• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Constitutional Rights - asking for ID and/or open carry

Started by HAL 9000, November 26, 2012, 01:52:29 AM

HAL 9000

I completely understand that to have a civil society, it needs to be based on the rule of law (which affects all aspects of life - property rights, civil and criminal adjudication, etc.)

Also, this post is intended to cover simple asking for identification, without regard to open carry. These issues can be mutually exclusive, as well as inclusive (as you'll see).

But the abuse of police power, or power of "the state," are situations I find intolerable.

I have great admiration for those in the following video, in that they know their rights, and stood up to authority protecting their rights in a peaceful manner. It's about time we as the citizenry, protect our Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Saying that, having a state-empowered authority confront you, even if unlawful, is often a frightening encounter, and so we collectively bow to this authority. I wish I had the balls some of these people do in the video. Maybe I will should the situation arise.

I'll apologize in advance for the fact the video is embedded, as I almost universally hate embedded YT videos. I randomly stumbled across this one, and found it compelling.

Do you know your constitutional rights?

stevesh

The best part is that the cops ended up looking like complete asses in every  case. I like to think I would have the nuts to do as the citizens in the video did.

On a lighter note:

The Quickest Way EVER Through A Security Checkpoint

slipstream

And just today there is this bit of news:




November 26, 2012
Supreme Court says cops have no expectation of privacy


   This means that it is absolutely legal to photograph/film police while they are doing their job. 

ziznak

I try not to fuck with the poh pohs... normally for "green" reasons and other double edged purposes...
N.W.A. - Fuck Tha Police + Lyrics
Rage Against The Machine - Fuck The Police

Quote from: HAL 9000 on November 26, 2012, 01:52:29 AM

It's about time we as the citizenry, protect our Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.


The police can get the drug dog to false alert on you by tapping or a hand signal and get probable cause and a warrant within minutes.

ziznak

hence you should try your best to not be black or carrying in AmeriKKKa

Juan

You don't have to be black anymore.  You just have to be doing something unusual.  I'm a large format photographer - I carry around an 8x10 view camera.  Cops are drawn to me like gnats.  I've had numerous run-ins with officers in public places where people often take photos with their digisnappers. 

I finally learned to tell them that a local art gallery had told me the "rich folks in Ponte Vedra Beach" will pay big money for these kinds of photos.  We share a laugh at the "stupid rich people" and I'm left alone.  Until the next cop comes along.

Sardondi

I have noticed what I think is an attitudinal trend among police. Hard to tell of course. But I think that 20-30 years ago most police would personally feel aligned with those who viewed themselves as constitutionalists, in that they believed in expansive personal rights under the Constitution (of course their jobs sometimes necessitate a certain amount of cognitive dissonance). But I think police viewed themselves as part of the great American middle class, whose interests and theirs merged.

I'm beginning not to see that. I'm beginning to see what I think is a real alienation of police from the citizens they serve. More than that, I even see a sort of default sense of opposition. That citizens are to be feared and mistrusted. Of course cops have always self-identified as an elite, and always will. But this is more.

Look at the huge militarization of police departments. And the massive increase in use of violence by police in even routine arrests and execution of warrants. They go in ready for war. In many departments, in the execution of a drug warrant (more and more of which are run on the wrong dwelling), everyone present in a house is cuffed behind the back and put on the ground. That would just about kill many people. And today the policy is that anything but immediate, mute acquiescence is viewed as "resistance" and if someone can't get on the ground, say because of arthritis, cops form a dogpile on top of the poor schmuck, and they use chokeholds and compulsion holds to make them comply, which panics many people, particularly if they have health problems and have trouble breathing to start with. And all the time all the cops are yelling their repugnant and false pre-programmed phrase, "StopResisting!StopResisting!StopResisting!"; when what is happening is that a badly arthritic man simply can't get his arms behind him far enough to be cuffed.

Most folks here know I spent a career in law enforcement, and I love cops and know what they sacrifice. But I've seen what I think are some terrible changes in police attitudes. They simply have too much power today, and can't be challenged. Look at how citizens are being arrested for filming cops in a public place. No way in hell is that illegal. But it happens all the time.

And now I see a change not only in their attitude, but the citizenry's: now even the average law-abiding joe is starting to fear his own police. I used to think that if this country fell under the rule of a despot, and there was a grassroots revolution to take government back, that most cops would be with the rebels. Even though police are by definition the protectors of the state and the status quo, I always felt they thought their interests lay with the people, not the state.

Not anymore. I get the feeling that if it came to shooting, even if it was more than a handful of Koreshian nuts, and was widespread and committed to the point it was a true revolutionary movement, that today many cops would back the state. And the police would dutifully shoot down their neighbors and friends.

I've never thought that before, and it frightens me.

Juan

A local restaurant had a bartender who was serving drinks to minors.  About a dozen cops came in at dinner time to arrest the bartender.  Because the cops were drug squad cops, they wore all black uniforms complete with black hoods and masks.  They frightened the diners badly - so badly that a dozen showed up at the next city council meeting to complain.  They thought the restaurant was being invaded by terrorists, and some even dove to the floor and called 911.

I hate to think what would have happened if one of the diners had been carrying a completely legal concealed handgun and had decided to defend him or herself.

This was a situation where one uniformed police officer could have walked into the bar, produced a warrant, and arrested the bartender.  What possessed them to think the way they acted was appropriate?

I agree with absolutely everything you said.

Growing up I had a close relative that was a cop.  He said they used to informally train any young hothead that joined the force to specifically not act the way cops do now.  As a former cop from that era, he hates cops now - lots of people do.

At some point it dawned on me that I wouldn't just take a cops word for it if I were ever on jury duty.  That was quite a realization.

I think something changed around the 80's when it seemed like a lot more cops started being killed on duty.  The thugs and gangs became so much much worse and so much more heavily armed than they were before, and just developed worse and more brazen attitudes.  I think that turned into too many (almost all?) cops having a real 'us against them' mentality now - with the 'them' being all the rest of us.

Having said all that, they sure have been efficient about getting these same criminals off the street.  It's hard for them to know ahead of time how much danger they are in and who is going to do what when they are dealing with these idiots.

Sardondi

Quote from: UFO Fill on November 27, 2012, 02:04:19 PM
....This was a situation where one uniformed police officer could have walked into the bar, produced a warrant, and arrested the bartender.  What possessed them to think the way they acted was appropriate?

The pretext is it's for officer safety. And it's true, officers have less chance getting killed when they go in heavy. It's also unnecessary in at least 90% of routine warrants and arrests. And it makes for fear and resentment in the targets of such tactics.

But now I'm going to give away some inside stuff. "What possessed them to think the way they acted was appropriate?" The real answer? Because it's fun, and because they can.

Nucky Nolan

Quote from: Sardondi on November 27, 2012, 01:40:03 PM
I have noticed what I think is an attitudinal trend among police. Hard to tell of course. But I think that 20-30 years ago most police would personally feel aligned with those who viewed themselves as constitutionalists, in that they believed in expansive personal rights under the Constitution (of course their jobs sometimes necessitate a certain amount of cognitive dissonance). But I think police viewed themselves as part of the great American middle class, whose interests and theirs merged.

I'm beginning not to see that. I'm beginning to see what I think is a real alienation of police from the citizens they serve. More than that, I even see a sort of default sense of opposition. That citizens are to be feared and mistrusted. Of course cops have always self-identified as an elite, and always will. But this is more.

Look at the huge militarization of police departments. And the massive increase in use of violence by police in even routine arrests and execution of warrants. They go in ready for war. In many departments, in the execution of a drug warrant (more and more of which are run on the wrong dwelling), everyone present in a house is cuffed behind the back and put on the ground. That would just about kill many people. And today the policy is that anything but immediate, mute acquiescence is viewed as "resistance" and if someone can't get on the ground, say because of arthritis, cops form a dogpile on top of the poor schmuck, and they use chokeholds and compulsion holds to make them comply, which panics many people, particularly if they have health problems and have trouble breathing to start with. And all the time all the cops are yelling their repugnant and false pre-programmed phrase, "StopResisting!StopResisting!StopResisting!"; when what is happening is that a badly arthritic man simply can't get his arms behind him far enough to be cuffed.

Most folks here know I spent a career in law enforcement, and I love cops and know what they sacrifice. But I've seen what I think are some terrible changes in police attitudes. They simply have too much power today, and can't be challenged. Look at how citizens are being arrested for filming cops in a public place. No way in hell is that illegal. But it happens all the time.

And now I see a change not only in their attitude, but the citizenry's: now even the average law-abiding joe is starting to fear his own police. I used to think that if this country fell under the rule of a despot, and there was a grassroots revolution to take government back, that most cops would be with the rebels. Even though police are by definition the protectors of the state and the status quo, I always felt they thought their interests lay with the people, not the state.

Not anymore. I get the feeling that if it came to shooting, even if it was more than a handful of Koreshian nuts, and was widespread and committed to the point it was a true revolutionary movement, that today many cops would back the state. And the police would dutifully shoot down their neighbors and friends.

I've never thought that before, and it frightens me.

Sardondi, it's good to read that we're on the same page. I also notice a change. The older police and the younger police aren't reading from the same playbooks. I think that the variance is more philosophical than generational. There's a huge difference in attitudes and procedures, as well as personalities. The old guard have more common sense, and they know how to act in appropriate ways. The new guard seem like skin-headed, storm-trooping characters from "Robocop" at times, and they can be unpredictable. These are generalities, of course. I was one to defend and support the police. I thought that it was mutual. I'm not sure now. It seems like we're turning into a modern version of a Police State. Some cops tried to entice and entrap me while I drove on local roads. One rode my bumper so that I would accelerate fast enough to break the speed limit. There were other situations along those lines, so I avoid the police as much as I can. They don't trust me, and I don't trust them. 

Ben Shockley

Sardondi, not only are we on the same page (for once) but you have noted some specific phenomena and used even damn near the same wordings I did when writing about this stuff some 18 years ago.   You too, P*B.

And re why it took a dozen cops, clad in ninja attire, to serve that liquor-selling warrant: don't forget budget preservation.   I wonder if that bust happened near the end of that town's fiscal year.  The department probably had to fight to get money for those cool clothes, but if they didn't use them pretty soon, their next plea for "cool stuff" might not be answered.   Basically the same as one of the reasons I laid out long ago for what went down at Waco in '93.
On that -- briefly-- why would the ATF go in armed and dressed for "combat" but with no medevac plan or assets?   That can only suggest that they didn't really expect anything to happen.   But if they didn't expect anything to happen, why go in with the accoutrements of "combat?"   My answer: budget preservation.

HAL 9000

Here is an heroic sheriff's officer who I think acted extremely professionally, and upheld our first amendment rights. I do understand that there are numerous occasions when protesters can impede the public's right to travel unencumbered, but clearly this example is one where reason and cooler heads prevailed.

Bravo officer.

TSA OPT OUT & FILM: DEPUTY SHERIFF PROTECTS 1ST AMENDMENT AT ALBANY AIRPORT


I also think Alex Jones is generally a whacko, but not all the time.

Pragmier

The black community has been saying this for ages. I wonder how much is a real change in behavior or the advent of camera phones everywhere.

Nucky Nolan

Quote from: Pragmier on November 29, 2012, 04:57:44 PM
The black community has been saying this for ages. I wonder how much is a real change in behavior or the advent of camera phones everywhere.

That holds true for many things. Americans wrongly assume that we're awash in much more crime and vice now. We're really doing better in most categories. The 24/7 news, as well as the technological explosion, just make it seem like things are much worse than they were in the past.

Sardondi

Quote from: Nucky Nolan on November 29, 2012, 07:08:21 PM
....The 24/7 news, as well as the technological explosion, just make it seem like things are much worse than they were in the past.

Absolutely true. I remind people that the "The Sixties" (1963-72 or '74) were an absolutely sucky decade. Those years were full of true class, political and racial hatred. It was a time of the worst national discord of since the Civil War and Reconstruction, in which there were something like 15-20 deadly riots. These were real riots, not Anarchist, G7 or OWS marches or demonstrations or disturbances; but genuine riots where people were intentionally killed, and millions of dollars in property was burned and destroyed. It was the Rodney King LA Riots squared, and anywhere from 2-6 of those things every year. This was a time which bred such vile, evil beings that they openly said their Marxist/Leninist/Maoist political beliefs gave them the right to kill as many as 25 Million Americans to achieve their political goals. And they actually did kill to try to bring about a Soviet America: in armed robberies, while attempting to spring murderers from custody or bombing school buildings. (Many of these same violent revolutionaries walk the street today, totally without regret except about their failure; sorry only that they didn't get to put their plans for mass murder into full action. You may know some of them as the mentors of a certain Nigerian-American President to whom they passed their political wisdom and experience in community organizing.)

Plus there was terrible racial discord, with blacks being murdered merely for trying to vote, and blacks and whites murdered for trying to register blacks to vote. Black families were dynamited out of their beds regularly.

The Sixties were just terrible. The only people who say they were days of peace and love were on acid the whole time, and that's all they remember. So don't believe this claptrap about woe is us what a horrible time of hatred we're in.

Nucky Nolan

You're right on all counts, Sardondi. "Bill Ayers" is the first name that comes to mind if one wants to use one person to capture the tone of your post. In the bad ol' days, the Ku Klux Klan were real criminals and terrorists, not just museum exhibits on talk shows. At the other end of the racial spectrum, the Zebra Killers did more than make idle threats to get their fifteen minutes of fame.

Juan

The 60s were also wonderful because a lot of ordinary Americans went to work, raised families, and sought to bring us out of the mess. 

Falkie2013



Here's something that really pissed my gf and I off one night.

I live 2 blocks from City Hall & the local HQ of the police.

Periodically they do sobriety checkpoints on the main road out of town & stop every car.

One night we had to go to Walmart to get something and only had 11 minutes to get there.

We went up Alhambra and saw the checkpoint & waited for the light to make a legal left turn to go up the road behind the local Walgreen's that goes up the hill to the street that approaches Walmart.

A Martinez cop followed us up the street & stopped us and asked us WHY we avoided the checkpoint & if we had been drinking.

He acted like a total jerk & acted he was real pissed that he couldn't ticket us or anything.

I asked him if it had become illegal to take a road to go to the store because their idiot checkpoint slowed down the 2 lane main road to a crawl & he said nothing & let us go.

They did one this weekend as well.

The state passed a new law where they could no longer just confiscate your cars in one of these stops. I hate them & the remind me of Nazi Germany where they could ask you for your papers at any time.

I once got stopped by the Beverly Hills police because I was walking through their city in the middle of the night. They couldn't believe I was walking to Santa Monica. I had missed the last bus from Sunset Blvd and didn't want to wait on a bench for 8 hours.


[attachment deleted by admin]


Quote from: somatic hypermutation on January 20, 2013, 05:59:36 PM
... This is the most conservative and government intrusion friendly Supreme Court in history...


The desire for Big powerful Government and intrusion are what the Left is all about.  That is what 'Left-wing' is.   The role of government is to solve all problems, more government spending is always the answer, and we are all too stupid to take make our own decisions.

You don't like something, so you arbitrarily decide it must be 'Conservative' - this is another trait of the Left.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on January 20, 2013, 06:14:51 PM


The desire for Big powerful Government and intrusion are what the Left is all about.  That is what 'Left-wing' is.   The role of government is to solve all problems, more government spending is always the answer, and we are all too stupid to take make our own decisions.

You don't like something, so you arbitrarily decide it must be 'Conservative' - this is another trait of the Left.

Sorry Paper Boy, read the paper.

The Right is all about more government power for defense and internal control of "terror", the left is all about internal control through social programs.  The right takes Consitutional rights via the Patriot Act and the Supreme Court, the left via social programs.  When either take power they take more control.  Wake up, they are the same, they just use different tactics.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on January 20, 2013, 06:14:51 PM


You don't like something, so you arbitrarily decide it must be 'Conservative' - this is another trait of the Left.

I am actually pretty conservative on taxation and spending, and liberal on legal control by the police state.  That makes me a CONSISTENT small government person.  You are all for big government, as long as they spend it on defense and control via the police state (eg modern conservationism has betrayed it's founders).

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Paper*Boy on January 20, 2013, 06:14:51 PM


The desire for Big powerful Government and intrusion are what the Left is all about.  That is what 'Left-wing' is.   The role of government is to solve all problems, more government spending is always the answer, and we are all too stupid to take make our own decisions.


Actually no it isn't. By left wing I suppose you mean by extrapolation communism? That is; (in Trosksy's version) the workers control of means of production. Of course, unless the said workers are experienced and qualified to control the means of production, the factory, organisation, chemical plant etc, will sooner or later fail to produce. In this case the 'workers' are too stupid or way out of their depth to make the decisions. Communism isn't big government; it's strictly non government and the society administered by the collective for the good of the collective. However, the original concept has morphed over the last ninety or so years in some places into a unwieldy bureaucracy..The final death throws of the Soviet Union was helped along by Gorbachev; he was a communist, but he was intelligent and foresighted enough to see the writing on the wall. The USSR couldn't continue building millions of tractors and obsolete machines that no-one needed or wanted, and at the same time go begging for grain to feed it's population. It was basic economics that killed the communist politburo, and instead replaced it with a right wing autocracy, steered in the shadows by the Russian mafia not known for their left wing political leanings. 
Even China has grabbed the nettle and accepted they have to embrace the scourge they considered capitalism; and is now the fastest growing economy (with India) on the planet. In China's case the bureaucracy is still unwieldly in many ways, but it's getting better all the time..when you have a 1/7 of the world's population, these things don't happen overnight. China is a prime example of an all pervading administration, but they will win out through sheer weight of the benefits of a deliberately under valued Yuan in relation to the dollar, euro, sterling and yen. 

Again, it will take a long time, but it's population will become prosperous; they're certainly some of the highest educated in the world; the state finances all their universities, and as a result, the students grab the opportunity with both hands, learn several languages, several sciences, engineering, computer skills; get a flight and move around the world being able to take up a job because of the level of their skills. This is from a country that in my lifetime was seen as insular and unapproachable. The USA and indeed much of Europe has a hell of a way to go before it gets close to the spending and buying power of China.

Quote
You don't like something, so you arbitrarily decide it must be 'Conservative' - this is another trait of the Left.

By default, it can be said with some justification that 'the right' accuse anyone of disagreeing with them as being on the 'left'  Consider that it's simply you could be wrong. Only the USA judges others by who they voted for the last election. As if it defines the person's intelligence and ability to function amongst it's fellow citizens.

Juan

     Yorkie, I don't know about you uks, but here the gun grabbers self-identify as being of the left. Whether or not they meet your definition of "left", they meet their own.

onan

Quote from: UFO Fill on January 21, 2013, 05:16:07 AM
     Yorkie, I don't know about you uks, but here the gun grabbers self-identify as being of the left. Whether or not they meet your definition of "left", they meet their own.


For every "crazy" gun grabber out there, I guarantee, there is a "I want a bazooka" whack nut out there.




Yorkshire pud

Quote from: UFO Fill on January 21, 2013, 05:16:07 AM
     Yorkie, I don't know about you uks, but here the gun grabbers self-identify as being of the left. Whether or not they meet your definition of "left", they meet their own.

Hmm, so it's a dichotomy based on perception of political leaning? In the UK, we don't feel the need to carry a long bow; the law for that has been rescinded but until quite recently all Englishmen over the age of 14 should carry out two hours’ longbow practice each week. This law dates from those days when there was no regular British army and local gentry were ordered to organise, fund and train their own fighting force. (Militia) This and other laws were filited from the statute because they're obsolete...We moved on..the same way in 1752 we moved off the Julian calender and had new years day on the first of january instead of May 25th.

On the UK and gun thing, I've said several times; Only those who have good reason (farmers, gamekeepers, hunters, police firearms officers, military etc) are allowed firearms. Handguns are banned for public ownership and use, period. Of those who apply to hold a shotgun/rifle licence they're subject to rigorous interview and analysis before approval..this probably contributes to us having about 30-40 killed each year with firearms, rather than 11-12 000; having such an attrition rate is acceptable, or it isn't. I presume it is, otherwise the government of the day would be moved by the population to do something about it.

Juan

We seem to have different worldviews - for you, the government gives you your rights - for me, the people give rights to the government.

Marc.Knight

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on January 21, 2013, 06:01:04 AM

Hmm, so it's a dichotomy based on perception of political leaning? In the UK, we don't feel the need to carry a long bow; the law for that has been rescinded but until quite recently all Englishmen over the age of 14 should carry out two hours’ longbow practice each week. This law dates from those days when there was no regular British army and local gentry were ordered to organise, fund and train their own fighting force. (Militia) This and other laws were filited from the statute because they're obsolete...We moved on..the same way in 1752 we moved off the Julian calender and had new years day on the first of january instead of May 25th.

On the UK and gun thing, I've said several times; Only those who have good reason (farmers, gamekeepers, hunters, police firearms officers, military etc) are allowed firearms. Handguns are banned for public ownership and use, period. Of those who apply to hold a shotgun/rifle licence they're subject to rigorous interview and analysis before approval..this probably contributes to us having about 30-40 killed each year with firearms, rather than 11-12 000; having such an attrition rate is acceptable, or it isn't. I presume it is, otherwise the government of the day would be moved by the population to do something about it.




The UK might have a more sedate society.  Australia had a severe spike in home invasions after banning public ownership of handguns.  I can imagine how one would feel if one week I had to turn over my gun to the government and the next week a gang of lunatics (with guns) invaded my house because they knew I would be defenseless.  If I owned one, I would happily give up a handgun to the government if they first take away all handguns from every existing and potential criminal.  Without this criteria it is sending sheep to the wolves.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod