nazi checkpoint

[Denny347]

I know they dont teach you this in Barney Fife school, but here is the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.

"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."

Ha, nice. I am well versed in the Constitution. Even look a few Constitutional law classes in college. The USSC is the ultimate authority on Constitutional issues and they have ruled on this matter many moons ago. Like it or not, that it how it works. Now where did I put my bullet for my pistol at?????

 

[Denny347]

He asked if you thought it was a bad thing that people are willing to give up their rights and you said no!

Ok, well I guess it's too early and my brain is still warming up. Hopefully I clarified myself by now.

 

[J_Wales]

You welcome, I do try to please. So far the USSC has my back on this as well as the ISC. So actually, it DOES make it right

Some sheep wear blue and a shinny tin badge.

 

[Denny347]

Where does it end? Is it also OK to search peoples cars just because you can? Or search peoples homes?

Is it OK to just randomly detain people walking down the street, just because they are walking down the street? That is the same thing as a police checkpoint on the road, it is just on foot instead of in vehicles.

There are USSC and ISC rulings and case law that dictate how these incidents are handled. DUI checkpoints have many restrictions, too many to list here, in the way they are to be operated and deviate from just one of them and the entire checkpoint becomes illegal. I don't work them anymore for many reasons but I did for several years.

 

[Denny347]

Some sheep wear blue and a shinny tin badge.

Yup, they are in every facet of life in fact. You cannot escape them.

 

[J_Wales]

Yup, they are in every facet of life in fact. You cannot escape them.

Yep... though the ones with the shinny tin are more dangerous. They have the power of the statist pigs behind them.

One can only be aware of them and prepare to defend one's self against them.

pacem ora, para bellum

 

[J_Wales]

Wait til they want to implant tracking chips in our arms. Cops will all be issued a scanner and will be able to pull us over at random and scan our chips to see where we have been recently.

People might laugh, but its not that far off.

Not at all.

Do a google re what police forces are already doing in some areas with technology to download tracking info from smart phones.

pacem ora, para bellum

 

[Denny347]

I just dont understand it. Not only is it morally wrong, but is there really nothing better to spend the resources on than DUI checkpoints and speed traps?

The instance I described at Washington and Sherman on the eastside was late at night on a Friday or Saturday night in the summer (it was a few years ago, dont remember all the details).

That part of town, there is really nothing better for IMPD to be doing? I was tired and just wanted to go home after work, but I ended up being detained for over an hour just because I happened to be driving on Washington St at that time. I had done nothing wrong. You think it is OK to detain a citizen on his way home from work just because hes driving down the street? They did not pull me over for any kind of traffic or equipment violation, they just pulled me over because I turned into a parking lot right before the DUI checkpoint.

That is a police state!

I am being quite frank here, trying giving people an insite. I will NEVER say checkpoints are cost effective...they are NOT. We would man a checkpoint with say 15 officers, we MAY catch 3-4 dui's in a 3hr period. Take those same 15 officers roaming and give them the same 3 hours, you will have at least 10 to 12 DUIs. Officers work DUI after their regular shift, paid by Federal OT. The money comes with strings, one of which is that the Dept has to perform x number of checkpoints per month or risk losing the funding. I really enjoyed catching drunks roaming and the money was vital at a time I needed it the most but I have stopped doing the OT DUI because I grew frustrated with their overall goals. DUI was 2nd to writing tickets and that pissed me off. I still enjoy catching drunk drivers but I do it during the course of my regular shift duties as a beat car.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I am being quite frank here, trying giving people an insite. I will NEVER say checkpoints are cost effective...they are NOT. We would man a checkpoint with say 15 officers, we MAY catch 3-4 dui's in a 3hr period. Take those same 15 officers roaming and give them the same 3 hours, you will have at least 10 to 12 DUIs. Officers work DUI after their regular shift, paid by Federal OT. The money comes with strings, one of which is that the Dept has to perform x number of checkpoints per month or risk losing the funding. I really enjoyed catching drunks roaming and the money was vital at a time I needed it the most but I have stopped doing the OT DUI because I grew frustrated with their overall goals. DUI was 2nd to writing tickets and that pissed me off. I still enjoy catching drunk drivers but I do it during the course of my regular shift duties as a beat car.

That's why you are one of the good guys. I hope when I get arrested it is by you

 

[Denny347]

That's why you are one of the good guys. I hope when I get arrested it is by you

Haha

 

[John Galt]

You welcome, I do try to please. So far the USSC has my back on this as well as the ISC. So actually, it DOES make it right

Being "legal" DOES NOT make it "right". Slavery was once "legal" , so was that "right"? Bankers today are pillaging trillions of dollars from the taxpayer, apparently they're doing it "legally", as many in Congess aren't prosecuting because no "laws" we're broken. Is this "right"? Congress getting rich on insider trading, "legal", but "right"? People that justify using perverted laws to sanction infringing upon people's Natural Rights are some of the most dangerous people on earth, as history has shown all too often.

 

[cobber]

Ha, nice. I am well versed in the Constitution. Even look a few Constitutional law classes in college. The USSC is the ultimate authority on Constitutional issues and they have ruled on this matter many moons ago. Like it or not, that it how it works. Now where did I put my bullet for my pistol at?????

Actually in Indiana, the Indiana Supreme Court has the last word. State courts can always extend more protections to citizens/residents/visitors, beyond what SCOTUS has opined, and SCOTUS can't do a thing about it.

The Indiana Courts have a different take on searches and seizures, especially as it pertains to traffic stops. I hope your department is aware of this and trains officers accordingly.

 

[cobber]

It disgusts me to think that a man driving down the street with no ill intentions in his heart, breaking NO LAWS can be pulled over for absolutely NOTHING.

The courts' reasoning on checkpoints would be that if you don't take the last available exit before the checkpoint, you are acquiescing to the stop. Therefore it's not unconstitutional.

It's like with Miranda. If you ask if you can have an attorney, you haven't actually asked for an attorney.

The courts love to draw these fine distinctions in deciding whether citizens have knowingly waived constitutional rights. The presumption seems to be that if you don't explicitly demand your rights, you've waived 'em.

 

[henktermaat]

Am I going crazy, or are the gatekeepers of libertarianism now espousing morals and "right and wrong"? I thought those were deist or theocratic ideals?

 

[Denny347]

Actually in Indiana, the Indiana Supreme Court has the last word. State courts can always extend more protections to citizens/residents/visitors, beyond what SCOTUS has opined, and SCOTUS can't do a thing about it.

The Indiana Courts have a different take on searches and seizures, especially as it pertains to traffic stops. I hope your department is aware of this and trains officers accordingly.

I am aware of the distinction. The USSC ruled in 1990 that DUI checkpoints are legal. Indiana ruled in the 2002 Gerschoffer case to narrowly defign how a checkpoint is conducted but it cannot narrow it so much as to say they were unconstitutional. That would over rule the USSC's decision that it was in fact constitutional. So in that sense, the USSC has final say, however, the state SC's can narrow that decision as long as it does not violate the perameters set by the USSC. I know what you are saying though.

 

[cobber]

I am aware of the distinction. The USSC ruled in 1990 that DUI checkpoints are legal. Indiana ruled in the 2002 Gerschoffer case to narrowly defign how a checkpoint is conducted but it cannot narrow it so much as to say they were unconstitutional. That would over rule the USSC's decision that it was in fact constitutional. So in that sense, the USSC has final say, however, the state SC's can narrow that decision as long as it does not violate the perameters set by the USSC. I know what you are saying though.

No, the ISC could absolutely find that checkpoints are a violation of the constitution. It would have to be based on the Indiana Constitution, but the ISC could definitely do it.
The SCOTUS is the highest authority on the US Constitution, but they have no power to dictate to the States how they will interpret or apply their own laws. Unless the States try to deprive the people of protections. So the Indiana Courts cannot take away rights guaranteed by the feds.
Thank God for federalism. It would be nice if the State Supreme Courts were a little more assertive in this respect.

 

[Mog]

Bankers today are pillaging trillions of dollars from the taxpayer, apparently they're doing it "legally", as many in Congess aren't prosecuting because no "laws" we're broken. QUOTE]

Not quite-- Congress isn't prosecuting because the overwhelming majority of them don't understand that they/we are being ripped off. Big Time.

 

[John Galt]

Bankers today are pillaging trillions of dollars from the taxpayer, apparently they're doing it "legally", as many in Congess aren't prosecuting because no "laws" we're broken. QUOTE]

Not quite-- Congress isn't prosecuting because the overwhelming majority of them don't understand that they/we are being ripped off. Big Time.

They understand. They. Are. Corrupt.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Wait til they want to implant tracking chips in our arms. Cops will all be issued a scanner and will be able to pull us over at random and scan our chips to see where we have been recently.

People might laugh, but its not that far off.

I seriously just laughed out loud...

probably pretty far off. You got the specs the soon to be issued people scanners?