corruption.
If an officer isn't required to articulate their reasonable suspicion, this could create an opportunity to name a reasonable suspicion after the fact which they can attempt to justify later. This bug in the law needs to be corrected, and officers should be required to state their reasonable suspicion at the time upon request (in fairness, the good officers usually do, but it's not required).
It’s a not a bug, it’s on purpose. It’s been this way for decades upon decades. They know what they’re doing. Look how quickly you’ve figured this out. Does anyone here honestly think all the cops, judges, prosecutors, and state legislatures don’t know this? They know.
Cop gets found guilty of this, and he should immediately lose his police license. And if cop breaks ANY constitutional issue immediately loses license.
An officer should lose a license for an opinion when half the judges in the country agree with the officer Even when cases go to the Supreme Court it might be a 5-4 decision. So almost half the judges on the highest court may agree that the officer made the correct decision.
Cops do something called "fat fingering" when they want to create probable cause. "Your plates don't come back to this vehicle.", knowing they typed it in wrong.
Speaking of coos and courts. I learned the other day that we are the only civilized country that give the prosecution the last say before the jury. Others give this to the defense. How is this fair?
Perhaps because we're the only civilized country that errs on the side of innocent until proven guilty? The burden of proof here is on the prosecution, which isn't true everywhere else.
The fact that a trial court actually sided with these crooks just ogoves how dumb, and corrupt so many judges really are. It's shameful but even more terrifying.
13:35 By telling it at that time, it eliminates the lawsuit that the officer didn't have that reason until s/he made it up much later. IMHO it's good for the police to tell their reason ASAP. It's like giving the Miranda Rights.
I had a cop pull me over for a tag light being out. After it was determined my tag light was not out, he then changed his story to say I ran a stop sign. Makes me wonder if I should have fought it.
Police frequently cite lack of maintenance on a car or failure to maintain proper documentation as a possible sign of underlying substance abuse or other criminality. People who are slipping into addiction generally start having financial problems and they can’t bare to face the withdrawals so they forego paying their insurance, or replacing the expensive tail light. They tell themselves that they’ll take care of it next week but the addiction is getting worse and so is the financial strain so anything that isn’t getting high just doesn’t get done. I think police have a lot of opportunities to help people, to catch them before they hit the bottom, but unfortunately our system is designed to help get to the bottom faster, not pick them up. Once they miss a few court dates, get arrested, lose their license, and lose their job they now have a much bigger hole to climb out of, and it may have all started with something as minor as a taillight. As long as police exist to generate revenue primarily, and protect and serve secondarily, there is no reason to grant them any leeway when it comes to constitutional rights. I have tremendous respect for police officers, but policing as an institution is deeply flawed.
My husband had a panel van that he used for work. Our family went to a local recreational area and were pulled over for going five over the limit. For at least three minutes the park rangers (two of them) were trying to get us to allow them to search our van. I couldn't help but think, "What kind of idiot would allow them to search their vehicle like that?" I guess that too many people forget that we don't have to prove our innocence.
Here, when you get stopped for speeding (rarely happens, normally you are not stopped for that) and they ask you "why were you driving so fast", never reply that you were in a hurry to get somewhere in time. They will do a lookup of your ID, drivers license and car registration to delay your stop as much as possible... Just reply that you do not want to make a statement (they inform you beforehand that it is not mandatory to answer the questions)....
I tell the officer, *If I was doing something wrong I assure you it wasn't intentional. I do appreciate you bring it to my attention.* It doesn't leave them anywhere to go. Another line I use is, *All the information you need for this traffic stop is on my license.* Beyond that I don't really engage.
Judge in cahoots with the prosecutor, especially when he offers no reasoning. I was illegally searched numerous times as a teenager. They never found anything, but always delayed me for long periods.
@@tvc1848 Just use these words: "I think I smell..." and then just come up with what you want to fish for today. For example: Civil Asset Forfeiture. "I think I smell money that is proceeds of crimes!"
This seems like very similar to something my father used to run into when he was a police officer in Orlando. It was not unusual for somebody to be pulled over and something be noticed that was completely different than the original reason that they were pulled over. Such as they were pulled over for an improper lane change. Get in the actions of the officer they decide to write them or something completely different or they notice something in the car and conduct an arrest as well as seizure for something completely different. What would frequently happen at just the lowest level of the arraignment and charging procedure. Is that would frequently come up and they would adjudicate whether or not the lane change for the original purpose of the arrest was valid now that's be certain here. Because it was well understood by 1961 that when you stop a car on the road the person is under arrest. As a custodial rest until you write a citation and you let them continue on down the road. How the hell they ever got to the idea that you could detain somebody without arresting them beforehand is still mind-boggling. Because that's not the definition. Once they found out that the original reason for the pullover was never adjudicated. Everything goes out the window. There was no reason for them to have arrested the person in the first place. Anything that they find as a result of that reasoning, is so suspect has to be eliminated from existence. It is still the fruit of the poisoned tree. Change to me that that mindset should always exist. But just in the last Thirty or forty years they have been intentionally hiring people with lower IQs to be police officers so that they would do as they were told rather than what they knew or felt to be correct and that's why we have some of these things happening. I thoroughly believe that. You have people with no sense what is right I suppose as to what they can get away with I'm not saying that there weren't bad police officers before this time. Because there certainly were. But I find this failure of Morality In a person has been giving way to a stacking of ethics. And as I explained to an ethics Professor who tried her damnedest to get me to take an ethics class when I was going to college. I asked her if she knew the difference between someone who is moral and someone who is ethical and she had this confused look on her face and asked what the difference was. I said the moral person, will almost always do that which is right. The ethical person will have to go look it up. That's a huge difference.
Always follow the 11 rules of le interaction * Never call 911 or allow le near you * Always record an interaction * Never speak or answer questions * Use a dash cam * Keep lic, reg, & ins in an envelop above the visor * Never perform a fst * Never consent to a search * Never keep cash or valuables in the car * Never pay a fine w/out a court date * Always consult an attorney * Never donate to any le entity
I've memorized the penal code number in my state because when pulled over on a traffic stop LEO is only allowed to ID the driver---and guaranteed they will always try to ID everyone in the car.
@@rockyroad7345 Only allowed to ID the driver? Do you mean that is unlawful for the officer to ask a passenger his name or that an officer can’t demand a passenger answer the question. Certainly each state is different and can put whatever restrictions it wants on officers. In my state however, a passenger does not have to answer any questions including his name but it’s not unlawful for the officer to ask.
I lived in CA for 20 years. I can assure you that you cannot trust police in CA. I am normally a "law and order" kind of person but I saw way too many cases of targeted pull overs in CA. And yes, I am one. In addition to my regular car, I also had an old truck. One afternoon I was on I805 in my old truck basically going with the flow but also being passed on both sides. (I805 is multi-lane). A cop pulls me over for speeding. He was probably surprised to find I was not Hispanic but ticketed me anyway. It seemed to me it was a case of ticket the guy in the old truck, not any of those in BMWs, Mercedes, and Cadillacs that were passing him. As for record keeping in CA, I called the court multiple times trying to pay the ticket and they kept telling me they could not find it. I even called the day before the trial date and they told me it was not in the system. Our legal counsel for the company I worked for warned me, as a friend, to show up in court anyway and lo and behold the morning of the trial it got entered into the system and judge was ready to hear the case. Yet another reason, of a very long list, I am glad I no longer live in CA.
Just to clarify, I am pretty sure they pulled me over because they thought I was poor, quite likely Hispanic, quite likely in the country illegally, and would pay the ticket without a fuss. (this was within 10 miles of the Mexico border - also CA is bad about expecting officers to issue xx number of tickets per month) He literally passed cars going faster than me as he caught up to me to pull me over. I suspect he still thought I was poor since I was driving an old truck so I got the ticket. This pales in comparison to the two levels of justice we now see at the national level but corruption is corruption and we need it to stop and we need to apply the laws equally to all. Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of speeding, the issue was simply that most everyone on the interstate was speeding AND there were a lot of cars that were passing me easily doing 10 MPH more than me. @@JP-gi7dw
Ive been pulled over because my windshield was cracked when it wasn't, for having a head light out during the day and for having a modified exhaust which isn't illegal. Each time the cops tried to search my vehicle.
Back in the seventies I was a long haired dude driving a customized van accompanied by my wife in a subdivision after 1:00AM . A police officer stopped me ? He came to the window and started asking questions , where are you going , where have you been . I told him this is my wife , I don't tell her where I'm going and where I've been , why would I tell you ? He wasn't very happy with my answer , couldn't understand why I wouldn't comply . I asked , could we get to the part where you tell me why I'm here with you ? He told me it was late and they stop everyone in a subdivision at that hour . My reply was I'm sorry but I was under the impression we live in a free country and we are free 24 hours a day , so can we get to the part where you tell me the law I'm breaking ? He told me to have a good evening . Don't answer questions ....
It's not a quick answer, so it's easier to let you know that he answers that in a video from last year called Frequently Asked Questions, starting about the 17:45 mark.
Over these past few months...hearing these types of stories of Cops doing stuff that is beyond reproach, I just can't help but think "Are cops given more freedom to do whatever because their supervisors have a piss poor understanding of the law?"
There's basically nothing in the whole "War on Drugs" that actually follows the Constitution, whether it's the laws and regulations themselves or the ways they're enforced. In fact I'm convinced that that's more of a reason for the drug bans than the actual harm involving the drugs. Drugs are an "acceptable target" to the public, in the same way "sin taxes" are mostly money grabs.
@knghtbrd No. They don't. I'm a field chef for a huge catering company, and I deal with a lot of law enforcement from many different branches and universally it's only Federal level law enforcement that even know the rudimentary facts of law. And its usually only FBI that knows anything beyond the basics. Local police mostly only hire the poorly educated and they actively look for the less intelligent because they tend to follow orders without questioning their superiors and have a more malleable conscience.
That has happened to me, one time I got pulled over because the trooper said I had "paused in the middle of an intersection" because I slowed down a little to shift gears. Another time I got pulled over because County cop said my turn onto a side street was "too wide", turning down a desolate farm road, unincorporated, with my big pickup truck, turning a little bit wide to miss an irrigation ditch, he proceeded to get me and my dog out of the truck made me stand in the back while he searched it, and FYI I'm pretty sure he was drunk. Another time I got pulled over for "driving too slow" on a completely empty dark country road at night after a deer ran in front of my car so I slowed down because didn't want to hit a deer. It's shameful they do to get money and fill their quota, bullies and scammers victimizing decent people who are generally law-abiding citizens, disgraceful abuse of power
The best is when they pull you over for something they claim doesn't work but after they've pulled you over for a closer look suddenly everything works. 😂
At what point does "reasonable suspicion" pop up that the Police Officer is breaking the law, can be detained and questioned? Disarmed and handcuffed on the side of the road?
Most do during daylight hours, check your state's driver's license handbook. I haven't had a test in a while but it was there for both my auto and motorcycle tests. There are antique cars and trucks that never had them and I believe if you ride a bicycle on public roads you need to use them.
If you are going to hustle do a walk around everytime you get in your car and check your lights. Might save your life. EDIT: with massive corruption all over pds its probably a good idea to do this whether you think you are following all the laws or not
Maybe it wouldn't take so long if LEO would stop asking "where are you headed" or "where are you coming from". That's a good way to get anyone's blood pressure up from the start...it's none of their business.
Just once I want to watch a video about a police stop where the officers aren’t trying to justify a charge they are making up after the fact. They are looking for a murder charge on every expired registration stop!
This happened many years ago. My co-workers and I had be working out-of-town on a construction job about 4 hours from home. On Friday night, we drove home and as we neared home, I took a road where commercial vehicles were prohibited, and got pulled over. The cop kept asking questions like, "Why were my eyes?" "Because I've driving for 4 hours at night." "Are you sure you haven't smoking pot?" "Maybe I should search the truck" Finally, after about 15 minutes of this B.S., I told him he had no right to hold us, and either give me the ticket or let me go. I had to pay the ticket, but he let us go.
I have found that (c. 1975) cars with no brake/tail lights also often don't have Dash Lights either, Fuse blown since both are/were on the same circuit.
Cop pulled me over for license plate light out. Asks if I'm on probation, what's are you smoking (I'm not, but my engine is). He didn't even take my license back to the cruiser to run it- he was just entertaining himsel. Ends with a very stern "get it fixed". OK dude, I'll swing by Pep Boys tomorrow and get a bulb...
I used to work a shift that got done at 1 am Tuesday through Friday morning. Driving home took me through the heart of town. At the time, there was a prostitution problem in that area. It make not come as I surprise that I got pulled over driving home one morning for that famous burned out license plate light. The officer let me go as soon as I mentioned that I had just got off work and was going home.
because cars have titles. When cash is taken they charge the cash as if it is the offender. The legal fallacy (my opinion) is that cash is different than real property where ownership can be tracked and therefore not subject to the "takings" clause.
Something dangling from the mirror obstructs your vision. I always love that one, I'm 6'5" the dam mirror obstructs my vision of the hood, the thing that is dandling blocks the radio.
There was an episode of that cop show on TV a few weeks ago. They pulled a guy over for swerving, handed him the ticket, and as he was walking back to his car, the cop said "Hold I, I have a dog coming" They searched his car and found significant amounts to drugs. Somehow I think that guy gets off.
While on my motorcycle, i got pulled over because when I passed the cop and turned onto a side rode, they EXPECTED that i would be speeding down that side road. They rushed to catch up to me, which they did very quickly because.. I wasnt speeding (i knew i had just passed a cop, i wasnt stupid). OF course they didnt admit thats why they pulled me over and made up the bullshit reason that my license plate was "improperly angled" and so it was "hard to see" (it wasnt, there was nothing wrong with it) and "let me off with a warning". Basically, they profiled me and expected me to do something i didn't ever do.
I got in my wife's car last Sunday night to take my my father-in-law, who was visiting from out of town, back to his hotel room. Passed a state trooper at 10:32pm right before I pulled into the parking lot and got lit up. Turns out her tag lights were out. Luckily my insurance, tags, driver's license were all up to date, and I was running 3 under the speed limit. After showing him my driver's license he let me go as in TN it is only a $10 fine and no court costs. Would have actually cost the state money to write me a ticket. Still pissed me off as it was a clearly pre-textual stop.
I think a police officer should always have to verbalize why a person is stopped and have to verbalize why a person is arrested. I am surprised to hear they dont have to do this. As well, allowed to lie whenever they like. All of this relates to transparency and good community relations.
If they ask you if you have or have done anything illegal, it should be reflex to reply "I invoke my Fifth Amendment right not to answer that question."
Fantastic to see a higher court protecting a citizens rights. As far as I’m concerned any stop for “taillight out” should be thrown out in court if the protesters don’t have video evidence of there actually being a deficiency.
I was pulled for a license plate light being out. It was so hard to see the LEO had to turn off his headlights to see it. 😂😂😂 He then gave me a field sobriety because I had just left a pool hall, but he could only write me a ticket for the light.
In the UK, an officer does not need a reason to pull you over, they Can do so quite literally to check you’re driving lawfully with no other reason than to check that. Section 163 Road Traffic Act 1988 applies. To search, however, they need reasonable grounds, and just a slight smell of marijuana is not reasonable grounds for a search! (A really Strong smell is.) we have far less issue with this problem than in the US, in part because Our version of Civil Asset Forfeiture requires a conviction for the related crime, either prior to a seizure ( Proceeds Of Crime Act), or after the seizure of unexplained cash over a certain value; if no prosecution is successful, that cash would be returned with no cost to the owner.
I was stopped once. The first thing the cop asked is why is my car clean? I thought he just asked a random question to see if I was nervous or drunk. After I told him that I had washed the car 5 hours before, he asked for my name, and let me go without asking for vehicle registration or driver’s license.
At the recommendation of a friend who is also the county sheriff this is what I do when stopped. I only used it once and it worked slick as a whistle. Roll window all the way down, dome light on after dark. "Hi officer, here is my license, how can I help you?" That sends the message I am cooperative and polite. By offering license with ID it suggests I am not hiding anything. While he looks at that , I say, "The insurance and registration are in the glove box, my neighbor, sheriff Jones told me not to be digging in there as the office approaches. If you need them I'll get them with your permission". That sends the message the sheriff is my friend who shares info with me. It also suggests I care about the officers safety. Cops like that. He didn't even ask for the insurance papers, guess he figured a guy like me would have his stuff in order. He said, "Your headlight is out, make sure you get it fixed within five days. Good night, drive careful".
I had a great drivers education teacher who not only helped us get licensed, but tought us how to retain it. He told us to never roll the window down more than needed to pass a piece of paper through, and that if they point a light in your face or a finger, never look at that point, and that often the stop was a precept, and that a citation needed to be written and signed before they move to the next step, but that technically once you sign the ticket there should be no further charges or it would be on the citation alteady. So he said to add no information beyond requested documents, dont argue about the citation, just sign it, pass it to the officer and in the same moment ask, " Am I free to leave ? ". In that moment, they are required to say " Yes ". Then leave, immediately, dont wait for the officer to walk back to his car and leave, just hit the gas the instant you hear the answer " Yes ". He had all kinds of great advice, how to handle single vehicle accidents, ( leave the scene, walk to a residence, ask to use phone, call cops tell them where your wrecked car is, then walk back, slowly, give them time to show up so they witness your return, dtink deeply ehen they see you from the bottle of liquer he told us to always have on hand, then the worst they can do is bust you for drinking in public, and cant prove you were drunk before the wreck. Of course, that was back in the 80's.
I got stopped years ago around 10pm in a rural area by a cop who was more than a mile behind me. I was going the speed limit and he caught up to me so fast that he was probably going 100. After he pulled me over, he ran the plate and said that it was registered to a dead person. It was my mother in laws car that my wife had inherited after her death but we had transferred the title months ago. His excuse for pulling me over is that a lot of cars are stolen from dead people. There was no place that he could have seen the plate to run it, he was just hoping for a dwi or drug bust.
I had to work second shift once and was driving home around midnight. I was pulled over by a trooper. He asked if my lights were on because I didn't have tail lights. They were always on. He wrote me a repair ticket which gave me 24 hours to get it fixéd. He said he was going to follow me home which was fine,he knew where I lived. I pulled into my garage and had them working probably before he made out around the block. Loose fuse. I had to get the repair signed off on by either a cop or registered garage. The next morning I went to a local PD . It was a down pour so I pulled just past the station entrance which is maybe 15 from the street so the cop could look out the window and see that the lights were working. I told her I parked there so she didn't have to go out in the rain. She insisted that she was going out to look. " I'll wait right here inside for you". She went out and stood there like she was waiting for some to hong to happen. She looked like a blue drowned rat when she came back in . My paper was signed . The cop could have been a dick. He knew where I was coming from which is the meth capital of that county so I avoided that bs. I was working on the school there where construction workers have to piss test but, it's unconstitutional for teachers to have to do it.
Ya, I had an incident years ago leaving a Lake Erie side night spot. I was the DD for 4 of us that night. On the way out I saw someone following us in Mirror with lights out. I knew it was a cop. I decided to pull into a driveway to turn around in case it was some drunk guy following us with lights off. The cop pulled in Driveway right behind me, then turned on the cop lights. Buy was he mad. He couldnt charge me for DUI, cause he didnt have probable cause, and I kind of knew I was taking that away from him, by pulling into driveway. Now, while I was in the bar, i Did have a drink spilled on me partially by someone else, so I probably smelled like alcohol, but little does he know I would have passed a sobriety test with flying colors. The best he could do to get back at me was impound my car and we had to get another ride home. Ill take it. Ive been cheating the system ever since in other tax ways , and that was 1993 or so. What comes around goes around. Call it Corrections I corrected my behavior times 10 or is it 100 or is it 1000?
is there a defined time limit for a traffic stop? how long should it take to write a ticket? seems like a gray area that would be hard to prove / enforce
There is no per se time for a detention whether traffic or otherwise. It is a case on a by case basis. The officer has to justify the length of the detention. I have seen decisions like, a routine citation and driver’s license or warrant check shouldn’t take more than 20 minutes but that doesn’t mean that an officer can automatically detain everyone for 20 minutes.
Hey ! Professor and teacher . i just have one thing to say 1. American Law Enforcement , 2. American Police ( Officers) ,and 3. 911 . Your Honor ,can you cut them a little slack and allow a break _please . Today . Take care you taught me a lot about being black in America, my civil liberties and rights, and to participate in whole democracy. Thank you . p.s. man ,IF this gentlemen had online classes. Amen 🇺🇸
