"Fourth of July DUI check is no celebration of freedom in tense video"
http://now.msn.com/dui-checkpoint-video … -tennessee
The bad news. You don't.
The good news. Fortunately, most government employees act in good faith.
Thankfully I have reached an age where most, no actually all policemen are younger than me!
I rarely get stopped, when I do I obviously look and act like a good citizen, and have no problems, but I also know I am 'copping out' by playing their game, and hate that, but normally I do not have the time to enlighten them on the finer points of stop and search laws, nor the inclination to be delayed just in order to be shown a lesson in 'respect' of the power a law officer holds.
I'm not sure that this is some sinister conspiracy to take away civil rights; it seems much more like a lack of training taken by the officers. Not knowing how things work in the US, but in the UK the police are generally impeccably polite addressing the public as sir/madam, saying please and thank you etc. They know that such a recording as shown in the OP would result in serious disciplinary action on the officers concerned and a sh*t storm in the media.
disappear - Not sure about the UK, but cops have quotas here (it's not just culture, it's a job requirement...). Not only that, but prisons are being privatized. These prisons-for-profit guarantee the state a given number of beds to be filled; they then use their profits to write legislation, and donate to candidates who will pass their (often harsh, drug) laws - which conveniently serve to fill up the beds in the prisons.
And yes, it is illegal to video cops. It is also illegal to video corporate animal cruelty (?without prior notice?!?) - shout out to Big Ag!
In some states, they are jailing students (or parents, in my particular state) for truancy, and bringing back debtor courts...
In some states, they are requiring a 5 year waiting period for voting rights once a prisoner is released...
Texas (of 500+ executions, 3 times that of any other state; and 50%+ appeal rate) is slashing the amount of time a death row inmate has to challenge their case...
While millions of DNA tests remain untested (nationwide)...
Land of the free!!!
A DUI checkpoint? The cop never asked him if he had been drinking?
More evidence of the fascism that is eroding our rights. Yahoo cops, drunk on their AUTHORITOH!
RB, I wrote a hub about our civil rights years ago. The thing refuses to get any traction here. Can you, or anybody else for that matter, recommend a politically-based, active website where the thing might actually get some traffic?
Meanwhile, here's a brutal, 3-and-a-half minute video about the US. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … 6K6m3Ua2nw
And here's a darn happy, music video about the US. Jack up the volume and watch full screen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … hyMvQ_N7Zc
Happy video about the US composed and sung by Elton John at the Royal Opera House? I'm sorry but where is the US content?
I receive some good traffic from the David Icke forums. They allow a link through your profile and a signature under your posts. I am active in the forums, so every post supplies a link. Great community as well.
Nothing wrong with checkpoints in principle. I still believe that the law enforcement officers crossed the line and need training as to the proper precedure to confront motorists keeping in mind not to trample on rights or push aside civil liberties. While the motorist was intimidating, law enforcement did not act professionally and allowed emotions and his sentiments to interfere with the case in point and the issue at hand. I see no reason why we cannot have both effective law enforcement against a pandemic problem and yet still have civil behavior that respects the motorist/citizen
I have always been of the opinion that drunk driving checkpoints are entrapment. I feel like I am in Nazi Germany when I have to go through one. Border Patrol checkpoints make me equally angry, but you cannot complain because you'll automatically get pulled over and be thoroughly searched. You just have to be a good citizen and keep your mouth shut.
What irks me even more are the citizens who say "They're just doing their job". If their job is to intimidate, harass, and entrap, perhaps they should quit and find honest work.
It's a mindset, and frankly had I joined the police or military, I doubt I would have rejected the mindset offered, they feel powerful and are powerful because we comply and they have the full weight of the law, and it's ability to close ranks, behind them.
In that respect I appreciate what the young guy did in the video.
However few people are prepared to put their lives in jeopardy to prove a point, and an old tombstone story is:
Here lies the body of Esra Wray
Who died protecting his right of way
His right was right
and his will was strong
But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.
Age seems to blur the edges of defiance.
I have an idea. Maybe law enforcement should just up and quit, and let citizens fend for themselves.
I think the complaints would quickly stop at that point.
Disappearinghead, not so anymore in the US. In some states and cities, they have actually made it illegal to record officers without their permission. So if you film the police committing a crime, YOU get charged with a crime.
Davidlivermore, in the city of Detroit, which is so bankrupt that police are often not even capable of functioning effectively anymore, there are private security firms that are entering the field of citizen protection. And they are doing a vastly superior job.
Yes, because putting corporations in charges of policing is always a good idea.
This is a very salient point as to civil rights being dependent on which city or state one happens to be in. In my civil rights hub that I wrote years ago, I specifically rant about this. Amongst a lot of other things...
Sure, I'll agree. Checkpoints are a pain.....and at some level they must violate some right, of the few we have remaining......However, most Holidays do give rise to more drivers under the influence. It shouldn't require the presence of law enforcement for a responsible/rational adult, to know that "drunk" driving is a pretty stupid, unacceptable thing to do.
You want your loved ones subjected to the dangers? I can tell you, I surely do not. Do the right thing and an occasional, quick checkpoint, shouldn't be such an egregious imposition, considering they save lives.
I'm afraid I don't see DUI checkpoints as "entrapment," ??? If you insist that's their purpose.....don't set yourself up to be a "trapped drunk." Fairly simple. I also don't feel that law enforcement is "harassing & intimidating" me, by checking my state of sobriety, as I operate a vehicle that has the capacity to injure or kill someone else.
Now, when they start stopping me on highways, to make me prove I paid my taxes......then you shall hear me roar, loud and clear. (davidlivermore......."EXACTLY." I hear a lot of needless whining)
There is something very wrong if the police can demand that a driver pull over at a checkpoint. In the UK this is illegal; the police must be able to prove that they suspect the driver has first committed a crime. So in the case of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, the police must suspect this from the way in which the car is being driven.
One of the freedoms we still have in the UK is that there is no legal requirement to carry any form of ID at any time even when driving, and the police have no right to demand that we produce any. If we are found to have committed a driving offence, then we have 7 days to produce a driving licence at a police station of our choosing.
fpher - Talk about cognitive dissonance...
Agree with a couple of people on here. There are, indeed, millions of examples of police officers crossing the line because most people who "serve" in such a capacity these days are people who love power, or who come to love power. And I would think the majority of Americans would at least come to the latter state soon enough (Abu Graib, anyone?).
What I don't like about posts like these (and some of the responses they generate) is it shows again American's feelings that they have the right to commit a crime. I've driven through both DUI checkpoints and safety belt checkpoints. I was sober, had my ID ready, my seatbelt on, and I knew where my registration and proof of insurance was. I had no drugs or illegal firearms anywhere on me or in my car.
Quite frankly, I didn't feel annoyed at all; I felt safe knowing that if there was anyone who was drunk with a suspended license, no seatbelt, in a stolen car with no insurance, carrying meth and an Uzi -- they wouldn't be out on the streets very much longer. Because they have no right to drive, or steal cars, or carry meth and automatic weapons -- and if they try to do any of those things, they should be caught. Plain and simple.
If you ever lost someone to a drunk driver you would be glad of the checkpoints getting some of the drunks off the road though very few get caught with the checkpoints.
That kid purposely aggravated the cop I don't feel sorry for him because of his little trick his car got scratched. To bad!
There is something wrong with checkpoints in principle. It violates one of the cornerstones of our justice system. It assumes that you are guilty until proven innocent. They detain you until you prove to them that you are not drunk.
Davidlivermore, actually yes, empirical evidence says that it is far better than publicly funded police. There has yet to be a case of members of one of these private security firms brutalizing a citizen...which is far more than can be said for the Detroit Police Department, or a police department of any major city or large suburb.
I'll take that violation. Because in this case, unfortunately, you often aren't proven guilty until you kill someone.
But actually, it doesn't violate that principle. Because police get search warrants because they *suspect* someone is guilty. Even if they find the evidence, that person remains innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (dun dun! Sorry, couldn't help the Law & Order reference). DUI checkpoints are, in essence, search warrants. They are searching for evidence of drunk driving. And even if they find that evidence via breathalyzer or field sobriety test, you still go before a court of law under the assumption that you were not drunk driving.
Usually that assumption ends when the police officer presents the evidence. But regardless, the principle stands.
The principle does not stand. In random checkpoints, police have no warrant to stop anyone. Stopping someone with no warrant requires probable cause. Random checkpoints do not serve as probable cause. And this is the reason we have an increasing police state, because too many people are willing to take this or that violation. Remove the limits of government, and none of your rights are safe.
by ga anderson 2 years ago
I stumbled across this John Stossel video piece.*Just click image to viewI am not a big fan of links with no explanation, but on this one, 'ya gotta' watch the video to get the point of the OP. But I will offer a head-start; I think this should be on the news too - as an outrageous and abusive use...
by Credence2 4 years ago
As my stomach turn listening to former NY Mayor, Guiliani blame the President and the current mayor for the deaths of the 2 officers in Bed-Sty, New York City, I had reason to pause. I think for myself and the insinuation that all the people involved in PEACEFUL protests were incited beyond reason...
by Christin Sander 6 years ago
What are your thoughts on the new Illinois law making it a felony to video an arrest?This law went into effect ahead of Chicago's G8 summit - where there tends to be a lot of protests. It also, in my opinion, is a threat to our constitution and freedom. Why should it be a felony to...
by SpanStar 7 years ago
It is really sickening just how butal and hateful law enforcement can be against the people they're getting their pay from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxgNKNEt … r_embeddedThe many videos reports I've read and watched law enforcement in action is simply nothing more then pure...
by Scott Vehstedt 5 years ago
What authority does the neighborhood watch have to observe or direct people to do something?Much has been made of the fact that when you call the Police, you're not really talking to a cop and therefore don't have to obey a given directive. Neighborhood Watch members are not sworn officers either,...
by ahorseback 4 years ago
Guess what ? Only a couple of them should be fired for abuse of power ? Gee , I'm just a poor white kid but I think that's a pretty good record ! And yet , there is a media driven and media fired culture-- That believe they are all Racist...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|