Overkill for burned out license plate

[PatriotPride]

Lets not turn this into a pastor-bashing thread.

But it's the fastest way to sneak a straw man in here.

 

[Brandon]

so cop bashing is ok because the cop was simply doing his job and was greeted with bs which in turn caused all his problems? so can we ask if you were simply doing your job and ran acrossed someone being uncooperative as this guy was about any reason at all just to argue for the sake of arguing, you wouldn't of changed your attitude?

 

[PatriotPride]

so cop bashing is ok because the cop was simply doing his job and was greeted with bs which in turn caused all his problems? so can we ask if you were simply doing your job and ran acrossed someone being uncooperative as this guy was about any reason at all just to argue for the sake of arguing, you wouldn't of changed your attitude?

Let the games begin

 

[CorvetteTom]

Wow... I can't believe some LEO's believe some of the things they say. We have rights that ARE the law, but you feel you have a right to circumvent our rights on a hunch or because you were disrespected??!! It's still not illegal to be a jerk, not even a ticket-able offense. Reading what some of you have written is really frightening, to think that there are cops like that out there... OMG! You truly believe it's okay to turn a civil stop into a felony stop because he didn't respect you?? That is just plain sad and scary. Putting on the blue doesn't instantly make you the law... you simply enforce it.

 

[down3green]

...the crime was the burnt out bulb...

.


That's a crime?


.

 

[Brandon]

theres a law that headlights are to be on in the dark.. i think it goes something like that. i doubt car manufactures put lights on license plates for the heck of it. im sure theres some fed regulation that says it has to be there in working order. so if its out...

 

[rambone]

so cop bashing is ok because the cop was simply doing his job and was greeted with bs which in turn caused all his problems? so can we ask if you were simply doing your job and ran acrossed someone being uncooperative as this guy was about any reason at all just to argue for the sake of arguing, you wouldn't of changed your attitude?

I wouldn't get out of my car if Mother Theresa ordered me to either. On what planet does a burned out license-plate bulb indicate that their is "Probable Cause" to believe that there are drugs in a car? The cops were attempting to perform an illegal search, giving illegal orders. I didn't appreciate any of the law-abiding-citizen-bashing in all of those posts I responded to... and I never called anybody a punk or a jacka-- the way other folks did.

I just calls em as I sees em. This kind of traffic stop is disgraceful. George Washington just rolled over in his grave.

 

[dross]

Y'know...There's making your points in a calm, rational, adult manner....


and then there's being deliberately inflammatory. I'm not completely certain this qualifies as the latter but it's definitely not the former. Because I'm giving the benefit of the doubt, I'm not removing this nor infracting it... Instead, I'm going to ask you to remember that these are people first with whom you're talking on here, and some of them happen to work as police officers, but that doesn't change the fact that they are human beings and even if you don't respect their employment, it'd sure be a lot more conducive to discussion rather than thread closure to treat them as you'd like to be treated.

This was a reply to Rambone, but it's a note to everyone, which is why it was not sent via PM.

Thanks for your help, everyone.

Blessings,
Bill

I'm glad you didn't give an infraction, because he wasn't picking on anyone except the officers who were in the video. As for inflammatory, one of the guys he quotes above was pretty inflammatory from the other side.

I hope this thread stays open, and I hope more cops come on with their side and keep their cool. Even though they volunteer for it, as I've pointed out many times, they have a very tough job.

One of the ways I heard it described is that they have to walk the gauntlet between two sets of lawyers: prosecutors on one side, and defense attorneys on the other.

I do think that it's a very good thing when videos like this are posted, and I think the outrage they generate is a good thing, too. It's a reminder, to use a cliche, that freedom isn't free.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'm not going to get drug into defending myself based on what these officers did. I wasn't there and I didn't (haven't) done what you saw on that video.

Having said that, my belief is that every stop can easily be influenced by the attitude of either the officer or the person being stopped. I have always found that being overly polite works to my advantage in more ways than one. I have also been known to allow someone's attitude and level of cooperation to influence the choices I have at my discretion such as whether I write a ticket or a warning for an infraction.

Many people seem to have an issue with "fishing" during traffic stops. I don't understand how police officers are supposed to attempt to find criminals if all they do is ask for a DL, registration, write a ticket and send people on their way. Simple questions which do not unreasonably lengthen the stop are a means to identify those who may be breaking the law. I don't consider a LEO asking me where I'm heading, coming from or if I have weapons in the vehicle to be such an unreasonable intrusion to my rights that I would do or say anything to escalate the situation because of it. A little bit of cooperation goes a long way, as does a bit of understanding. There is a way to inform a police officer that you do not want to comply with a request without being overly dramatic and obviously attempting to create a scene as the driver of that vehicle did. "You're making mean faces at me?" Come on, not saying the officer's comments or behavior were right but I think there were some issues on both sides of that glass. I have conducted hundreds of traffic stops. The reaction of that driver was well outside of what I have experienced as being normal. His behavior would have put me on high alert and sparked my curiosity as to what else may be going on. Had he informed me that he had been beaten by LE prior and was therefore fearful of anyone with a badge I would have done whatever I could to convey to him that we are all not cut from the same cloth. I have seen people react abnormally in an attempt to further conceal something they were afraid I would find. This is my personal experience and something I can articulate to justify any additional questioning that I may feel is needed. It has been deemed justified by the courts in cases that I had go to trial.

It seems to me that there simply is no way to please some people when it comes to police work. If someone duct taped a little girl, put her in the trunk of a car, ran a stop sign, was stopped by an officer who failed to look for any potential hints that something was amiss and simply wrote the driver a ticket and sent him on his way that officer would be barbecued by the media and 99.9% of the citizens. No one would defend that officer's literal enforcement of the constitution.

People want criminals caught but they don't want to be caught up in the search regardless of how minimal the inconvenience may be. Remember the thread last week about the member here who was parked in the driveway of a vacant house and was completely outraged that a cop had the audacity to check him out? Fortunately that thread didn't go the way the OP intended but the fact that it was written at all is evidence of my point. If there is nothing coming across the radio and not a whole lot going on out on the streets, what are we supposed to do? If we stop cars and write tickets we are serving as illegal tax collectors. If we stop cars in an attempt to find something else we're fishing. If we stop at a gas station and talk with another officer we're being lazy. If we drive around our beat we're wasting taxpayer gas. Criminals don't walk up to officers, turn themselves in and admit their crimes. We must search for them and unfortunately we don't have ESP to tell who is or isn't doing wrong by just looking at them.

Enforcement of the law is not a black and white issue. I believe in the rights which are spelled out in the constitutions and bill of rights. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not an easy criteria to meet, particularly without the benefit of hindsight we all have when viewing issues or watching videos. The courts have ruled in favor of law enforcement on issues which can be interpreted as harmful to the original intent of the founding fathers. I don't think these concessions were made to spite the citizenry. I believe they were made to allow LE the ability to better protect society as a whole. Yes it is giving up a bit of liberty to preserve safety but I believe this is what the majority in this country are comfortable with. That is how this country is supposed to work isn't it? The majority, represented by elected and appointed officials, get to determine what is acceptable and what isn't? (I fully understand that this isn't the way things have been going). While the majority of the members here would likely survive just fine in a country where the constitution and bill of wrights were the only law of the land, I don't believe the majority of our society would. Most of the membership here are able bodied males who are capable of defending themselves and protecting their immediate family the majority of the time. Therefore they feel it is unreasonable to be subjected to questioning or intrusions of LE. The rest of society who is not prepared to defend themselves feel that they pay LE to do that for them and they are willing to accept that we must subject them to minimal intrusions or questioning as part of our attempt at weeding out the slugs of society.

The cops out there who are pricks complicate this delicate balance as do those who go out, video camera in hand and attempt to create a situation they can show to the world. The reality and the majority of both cops and citizens fall in between the extremes and the system seems to work by and large. It is far from perfect and we will obviously never be able to have a system that pleases everyone. The whole topic is in a big gray area and gray areas leave plenty of room for interpretation, speculation and controversy.

This post has been repped. As Dross said, you made your point clearly, calmly, and from a perspective most of us won't have solely by virtue of our employment not being in a squad car.

There were attitudes on both sides of this. The driver was not blameless, and if I gave the impression I thought he was, I apologize. As I just wrote above this post I'm writing now, we all need to remember we're dealing with people. Not "enforcers", not JBTs, not "criminals with a badge", but conversely, not "mopes", "dirtbags", or even "defiant punks" or "smart a** blow hard anti authoritarian"s.

People.

I take issue with one point in the post to which I'm replying, and that's the point about "I believe they were made to allow LE the ability to better protect society as a whole. Yes it is giving up a bit of liberty to preserve safety but I believe this is what the majority in this country are comfortable with. That is how this country is supposed to work isn't it?"
If this is the case, I'm not sure why Castle Rock decided that LE were the ones to be protected even when they did nothing for Mrs. Gonzales. I understand what the result might be, that cities could be held at fault for any crime.. But the angle on this that they missed was that it is your own responsibility to protect yourself, and thus, laws that get in the way of people doing that are unConstitutional. We don't have to give up safety and we sure don't have to give up any liberty, nor in either case, should we. The Court didn't take that one additional step, though, which would have made a world of difference. Nonetheless, neither you nor anyone not sitting on the Court is responsible for their actions, nor do I hold you so.

The point about most of us being able-bodied.. while that's true, it's those who are not that have a greater need to be armed. They're the ones at greater risk both of being targeted and of being overpowered. The largest problem with "weeding out the slugs of society" is when LEOs (anyone, but LEOs have the power and authority to make this a problem) decide someone is guilty of something based on a feeling and keep looking until they make it true. I know you guys don't pass the laws, but you have the power to enforce them or not, it seems. Was not a former President once quoted as saying that the Chief Justice of SCOTUS had made his ruling, "...let him enforce it!"? I'm not sure about that one and I'm being lazy at the moment and not using google-fu, but the point, I trust, is clear: If police do not enforce bad laws, the legislature is powerless to violate the peoples' rights. I'd like to see some initiative that would nullify laws of that nature and I'd like to see you guys able to stop worrying about inane drug prohibition and other victimless crimes and focus on the actual crime.... such as the guy knocking over the Stop and Rob to get the drugs. Or booze. Or smokes. or whatever it is he's committing a crime to get.

Is there that much pressure from within LEAs to enforce victimless crimes?

Thanks again for your input.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[down3green]

I think the guys in the car are idiots.

.


I think the guys in the car stood up for their right against unreasonable (lacking probable cause or reasonable suspicion) search and seizure (they had a burned out light bulb). This country needs more "idiots" like them.


.

 

[rambone]

If police do not enforce bad laws, the legislature is powerless to violate the peoples' rights. I'd like to see some initiative that would nullify laws of that nature and I'd like to see you guys able to stop worrying about inane drug prohibition and other victimless crimes and focus on the actual crime.... such as the guy knocking over the Stop and Rob to get the drugs. Or booze. Or smokes. or whatever it is he's committing a crime to get.

Is there that much pressure from within LEAs to enforce victimless crimes?

I completely agree with this. I hate how the Executive Branch tries to defer all constitutional responsibility to the other 2 branches. All three branches must understand and follow the constitution.

 

[Prometheus]

so can we ask if you were simply doing your job and ran acrossed someone being uncooperative as this guy was about any reason at all just to argue for the sake of arguing, you wouldn't of changed your attitude?

By the time I get to see some one they are having a very, very bad day/night.

I see every single walk of life from the most depraved souls to the most saintly.

I treat every single one of my patients the same, as if they were a family member.

Why? Because I'm a professional and it's MY CHOSEN PROFESSION.

If you don't like your job or can't preform your job without being resentful... FIND A NEW LINE OF WORK. Dealing with a unhappy and angry people come with the job. Grow a thicker skin you wussies!

My whole life I've chosen a path of service to/for others. Some days it's more rewarding than others.

Do you think I always enjoy spending hours upon hours of trying to save a patient who came in strapped down with armed LEO's to supervise at 3:30am when I should be sleeping because I have to start all over again at 6am on a whole new day? Why do I do it? Because it is MY JOB. I signed up for it, I knew what I was getting in to and it is the RIGHT THING TO DO. Those type never say thank you and usual berate the females assisting. As I said above, grow a thicker skin you wussies, if a nurse can handle it, WHY CAN'T YOU!?!?!?

I'm tired of all this B.S. about "Oh he hurt the poor cops feelings"... BOO-FRIGGIN-WHO! You can cry a river in my undisturbed bed, because after you fill them full of holes or beat them unconscious and clock out right on time at the end of your shift, my day just got that much longer and now I'm dealing with them. I just thank God the majority of the time I spend with them they are unconscious.

Do your job or find a new one. It's not like most departments are paying big bucks anyway. You'd make a better living in the private sector anyway (provided you aren't bringing home the federal paychecks anyway).

*the word "you" is used collectively to describe all the whiners and wussies who can't handle someone questioning their "author-a-tay" and making excuses for someone who takes it personally instead of as a professional.

 

[patton487]

The funniest part is when Officer Bulls*** tells the guy that his dog is a "duel purpose" dog that alerts to people as well as drugs. Oh really? That's one amazing dog that can tell a bad guy by sniffing him.

 

[j706]

Wow... I can't believe some LEO's believe some of the things they say. We have rights that ARE the law, but you feel you have a right to circumvent our rights on a hunch or because you were disrespected??!! It's still not illegal to be a jerk, not even a ticket-able offense. Reading what some of you have written is really frightening, to think that there are cops like that out there... OMG! You truly believe it's okay to turn a civil stop into a felony stop because he didn't respect you?? That is just plain sad and scary. Putting on the blue doesn't instantly make you the law... you simply enforce it.

Huh? Where in the heck is all that coming from?

 

[j706]

.


I think the guys in the car stood up for their right against unreasonable (lacking probable cause or reasonable suspicion) search and seizure (they had a burned out light bulb). This country needs more "idiots" like them.


.

The point some of you guys just can't seem to comprehend is this particular driver was acting way weird. He was not acting like a normal person acts on a simple traffic stop. It is not about him being concerned about his rights. What this was is a guy who has an attitude problem and uses the excuse of his rights as a way to be a a--. His actions and his actions alone is what pushed this stop to the point it went.

I didn't watch more than 2 or 3 minutes of the video and I knew where it was going to go. My suggestion is if you don't want to get stopped don't commit any crimes,even simple equipment violations.

 

[Bill of Rights]

The funniest part is when Officer Bulls*** tells the guy that his dog is a "duel purpose" dog that alerts to people as well as drugs. Oh really? That's one amazing dog that can tell a bad guy by sniffing him.

I think what he meant by "alerts to people" is that they use the dog in foot pursuits and they sniff out if someone is hiding under or inside something (like you see on "Cops" when they hide under a kid's backyard swimming pool and the dog finds them, or in a "missing child" situation.) He doesn't smell BGs, just people in general.

Just a guess, though.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[patton487]

I think what he meant by "alerts to people" is that they use the dog in foot pursuits and they sniff out if someone is hiding under or inside something (like you see on "Cops" when they hide under a kid's backyard swimming pool and the dog finds them, or in a "missing child" situation.) He doesn't smell BGs, just people in general.

Just a guess, though.

Blessings,
Bill

I getcha Bill, still it was just an excuse to try and get the passengers out of the car. And a funny one at that. I think my 10 year old would have seen through that line of horse poop. lol

 

[Brandon]

the probable cause came up when the driver was being a jerk. funny part is they dont tell you if they were actually on something or not because that would discredit their dumb behinds. imagine that.

 

[Compatriot G]

The point some of you guys just can't seem to comprehend is this particular driver was acting way weird. He was not acting like a normal person acts on a simple traffic stop. It is not about him being concerned about his rights. What this was is a guy who has an attitude problem and uses the excuse of his rights as a way to be a a--. His actions and his actions alone is what pushed this stop to the point it went.

I didn't watch more than 2 or 3 minutes of the video and I knew where it was going to go. My suggestion is if you don't want to get stopped don't commit any crimes,even simple equipment violations.

This same individual was beaten by the Border Patrol(I think)and it was on video tape. I would suspect he might be a little leery of law enforcement and a bit hostile towards them.

I don't know about you, but I think the officer that initiated the traffic stop had an attitude attack rather quickly. When he asked the others in the car for ID and the driver stated they didn't need to show him ID, the police officer told the driver to shut up in a tone that was full of attitude.

Whether I'm an a** or not, my rights remain. I don't surrender my rights just because you don't like my attitude.

I think most of us understand why they were really pulled over. It was nighttime on a highway in Arizona. The police were looking for drugs or illegals. The license plate light is just the flimsy legal excuse they get to use for the stop.

 

[Compatriot G]

the probable cause came up when the driver was being a jerk. funny part is they dont tell you if they were actually on something or not because that would discredit their dumb behinds. imagine that.

Well, if they were "on something", then the brilliant police officers and the super dual-purpose dog really dropped the ball on that stop. It appears they were sent on their way after the officers were done with the driver.