Uh yea…
It doesn’t work like that…
They can easily create probable cause to search your car at any point after you are pulled over…
Well, like I said before, they have the gun, they can pretty much do what they want… but they’re liable for the consequences, and to have the legal right to search the car, they need probable cause to believe that their search will reveal evidence of criminal activity. Not a “suspicion.” Not a belief that criminal activity has taken place and the desire to use that as an excuse to search.
I don’t understand how this is a difficult concept. Anyone who tells you otherwise based on personal experience is either a police officer who hasn’t been burned yet, or some John Q. Public who got burned and doesn’t know well enough to file a complaint.
They can ask you to search your car. They can walk 360 degrees around it and look for anything that looks incriminating (drugs, weapons, etc.). They can question you (though you can choose not to answer their questions after presenting them with your driver’s license). They can do all sorts of things, but if they cannot justify why they wanted to do the search, or if the judge thinks their cause was lackluster, the case against you will get thrown right out.
reminds me of the night I got pulled over driving home from a friends. Got pulled over and was really not sure why. Asked for license, reg…comes back…asks me to step out of the car. Hmmmm ok…takes me around back. more cops show up. they pat me down and two cops, 1 on each side of my car, start going through it and nobody asked me shit. They just did it. So when I asked the cop who was standing next to me while my hands were on my trunk what I did wrong he said my car matched the description of a car in the area that was said to be transporting drugs. I guess that was their “probable cause”. My car was all shitted up when I got back to it. Floor mats tossed on the seats, pens and papers and anything I had in my center console just tossed where the fuck ever they felt like flinging it. I was let go with nothing because they had nothing on me.
That’s kind of a gray area. Someone probably should have told you why, but if they had a reliable report of a car in the color and body style that you have transporting drugs in the time and place that you were, that’s definitely reason to pull you over. Probably could have made something of it, if you’d wanted to, but having targeted reliable intelligence is way different than having a random checkpoint or a random traffic stop and deciding to look further because you can.
-
They had probable cause the second they saw his horrible shorts.
-
What he did was AWESOME. If BP was comfortable and knowledgable wih their rights they could have taken him away. Clearly, due to the recent splurge of BP agents, they didn’t know what they were capable of.
The law says that if you flash nunchucks… you better use them.
That guy was so annoying. If you have nothing to hide just let 'em look.
ironic i just had my BP exam today lol scored 2nd highest in the location 
I don’t know anyone who hasn’t passed with a mid to upper 90… and I don’t know anyone smart who took it.
Thats a terrible way of thinking.
what did you get
I’m glad you don’t approve of my way of thinking.
That’s the exact philosophy that Benjamin Franklin was so dismissive of in the quote I posted. You shouldn’t have to submit to a search without reason in a free country, even if you have nothing to hide.
Whether or not you have something to hide, it’s not “annoying” to protect your Constitutionally protected freedoms. Would it be “annoying” for a hunter to tell a cop to fuck off if he wanted to confiscate his rifle without reason, even though he thought he might get it back? (No.) Would it be “annoying” for a person in public to fight for their right to express their opinion if a police officer told them to stop because they didn’t agree with the religious/political content? (No.)
If you’re not willing to stand up for your rights, you have no rights.
(To bring it full circle to Benjamin Franklin’s quote: if you’re stupid enough to give up your rights, you’re too stupid to have rights in the first place.)
Well since he wouldn’t even show them his license when they asked him for it I feel he had something to hide. If a peace officer asks you for your license as proof that you are by law able to operate your vehicle I feel you should have to show it to them. He didn’t.
:mamoru:
That was 20 minutes in and the guy was pretty heated. He should have showed them his license. That was the only fault I found with him.
I have no problem with people protecting their rights but when the guy was clearly proven wrong and still wouldn’t abide I got annoyed. I do agree with your quote, I was just overly annoyed with the guy at the time.
Yeah, he came off as a prick, but I understand why he was being a prick, and might do the same in his shoes.
He wasn’t ever proven wrong, either, the only thing that was out of place was the driver’s license thing.
i think he could have atleast gotten out of the way for traffic
Yeah, probably. He could have refused to consent while on the side of the road.
i thought it was funny that he was free to go and then all the officers were blocking his car just staring at him lol