PDA

View Full Version : 4th of July DUI Checkpoint - Drug Dogs, Searched without Consent, Rights...




donnay
07-05-2013, 07:10 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w-WMn_zHCVo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w-WMn_zHCVo

Published on Jul 4, 2013


Tennessee State Trooper AJ Ross orders me to pull over and get out of my car, bullies me around, gets the drug sniffing K-9, lies about me having "Illegal Drugs" in the car, searches without consent, and tells me that it is ok to take away my freedom. All while not being detained. All this harassment because my window was not lowered enough to his preference. I broke no laws whatsoever. All of this on a day that we are supposed to be celebrating freedom and liberty. This checkpoint was in Murfreesboro, TN.

tod evans
07-05-2013, 07:13 AM
Officer safety!

I suppose he should be "grateful" that a cavity search wasn't necessary..:eek:

donnay
07-05-2013, 07:27 AM
What boils my blood in this video is the cop, while searching the vehicle, mocks the kid for knowing his constitutional rights--then the other cop hanging on the car door notices the video camera, shines his light directly into the video camera, then very sheepishly alerts the cop searching the vehicle to the camera. The cop searching, on his power hunger trip turns the camera away from them and continues searching. Bottom line is he doesn't give a shit--because in his pea-brain he above the law!

I hope this video goes viral! This is one of many trooper/cops on power trips. But the more people stand up to these bullies the less power they will have!

Wooden Indian
07-05-2013, 07:48 AM
This is one of a thousand abuses these badge wearing mad men commited this day alone.
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

How can we combat it? Maybe a large group meetup near these events, with everyone travelling in seperate vehicles spaced a few cars apart, and each resisting one after another... it would back up traffic and send these dopes into a meltdown.

They go bat-shit when one car refuses to comply. Imagine the reaction when 20 of the last 30 cars refused to comply.

aGameOfThrones
07-05-2013, 07:53 AM
Using a drug dog at a DUI checkpoint is illegal, but they are in the business of illegality.

EBounding
07-05-2013, 08:26 AM
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

And they love it because they think they're helping by complying, giving them a false sense of authority.

GunnyFreedom
07-05-2013, 08:38 AM
Freedom baby!

Matt Collins
07-05-2013, 09:26 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW8tyTgoQiI

DamianTV
07-05-2013, 09:32 AM
Lets celebrate having Right by having our Rights completely fucking violated.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to donnay again.

belian78
07-05-2013, 09:46 AM
This is one of a thousand abuses these badge wearing mad men commited this day alone.
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

How can we combat it? Maybe a large group meetup near these events, with everyone travelling in seperate vehicles spaced a few cars apart, and each resisting one after another... it would back up traffic and send these dopes into a meltdown.

They go bat-shit when one car refuses to comply. Imagine the reaction when 20 of the last 30 cars refused to comply.
That's a really really good idea, but I can see it now, you'd be arrested for obstruction/harassing an officer in the line of duty/disturbing the peace/whatever else BS charge they could think of.

DGambler
07-05-2013, 09:46 AM
This is one of a thousand abuses these badge wearing mad men commited this day alone.
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

How can we combat it? Maybe a large group meetup near these events, with everyone travelling in seperate vehicles spaced a few cars apart, and each resisting one after another... it would back up traffic and send these dopes into a meltdown.

They go bat-shit when one car refuses to comply. Imagine the reaction when 20 of the last 30 cars refused to comply.

Awesome idea, this is exactly what needs to happen.

WM_in_MO
07-05-2013, 09:49 AM
Throw ourselves on the gears of the machine, nice.

Wooden Indian
07-05-2013, 09:50 AM
That's a really really good idea, but I can see it now, you'd be arrested for obstruction/harassing an officer in the line of duty/disturbing the peace/whatever else BS charge they could think of.

Never acknowledge it as a group exercise to the scum bags. You do not know any of the other drivers as far they're concerned. Just out for a drive. Besides, it's none of their damn business where your're going to or from. Refuse to answer those questions. Refuse to comply. Shut down their whole little operation.

Czolgosz
07-05-2013, 10:00 AM
Once we educate the masses they'll demand to be free!


(yes, it's dripping)

Anti Federalist
07-05-2013, 11:21 AM
Freedom baby!

No kidding!

Nothing says liberty like random searches, drug sniffing dogs and arrogant cops bossing everybody around.

Freedom is Slavery.

Anti Federalist
07-05-2013, 11:21 AM
Once we educate the masses they'll demand to be free!


(yes, it's dripping)

LOLOLOL

Anti Federalist
07-05-2013, 11:23 AM
This is one of a thousand abuses these badge wearing mad men commited this day alone.
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

How can we combat it? Maybe a large group meetup near these events, with everyone travelling in seperate vehicles spaced a few cars apart, and each resisting one after another... it would back up traffic and send these dopes into a meltdown.

They go bat-shit when one car refuses to comply. Imagine the reaction when 20 of the last 30 cars refused to comply.

I like this, and would take part in such an operation.

Czolgosz
07-05-2013, 11:39 AM
I like this, and would take part in such an operation.

+wun

torchbearer
07-05-2013, 11:43 AM
I like this, and would take part in such an operation.

not a bad idea, just need enough people in an area to make it effective.

Czolgosz
07-05-2013, 11:46 AM
not a bad idea, just need enough people in an area to make it effective.


That is our problem...we don't have geographically concentrated freedom.

kcchiefs6465
07-05-2013, 11:47 AM
I like this, and would take part in such an operation.
The newspaper here gives notice but not exactly where the DUI checkpoint would be. It will say "police will be conducting a DUI checkpoint between 5PM and 7PM with funds allotted to them from some highway fund." That is their warning. One good thing about social media I used to like was that I'd get alerts from people who'd say "checkpoint is on so-and-so street." Another person would confirm another one. That would be the only way to make it work. Have 30 people ready at the drop of a hat to meet up somewhere close by after getting confirmation of where it is at. Have them all record the encounter.

Eventually they'd just start waving every car through. If you shitted on their gestapo parade every time they held one, they'd become pretty meaningless. The officer still makes overtime so I doubt he really would care if they were waving everyone by or not. Probably makes his job easier though less revenue is a good thing. They also might charge you with obstructing if you showed up to every checkpoint with a camera. I've seen someone charged with obstructing traffic for warning people about an upcoming obstruction in traffic. I wouldn't put it past them.

It is a good idea though. If nothing else it might just give the Lieutenant an aneurysm.

mczerone
07-05-2013, 12:03 PM
This is one of a thousand abuses these badge wearing mad men commited this day alone.
What's worse is that Boobus applauds this behavior... he finds entertainment value in it.

How can we combat it? Maybe a large group meetup near these events, with everyone travelling in seperate vehicles spaced a few cars apart, and each resisting one after another... it would back up traffic and send these dopes into a meltdown.

They go bat-shit when one car refuses to comply. Imagine the reaction when 20 of the last 30 cars refused to comply.

I get the idea, but activism that harms the general public doesn't win adherents.

Another idea is to just publicize the checkpoint via social media and/or sign waving/visual displays to redirect people before they reach the cops. They might put cops on watch to see who turns back at the point you're warning them, but then just get someone else another 1/2 mile down the road. Repeat if necessary.

mczerone
07-05-2013, 12:03 PM
That is our problem...we don't have geographically concentrated freedom.

Free State Project...

Contumacious
07-05-2013, 12:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w-WMn_zHCVo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w-WMn_zHCVo

Published on Jul 4, 2013


Tennessee State Trooper AJ Ross orders me to pull over and get out of my car, bullies me around, gets the drug sniffing K-9, lies about me having "Illegal Drugs" in the car, searches without consent, and tells me that it is ok to take away my freedom. All while not being detained. All this harassment because my window was not lowered enough to his preference. I broke no laws whatsoever. All of this on a day that we are supposed to be celebrating freedom and liberty. This checkpoint was in Murfreesboro, TN.

And for that treat you can thank the scumbags - impostors -who pretend to be Article III Justices of the Supreme Court who claim that they and police officers have immunity.



.

Christian Liberty
07-05-2013, 12:12 PM
Why can't we just have a distracted driving law and be done with it? I see no point in special drunk driving laws, or texting while driving laws, or whatever. If you're driving safely, it shouldn't matter, if you aren't, it really shouldn't matter why.

I think I've come around on this. I really don't see the point.

Christian Liberty
07-05-2013, 12:12 PM
Why can't we just have a distracted driving law and be done with it? I see no point in special drunk driving laws, or texting while driving laws, or whatever. If you're driving safely, it shouldn't matter, if you aren't, it really shouldn't matter why.

I think I've come around on this. I really don't see the point.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise...

Brian4Liberty
07-05-2013, 01:13 PM
I get the idea, but activism that harms the general public doesn't win adherents.

Another idea is to just publicize the checkpoint via social media and/or sign waving/visual displays to redirect people before they reach the cops. They might put cops on watch to see who turns back at the point you're warning them, but then just get someone else another 1/2 mile down the road. Repeat if necessary.

They create backups with these checkpoints anyway. Sometimes very long ones, late at night. That's one of the outrageous parts about these checkpoints.

As far as warning people, IIRC, people have tried it and they get arrested for that too.

torchbearer
07-05-2013, 01:15 PM
http://www.pitch.com/imager/b/magnum/2672928/175e/Checkpoint_Ahead.jpg

Brian4Liberty
07-05-2013, 01:21 PM
Why can't we just have a distracted driving law and be done with it? I see no point in special drunk driving laws, or texting while driving laws, or whatever. If you're driving safely, it shouldn't matter, if you aren't, it really shouldn't matter why.

I think I've come around on this. I really don't see the point.


I'm willing to be convinced otherwise...

It's for the children! If you drink alcohol, you are guilty! Alcohol is evil. And pot too. These checkpoints are important. What if someone has a terrist under their seat? We are at war, and your vehicle is part of the war zone. What if someone has a pressure cooker in that car? We'll see how you feel when they blow up your mother with that WMD! What if someone does not have proper papers? There's no telling what's in your pocket or up your butt. If you are innocent, you have nothing to fear from a friendly finger.

Now take your prescription meds and submit like a good boy.


;)

mad cow
07-05-2013, 01:26 PM
The whole idea of drug sniffing dogs being expert witnesses is a sham,the cop might as well say 'this mouse in my pocket says you got drugs in your vehicle'.

From a long but good article at Reason:

Those numbers look almost respectable compared to the results of a 1984 operation in which Florida state police stopped about 1,330 vehicles at roadblocks and walked dogs around them. If one dog alerted, another was brought in, and vehicles were searched only if both dogs indicated the presence of illegal drugs. That happened 28 times, but those searches yielded just one drug arrest. In other words, even when two dogs both signaled the presence of drugs, they were wrong 96 percent of the time.



http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/31/this-dog-can-send-you-to-jail

mczerone
07-05-2013, 01:32 PM
They create backups with these checkpoints anyway. Sometimes very long ones, late at night. That's one of the outrageous parts about these checkpoints.

As far as warning people, IIRC, people have tried it and they get arrested for that too.

(1) It doesn't matter that they'd be backed-up anyway - people don't see the ever-intrusive hand of tyranny as the problem when there is an easier scapegoat to put forth. Tax protesters are vilified because they "don't contribute their fair share," rather than looking to the taxman as the problem. Filibusterers are scapegoated for holding up "the process" rather than the process being blamed for the ills.

(2) I know getting arrested is scary to people that have things to lose (family, steady jobs). But it shouldn't be a deterrent to true activists. And you'd run the risk of getting arrested for BS charges by flooding the checkpoint anyway. So my alternative isn't any worse as far as the risk of being arrested goes.

Brian4Liberty
07-05-2013, 01:35 PM
Extremely common warnings on prescription drugs. Feel free to take and drive. No penalty, no chance of getting caught at a checkpoint.


Do not drink alcoholic beverages when taking this medication

May cause drowsiness or dizziness

This drug may impair the ability to drive or operate machinery. Use care until you become familiar with its effects.

angelatc
07-05-2013, 01:53 PM
Even though SCOTUS held this to be a reasonable intrusion of our rights does not mean that the states have to use the technique. DUI checkpoints are illegal in Michigan, thanks to some highly motivated people who jumped in hard back in the early 90's when this battle was still being fought.

It is unlikely that SCOTUS will ever choose to revisit this, but the fight could still be won on a state level.

Christian Liberty
07-05-2013, 01:59 PM
I'd say SCOTUS ruled correctly. Its not the Federal Government's job to police the states.

I think fighting it on the state level is the correct thing to do to begin with.

Then again, I don't accept the validity of the 14th amendment to begin with, which was the amendment (Passed at gunpoint) that is normally used to defend the bill of rights directly applying to the states. It sounds good, but when you use the Feds to enforce it its like unchaining a dragon to deal with a few armed robbers.

Christian Liberty
07-05-2013, 02:03 PM
It's for the children! If you drink alcohol, you are guilty! Alcohol is evil. And pot too. These checkpoints are important. What if someone has a terrist under their seat? We are at war, and your vehicle is part of the war zone. What if someone has a pressure cooker in that car? We'll see how you feel when they blow up your mother with that WMD! What if someone does not have proper papers? There's no telling what's in your pocket or up your butt. If you are innocent, you have nothing to fear from a friendly finger.

Now take your prescription meds and submit like a good boy.


;)

I know in the past I've agreed with Trad Con and probably a few others that drunk driving laws (Although not these checkpoints, and I don't think anyone here ever agreed with that either) that DUI laws were justified. After thinking about it more, I just don't see the point. If someone is participating in distracted driving, isn't that in and of itself a problem?

The only distinction I can see is if a sober person is driving recklessly, a cop can pull him over, tell him to drive safely, and he can (at least possibly) start paying attention again. If he's drunk, on the other hand, and that's the cause of his reckless driving, he really shouldn't be driving for several hours because as long as he's doing so, he'll be dangerous, assuming that he was drunk enough to disrupt his driving in the first place.

That's really the only distinction I can think of.

aGameOfThrones
07-05-2013, 02:14 PM
A guy in the youtube comment section who claims to be a constitutional law professor told me how everything the cops did was legal.

torchbearer
07-05-2013, 02:15 PM
A guy in the youtube comment section who claims to be a constitutional law professor told me how everything the cops did was legal.

but was it moral?

aGameOfThrones
07-05-2013, 02:17 PM
but was it moral?

Going by his reply, yup.

here is one of his comments.



Michael Scott 42 minutes ago

This comment has received too many negative votes

The police did nothing wrong. The driver's failure to follow the instructions of the officer gave them probable cause to search the vehicle because reasonable people don't refuse to roll down their window, not to mention the other nonsense the driver was spouting. There was no violation of rights, only rudeness on the part of the driver. There's a lot of those so called "constitutional scholars" out there that get their law degrees from watching TV and movies.

torchbearer
07-05-2013, 02:20 PM
Going by his reply, yup.

really, does a strange man in a costume really have the right to invade what is yours?
thought we fought a war against the mightiest empire on earth because of crap like that.
maybe that prof needs to get his tongue out of the statist koolaid.

devil21
07-05-2013, 03:14 PM
Going by his reply, yup.

here is one of his comments.

He's as much a constitutional scholar as Obama is. Betcha $100 he's a cop, not a lawyer. I see the same types of posts at the LEO heavy forums elsewhere. Remember, cops can and do lie and can legally do it on the job. Why anyone would think they'd stop lying when they take off the uniform and sit down at a keyboard is beyond my comprehension.

That video is full of unconstitutional behavior and his reply is utter bs.

Contumacious
07-05-2013, 03:51 PM
Going by his reply, yup.

here is one of his comments.
[QUOTE]This comment has received too many negative votes

The police did nothing wrong. The driver's failure to follow the instructions of the officer gave them probable cause to search the vehicle because reasonable people don't refuse to roll down their window, not to mention the other nonsense the driver was spouting. There was no violation of rights, only rudeness on the part of the driver. There's a lot of those so called "constitutional scholars" out there that get their law degrees from watching TV and movies.


The police was absolutely wrong.

In US v Salinas the SCOTUS ruled that the the individual has 2 choices

Ascertain if they have been detained

YES? Miranda applies

No? Leave

.

seraphson
07-05-2013, 05:28 PM
[QUOTE=aGameOfThrones;5111119]Going by his reply, yup.

here is one of his comments.


The police was absolutely wrong.

In US v Salinas the SCOTUS ruled that the the individual has 2 choices

Ascertain if they have been detained

YES? Miranda applies

No? Leave

.

Do you have a link to the case? I tried finding it but got a bunch of non-relevant cases. I'd really like to have this for future reference. Thanks!

devil21
07-05-2013, 05:34 PM
Do you have a link to the case? I tried finding it but got a bunch of non-relevant cases. I'd really like to have this for future reference. Thanks!

Pretty sure this is the one. It made some news recently but it was Salinas v. Texas, not Salinas v. US. Here's some info:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/salinas-v-texas/

eta: looking at the ruling closer, appears scotus ruled that answering any questions waives your 5th as long as you haven't been given Miranda and do not expressly state the 5th as a reason for not answering a particular question. Just another reason to not answer any questions at all from the start and immediately ask for a lawyer if you're ever in a situation where that is a possible outcome. The driver in the video is exercising his rights according to scotus recent ruling but needs to expressly state 5th amendment protection. Shitty part of that is that will be used as an excuse by the cops to "suspect" something. Silence? Guilty. 5th? Guilty.

Miranda does say "right to remain silent." Remaining silent implies you start there and STAY there. Interesting case but scotus definitely is chipping away at the 5th here.

devil21
07-06-2013, 03:54 AM
Also from scotusblog on this ruling. He explains better than I can.

http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=165262

You actually have to say that you're going to be quiet. Huh? The answer again is to not answer any questions and don't "go down to the station" or whatever.

Origanalist
07-06-2013, 04:07 AM
//

green73
07-06-2013, 05:06 AM
It appears 1,914 cops have watched this.


1,320,726 views
Like 22,051 Dislike 1,914

Origanalist
07-06-2013, 05:12 AM
It appears 1,914 cops have watched this.


1,320,726 views
Like 22,051 Dislike 1,914

You are totally discounting their cheering section.

green73
07-06-2013, 05:22 AM
You are totally discounting their cheering section.

You are correct!

Matt Collins
07-06-2013, 08:33 AM
The kid should've said "am I being detained, or am I free to go?"


If the LEO didn't answer he should've demanded to see the LEOs supervisor.

Matt Collins
07-06-2013, 08:33 AM
What boils my blood in this video is the cop, while searching the vehicle, mocks the kid for knowing his constitutional rights--then the other cop hanging on the car door notices the video camera, shines his light directly into the video camera, then very sheepishly alerts the cop searching the vehicle to the camera. The cop searching, on his power hunger trip turns the camera away from them and continues searching. Bottom line is he doesn't give a shit--because in his pea-brain he above the law!

I hope this video goes viral! This is one of many trooper/cops on power trips. But the more people stand up to these bullies the less power they will have!
The kid should be glad the video wasn't deleted, or his phone confiscated.

phill4paul
07-06-2013, 08:36 AM
The kid should've said "am I being detained, or am I free to go?"


If the LEO didn't answer he should've demanded to see the LEOs supervisor.

0:47. And yes the next thing he said should have been to speak with the supervisor.

WM_in_MO
07-06-2013, 08:45 AM
Doesn't matter, everyones rights were violated that night and every other night they set up these suspicionless checkpoints.

Red Green
07-06-2013, 09:18 AM
You are totally discounting their cheering section.

Yeah, who would have thought pigs could get fluffers.

CPUd
07-06-2013, 11:02 AM
I've never had to go through a checkpoint down here. They generally tell you when and where they are going to be set up. The locals take any number of alternate and usually faster routes. That leaves mostly out-of-towners and drunk/high people going through.

pacelli
07-06-2013, 04:31 PM
hey Donnay are you going to litigate this any further given that you have evidence?

CPUd
07-07-2013, 01:47 AM
Found some local press on it:



...

“I researched this and found out that K-9 units have been doing these false alerts all over the country in order to be able to search vehicles without consent.”

The video, which was posted Friday morning to the libertarianrepublic.com, skyrocketed to the top of Reddit’s homepage, a site where content is voted “up” by users.

Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office Public Information Officer Lisa Marchesoni said officials are “reviewing the incident” and “looking into the matter to determine if there are any policy or procedure violations.”

David said Kalbaugh was shaken after the incident.

“(Kalbaugh) called me that night really upset, in a shaking, trembling voice; he was really concerned,” David said. “I watched the video when he uploaded it, and my blood boiled. I think that’s why it went viral.”

David said the organization is not anti-police and claimed it regularly donates funds to the Murfreesboro Police Department to show support.

The demonstration aimed to send the message that “any abuse of the constitution will be exposed,” David said.

David said this was not Kalbaugh’s first video in which he confronts the police, and Kalbaugh also records confrontations with the local homeless population for a Facebook page he dubbed, “Don’t Support Murfreesboro Panhandling.”

Videos similar to this are gaining popularity; they can be viewed here and here.
...



http://www.dnj.com/article/20130706/NEWS01/307060032

CPUd
07-12-2013, 02:12 AM
Update:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYdQ2S4bNS8

http://www.facebook.com/foxnashville

mad cow
07-12-2013, 02:33 AM
"Many of the calls were made on untraceable phones."
Well we can't have that now,can we?

CPUd
07-12-2013, 03:24 AM
I notice they didn't say too much about the K-9, which is kind of an important part of the story about why the video got so much traction.

pcosmar
07-12-2013, 06:56 AM
I notice they didn't say too much about the K-9, which is kind of an important part of the story about why the video got so much traction.
Because they know,, but don't want to admit.

http://www.yumasun.com/articles/anderson-63132-charges-patrol.html

A Baptist pastor who claimed he was beaten by law enforcement officers at an interstate checkpoint was acquitted Friday of two misdemeanor charges related to the incident.




A Border Patrol agent referred Anderson to the secondary inspection area after a canine allegedly alerted to his vehicle. However, Anderson refused to move to secondary and stayed in his vehicle even after multiple requests from both Border Patrol agents and officers with the Department of Public Safety.

“I was exercising my Constitutional rights. I knew they wouldn't find anything and they didn't,” Anderson told the Yuma Sun. “It is an unconstitutional checkpoint and I basically refused a warrantless search of my vehicle.”



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVMZUgmrJrk

And it is not rare. It is common. It is known. and it is getting worse.

Matt Collins
07-12-2013, 10:06 AM
Now he is saying they found drugs in the car:

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20130711/NEWS03/130711016/Sheriff-speaks-about-viral-DUI-checkpoint-video-says-deputy-found-pot-car-

CPUd
07-12-2013, 12:41 PM
Here's some stuff about drug dogs - true alerts vs false alerts:
http://nevergetbusted.com/university-study-tricked-certified-police-dogs-to-false-alert-200-times/