So whaddya think?

[Klackamas]

Ryan Scott - Dekalb resident stopped at an unconstitutional police checkpoint. 9/20/14

Checkpoint stop. Don't bother with the first 3 minutes and 20 seconds.

[GoCougs]

Meh, you don't fight The System by fighting with the boots on the ground.

[Rupert]

I think videos like that and checkpoints like that are why people don't trust cops.

[Soup DeVille]

Meh, you don't fight The System by fighting with the boots on the ground.

Putting their antics on Youtube though seems to be rather effective.

[Klackamas]

I do see the driver's point. Picking every fifth (or whatever) car negates probable cause. It's the very definition of arbitrary and capricious and it relies on probabilities which isn't good for a legal scenario. It's chance vs. being deterministic and the law specifies deterministic.

The license is government property, but demanding someone produce it because they're the fifth car is a rickety argument. I think it also violates the equal protection clause unless you stop everyone. It's nfg by how many things it violates.

And how does it work anyway? Every fifth car gets pulled, but if you drive like you're drinking and you aren't the fifth car, they have to let you pass by according to rules of the checkpoint?

"Driving is a privilege" doesn't even enter into the argument. What does that have to do with anything? It's like saying the sky is blue. So?

Putting it on youtube is a good thing.

[Soup DeVille]

For the record, checkpoints like this have been found unconstitutional in Michigan.

[bing_oh]

Dueling assholes. He was fishing for a reaction and he got a bite.

[Rupert]

Seems like cops should be able to control their reactions a mite bit better than that fool. First guy was fine, then WHY THE FUCK IS THE DOOR OPEN?!

[bing_oh]

I do see the driver's point. Picking every fifth (or whatever) car negates probable cause. It's the very definition of arbitrary and capricious and it relies on probabilities which isn't good for a legal scenario. It's chance vs. being deterministic and the law specifies deterministic.

The license is government property, but demanding someone produce it because they're the fifth car is a rickety argument. I think it also violates the equal protection clause unless you stop everyone. It's nfg by how many things it violates.

And how does it work anyway? Every fifth car gets pulled, but if you drive like you're drinking and you aren't the fifth car, they have to let you pass by according to rules of the checkpoint?

"Driving is a privilege" doesn't even enter into the argument. What does that have to do with anything? It's like saying the sky is blue. So?

Putting it on youtube is a good thing.

You can blame the courts for the arbitrary determination of which cars are stopped/contacted in checkpoints. They ruled that checkpoints must be conducted in such a way to be fair and impartial. And, just so you know, probable cause has nothing to do with this. Probable cause is the legal threshold necessary for an arrest. Reasonable suspicion would be required for a detention...except that the courts have ruled that things like DUI checkpoints are constitutional without reasonable suspicion as long as they're conducted in a standardized fashion, are minimally invasive, and follow a set of legal guidelines.

[Rupert]

What do you do if someone pulls up to a checkpoint, driving fine, talking fine, acting fine, but you smell alcohol on their breath and they say they've only have one drink?

[bing_oh]

Seems like cops should be able to control their reactions a mite bit better than that fool. First guy was fine, then WHY THE FUCK IS THE DOOR OPEN?!

Everybody's human, even cops. No, it wasn't particularly professional. A wet cop and a roadside lawyer is a good (bad) combination for this kind of incident. Like I said, the guy was obviously fishing for a reaction and got one...wonder how many times he went through the checkpoint before he got pulled out of line.

[bing_oh]

What do you do if someone pulls up to a checkpoint, driving fine, talking fine, acting fine, but you smell alcohol on their breath and they say they've only have one drink?

He gets pulled out of line and we do the dance. If he doesn't show clues on the tests, he gets a "have a safe night" and goes on his way. A few minutes is worth making sure he's good to go and hasn't had so much to drink that he's gonna wipe out a family in a minivan coming home from McDonalds.

[Rupert]

Bollocks.

[bing_oh]

Bollocks.

When did you become British? Or are we just doing CarSpin catchphrases? If so...



Bootstrap.

[Rupert]

I've always used "bollocks" when appropriate. Too much Sex Pistols when I was a youth, I guess.

[bing_oh]

I've always used "bollocks" when appropriate. Too much Sex Pistols when I was a youth, I guess.

So, you consider my response "bollocks?" Care to share why?

[Byteme]

Yup, nothing better to do on a rainy night so I think I'll go bait cops.  What a dick.

I see what he was trying to show but I think his little show lost a lot of impact when he immediately went on the offensive with his "am I being detained" and "this is unconstitutional" statements. 

I'm not defending the cops or the checkpoints. I'm just critiquing the guy's efforts.

[GoCougs]

Putting their antics on Youtube though seems to be rather effective.

That's been happening for some time yet there are still checkpoints.

I don't really agree with the arguments against checkpoints; that 2nd trooper was right - driving is a privilege not a right (i.e., not your property = not your right).

Bad drivers are colossally dangerous for the rest of us and a good portion of WtP have demonstrated absolute disregard for our fellow drivers, so I don't really have a problem with checkpoints (then again they don't have them in my area ).

Also, when the roadways are returned to private hands you betcha there will be some sort of checkpoint process (and mandatory insurance, helmet, seat belt rules, too).

[Madman]

Dueling assholes. He was fishing for a reaction and he got a bite.

Agreed.

This asshole was looking for a confrontation and he got one.  I'll bet he's one of those "Sovereign Citizen" dickheads who think the law doesn't apply to them.

And yes, Officer Rage-O-Holic was waaaaay out-of-line. too, but at least he got wannabe-lawyer-boy to shut the fuck up!

[Soup DeVille]

That's been happening for some time yet there are still checkpoints.

I don't really agree with the arguments against checkpoints; that 2nd trooper was right - driving is a privilege not a right (i.e., not your property = not your right).

Bad drivers are colossally dangerous for the rest of us and a good portion of WtP have demonstrated absolute disregard for our fellow drivers, so I don't really have a problem with checkpoints (then again they don't have them in my area ).

Also, when the roadways are returned to private hands you betcha there will be some sort of checkpoint process (and mandatory insurance, helmet, seat belt rules, too).

Why don't they have them in your area?

[280Z Turbo]

So roadways belong to the ruling elite? Obama lets us use his roads out of the goodness of his heart?

[bing_oh]

Agreed.

This asshole was looking for a confrontation and he got one.  I'll bet he's one of those "Sovereign Citizen" dickheads who think the law doesn't apply to them.

And yes, Officer Rage-O-Holic was waaaaay out-of-line. too, but at least he got wannabe-lawyer-boy to shut the fuck up!

Nope, definitely not a sovereign citizen. They're a...different kind of asshole. Much more fringe and potentially more dangerous. No, this kid was just one of the assumed-to-be-privileged, "I know my rights!" roadside lawyers who want to post their "defiance to authority" on social media. Pretty common today, actually. Funniest part was, he was clearly not really ready for the degree or wrath he got from the trooper...I think he was more than a little bit scared that he was going to be exiting the vehicle involuntarily and succumbing to the harsh pull of gravity with the assistance of law enforcement.

[Rupert]

Yes, he probably was, but that was Officer Rage's fault.