Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
That said, I have trouble believing him. I feel he`d have more damage to his face than a few scratches. I dunno... to me, if this is true, it just seems like he was acting defiant just to see how far he could go.
And shut up with that "If you have nothing to hide, then don`t act like you do" bullsh*t. Maybe you`re fine with your liberties being taken away, but some of us enjoy being able to take a sh*t without our toilet sending a detailed medical report to the government.
from what i remeber the officer saying bombs dogs will sit when they detect a bomb. well the guy in the video said that they said the dog had detected either drugs or a person.
wouldn`t this mean thatthe dog should have been going after the trunk?? not just going whatever or sitting???
If you have nothing to hide then just do what the officer says and you will be on your way in no time!!!
Not that hard people.
I actualy have to give all kudous to the dude in the vid for highlighting this abuse of his human right`s. This goe`s against the basic rights of citizens of not just America but of all westren countries and if we don`t stand up these rights will be taken away.
Just my 2 cents
And you`re right about all of the dog "experts" who have weighed in here. The dog with me in my profile pic is trained in bomb detection, and he sits to indicate to me that he has alerted on something. I have seen PLENTY of dogs that sit as their indicator.
In my case, I DEFINITELY don`t want the dog scratching and pawing at something he`s telling me can go boom.
And when they finally had to bust the windows to get him out, cops have to be overly cautious... look what happened to the motorcycle cops in Oakland.
But this does sound like a bit of cops egos getting the best of them. They could have treated him with more respect after he was secured.
Many people have been quoting the constitution but the fact is that there is a law in place that has not been overthrown as unconstitutional, so the constitution cannot be used to contradict it.
The excessive use of violence was wrong, but in every other way the officers did their job correctly, assuming they didn`t make up the story about the dog.
This website has a good summing up of the law:http:/
Could you clarify? Personally. i thjink this could be where the pastors version and the police version may differ.
This man is innocent in every factor. I`m eagerly awaiting a response to this video, and if he is found guilty.... All hope is gone for America.
Now, I need to point out something about Terry Stops. Terry Stops are still not allowed without reasonable suspicion. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not simply an officer`s hunch. The Fourth Amendment applies in a Terry Stop just as much as anywhere else.
That said, this wasn`t a Terry Stop. In traffic, a Terry Stop is the temporary detention of a person in a vehicle to investigate a possible crime or civil infraction. This also requires reasonable suspicion, but does not constitute a search of the vehicle.
So the police turn up at your house, without a warrant, and ask to have a look around as they `believe` you may have drugs on the premesis. Why? Well, they just think you might.
You are saying that you are just going to let them in for a casual look around to find whatever they like, and it is your fault if you refuse and they assault you?
Ok, so Terry Stop covered the frisking of a potentially armed individual of whom the Officer has reasonable suspicion.
However as stated, the request by the office was not for this guy to submit to a frisk, it was to open his vehicle for an un-warranted stop and search which does not consitute an immediate risk to the officer.
I don`t see any way Terry Stops are relevant in this case.
So by following the law and NOT allowing the officers to act above the law, he did the wrong thing?
So based on your opinion, if the Border Patrol stopped YOU and told you to drop your pants so they could inspect your privates for contraband, you would comply? Seriously, would you?
I think any reasonable, innocent person would probably allow these cops to check their trunk, etc. BUT the point here is that when a person refuses there are regulations in place that the cops are to follow. Nowhere does it say that it`s permitted to break two windows, tazer a person multiple times, grind their head into broken glass, etc. They could have easily removed him from his car without all the excessive force, they are trained in that. They were pissed at him and took it out on him and they should pay the consequences. The very least they should have done was to have the dog come back a second time - it was a reasonable request.Do I think this guy wanted
According to him, he had just washed his face. So, did you comment on a video you didn`t actually watch?
Yes, that would have gotten him through with a lot less pain and trouble. I believe the principle he was fighting for here is more important. By exercising his rights in this way, he was saying a lot more about what freedom means to him. It`s not that he would have been in trouble by letting them search, it`s that he shouldn`t HAVE to let them search. That`s worth fighting for.
and @ tispayne, drug dogs are trained to bark if they detect something. if the dog just sniffed his car and walked off, it didnt find anything.
also, if he had answered the questions, they wouldnt have brought the dog over in the first place...teeeewat....
Oh right... almost forgot that you`re paranoid.
Although it would be interesting to see their side of it, since people are taking the pastors word as gospel (pardon the pun)
If you look at it from the Police view, the guy resisted the search.I believe he was politely asked to step out of his vehicle. If he wasn`t, then that`s really abuse of power.
Yes, some cops are not that good, but that doesn`t mean all of the cops are really like that.Generally, Why would someone want to hurt someone for some reason?
And just a question, was his window pulled down, b`coz he said the window in the driver side was smashed too.
Basically we`re getting a police state, and there`s bugger all we can do about it.
I don`t care what your view is, this is obviously abuse of power.
Should he have been treated like that? HELL NO.
There was no reason for him to be treated in such a way. Our rights are there for us to excercise them. If this is how citizens are treated for excercising their rights then what is the f***ing point of having rights?
He is not dumbass, he is not an idiot, he is a citizen who took a stand out against something he felt was not right.
So mock him all you want. At least he tried to do something.
What if some guy was really smuggling or something, and there was a checkpoint, and he did what this guy did, but the police were "Oh yeah, you can go..."
I`ve been in a lot of similar cases, and what I do, is just cooperate.
And if that kind of reasoning will work, then why would there be checkpoints anyway.
You might accept them on a voluntary basis, but if you refuse to state your nationality they have to let you go. You may critize the guy`s attitude and purpose, but he has the law on his side, not the agents who stopped him.
The agents are just doing their job, I agree. But who is giving orders initially? The US governement. There is clearly a problem.
You all need to remember as well that these are simply law enforcement officials, not judges. These guys are getting paid to uphold the law, not to bend the rules and abuse their power.
I put the question to you all, why is it so many bad cop storied come out of America?
Every week there’s a different video about a cop abusing their power. I’m from the UK and we’ve have a few bad copy stories in the papers at the moment regarding the G20 protests and you can see the sheep post on there too from the USA.
It’s so funny that you’ve become so accustom to being abused and controlled by your police that it’s just normal for them to do as they wish & treat you like scum.
Did they have this same thing in one o
That sounds more like something from a police state than the US, which I find very disappointing. So much for police protection...
Yeah, I said it.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
But! All the stuff about how the dog didn`t bark or make a sound so obviously they were lying? Yeah, those dogs are trained to be subtle, you wouldn`t want your subject to know you know (and you wouldn`t want people who are scared of dogs to be afraid when you`re doing a drug test on plane passengers or anything). Clearly he didn`t have drugs, but the dog could easily have indicated that and I wouldn`t bring the dog back either if I was the patrol, because you shouldn`t bring them into potentially dangerous situations just to prove a point.
I`m fed up with the `If you have nothing to hide, Allow them.` Argument. There are crooked cops, Crooked and sneaky enough to plant evidence on you or in your vehicle. Why ? Quotas! If they don`t get a certain number of `expected` arrests their superiors will reprimand them thinking they aren`t `On The Job`.
Fines, Court costs, Bails are revenue streams for the states and agencies. They expect cops to bring in that revenue for them. Some `Gung Ho` cops will do it by whatever means, Especially if they believe their job is on the line.
Thank You Prime. This `Maddog` european know-it-all obviously isn`t fluent in US constitutional law.
Everyone has the right to refuse an illegal search, This guy didn`t run, He didn`t give them any excuse to inflict bodily harm on him. This was a random stop at a `checkpoint` many many miles from the border.
ok seriously; the guy was clearly looking for trouble and guess what?? he found it...surprise, surprise...
i hope i`m not alone in this but i kinda get the feeling that he purposely staged this sh.t...
ok but even if he didn`t, based off of his 8min rant i think the border patrol did exactly what they should have done in this situation. From the guy`s own description of what happened, he was clearly acting like a jackass...this undoubtedly gave border patrol every reason to be suspicious and want to search his car...
rights and amendments don`t even count with this one...if you have nothing to hide, then don`t act like you do...
our rights are there for a reason. excercise them whenever you feel your being treated unjustly.props to this guy for getting the word out.
And remember that time those stuffy Brits were all like "c`mon give us your tax money, chaps!"
...and then those ungrateful Boston guys were like "no way!, and here`s what we think of your stupid British warm water leaf-broth drink!!!"
Anyways, like Benjamin Franklin said, "Never disobey those with any authority, because people with even a hint of power are always infallible."
Maybe not in my lifetime, but at some point, people will stand for what isn`t right. The average joe will always outnumber the man of duty.
...not to sounds like a hippie or anything. lol
Where did you get that nonsense? The only thing you HAVE to do when you get pulled over (for probable cause) is follow lawful direction. If a cop pulls you over for speeding the only thing you HAVE to do is give them your license so they can right you a ticket. You don`t have to say anything, or allow them to search your vehicle.
BUSTED: The Citizen`s Guide to Surviving Police Encountershttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXz...
Being in the service and having sworn an oath to protect our country from enemies both foreign AND domestic; How do you feel knowing that our rights that you are fighting for are slowly being eroded?
I think everyone that has watched the victims other videos will agree that the guy is a bit of a douchebag.
BUT if it went down the way he says it did, then he makes a valid point.
Law Enforcement officers regularly violate people`s civil rights. It`s a sad truth. The UK has become a police state, and we are right behind them.
yeah that is sooo realistic.
In my case, I probably would have just let them search the car. I do see where the guy is coming from though. The Constitution grants us rights from illegal search and seizure. Do you not think that this is against someones rights to deny a complete stranger to search your belongings?
Police are there to help, but they took it too far. They have superiors to answer to and I bet that once they are alerted to this video, consequences will follow. I mean the guy was tazed, what, three for four times... Ouch.
Not to mention that Probable cause has to be met Arizona v. Hicks
If you have nothing to hide, then don`t hide it.
You dont know when to quit! The full story
Just to quote 1 tiny section...
"DPS also cited a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality of checkpoints near border areas, and that the stop on Interstate 8 is in compliance with the law."
It was legal to stop and search him. His whole legal case now is about the force used which I am not arguing over. I refuse to debate it futher when I`ve now TWICE proven it is legal to be stopped and searched in the States if the police have reasonable reason to do so. He argues they didnt, they claim they did so when the police stop you..comply and argue about it AFTER they are done!
The Supreme Court also held that individuals in automobiles have a reduced expectation of privacy, because vehicles generally do not serve as residences or repositories of personal effects. Vehicles may not be randomly stopped and searched; there must be probable cause or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
None of the above conditions were present, The stop and the search was ILLEGAL! YOU FAIL!
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Scroll down to the "Stop and search" section. Sorry, you lose! Border patrol`s are generally obligated to to question every other car that passes through. If they can justify stopping him, same as in the UK, he`s got NO argument.
And dont make out I live in a police state thank you!
You may live in a police state in the UK, But WE in the US have something called the 4th Amendment, I suggest YOU LOOK THAT UP.
They had No warrant, No just cause, No dog alerted, and No right under any law or jurisdiction to violate his 4th amendment rights!
But then what he DID do shows the world that C(amron) Diaz and the other bloke are IDIOTS who deserve to be sacked for such a horrific display of violence toward an innocent party.
Bu agree with Nidonemo - One side.
And for those of you who don`t know... the DPS Officers tazed him, Border Patrol do not carry Tazers. Also, a Border Patrol checkpoint falls under what is considered an "extension of the border" therefore they are allowed to send you to secondary and search your vehicle.
Next time, if you are not hiding anything, don`t be a drating dick and just listen... would have been on his way in 20min tops!
I hope he counter-sues them and wins big.
Those of you saying he deserved it need to get tazered a few times and have your head stomped into glass like was done to him. Maybe then your opinion will change.
"You are a baptist pastor (although I neither saw or heard anything indicating this) so you deserve to be beaten "to a pulp""
"congradulations. you were black for a day."
Keep it classy IAB
You are a baptist pastor (although I neither saw or heard anything indicating this) so you deserve to be beaten "to a pulp"
Second, I understand you were excersizing your rights. I agree with you not letting them search your car but you really should have just answered their questions. I grew up on the Mexican border and if you live there you should be more than willing to help the border patrol. In short, you knew you were going to stir up trouble and you deserved every bit of ass whooping you recieved.
Spent a whole 3 minutes thinking up that zinger. B)"
He`s Baptist not Catholic....back to the drawing board?
I think Don`t Tase me Boro would be closer if anything
Spent a whole 3 minutes thinking up that zinger. B)
It doesnt apply in this situation.
The United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a division of the United States Department of Homeland Security, is permitted to search travelers and their belongings at the American border without probable cause or a warrant. These searches are therefore exempted from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Pursuant to this authority, CBP may generally stop and search the property of any traveler entering or exiting the United States at random, or even based largely on ethnic profiles. However, CBP may only conduct searches of the traveler`s body â€” including strip, body cavity, involuntary x-ray, and in some jurisdictions, patdownsearches â€” if the Customs officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is concealing contraband.
Also, what does the fact that he`s a pastor have to do with this?
1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you don`t have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.
2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.
3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, "close by" usually means just the room you are in.
We all recognize the need for effective law enforcement, but we should also understand our own rights and responsibilities -- especially in our relationships with the police. Everyone, including minors, has the right to courteous and respectful police treatment.
If your rights are violated, don`t try to deal with the situation at the scene. You can discuss the matter with an attorney afterwards, or file a complaint with the Internal Affairs or Civilian Complaint Board.
1. You have the right to remain silent and to talk to a lawyer before you talk to the police. Tell the police nothing except your name and address. Don`t give any explanations, excuses or stories. You can make your defense later, in court, based on what you and your lawyer decide is best.
2. Ask to see a lawyer immediately. If you can`t pay for a lawyer, you have a right to a free one, and should ask the police how the lawyer can be contacted. Don`t say anything without a lawyer.
3. Within a reasonable time after your arrest, or booking, you have the right to make a local phone call: to a lawyer, bail bondsman, a relative or any other person. The police may not listen to a call to a lawyer.
4. Sometimes you can be released without bail, or have bail lowered. Have your lawyer ask the judge about this possibility. You must be taken before the judge on the next court day after arrest.
5. Don`t make any decisions until you see a law
1. Upon request, show them your driver`s license, registration, and proof of insurance. In certain cases, your car can be searched without a warrant as long as the police have probable cause. To protect yourself later, you should make it clear that you do not consent to a search. It is not lawful for police to arrest you simply for refusing to consent to a search.
2. If you`re given a ticket, you should sign it; otherwise you can be arrested. You can always fight the case in court later.
3. If you`re suspected of drunk driving (DWI) and refuse to take a blood, urine or breath test, your driver`s license may be suspended.
1. It`s not a crime to refuse to answer questions, but refusing to answer can make the police suspicious about you. If you are asked to identify yourself, see paragraph 2 above.
2. Police may "pat-down" your clothing if they suspect a concealed weapon. Don`t physically resist, but make it clear that you don`t consent to any further search.
3. Ask if you are under arrest. If you are, you have a right to know why.
4. Don`t bad-mouth the police officer or run away, even if you believe what is happening is unreasonable. That could lead to your arrest.
2. You must show your driver`s license and registration when stopped in a car. Otherwise, you don`t have to answer any questions if you are detained or arrested, with one important exception. The police may ask for your name if you have been properly detained, and you can be arrested in some states for refusing to give it. If you reasonably fear that your name is incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, which may be a defense in case you are arrested anyway.
3. You don`t have to consent to any search of yourself, your car or your house. If you DO consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court. If the police say they have a search warrant, ASK TO SEE IT.
4. Do not interfere with, or obstruct the police -- you can be arrested for it.
Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
Don`t get into an argument with the police.
Remember, anything you say or do can be used against you.
Keep your hands where the police can see them.
Don`t run. Don`t touch any police officer.
Don`t resist even if you believe you are innocent.
Don`t complain on the scene or tell the police they`re wrong or that you`re going to file a complaint.
Do not make any statements regarding the incident. Ask for a lawyer immediately upon your arrest.
Remember officers` badge and patrol car numbers.
Write down everything you remember ASAP.
Try to find witnesses and their names and phone numbers.
If you are injured, take photographs of the injuries as soon as possible, but make sure you seek medical attention first.
To all my fellow Americans:Welcome to the impending police state that we allowed George W. Bush to create in order to "protect" us from "terrorism."
Impending police state? The US has BEEN a police since October 2001. Its just your `rule of law` is morphing into the `rule of force` over time. But given the state of American finances, there going be hundred times more worst than is case in about 5 years. And will so common that no one will really care. Welcome to The American Dystopian Dream 101
4th AmendmentThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
As a soldier, I fight to PROTECT the very freedom that many Americans are so willing to give up the split second someone in a position of "Authority" tells them they have to.
Wake up people!
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
You have the right to remain silent.
and anwar a search warrant is only needed to search the area past the suspect and the area past their direct control. during an arrest they can check you and in this case your car without need for a warrent
"at the risk of being called a paultard"
"To all my fellow Americans:Welcome to the impending police state that we allowed George W. Bush to create in order to "protect" us from "terrorism." "
Slippery Slope. Nice job using one example and blowing it out of proportion. "Hey today I fell and bruised my leg, thats why there should be universal healthcare!"
Know your rights. Here is your rights provided by the ACLUhttp://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res2...
May god have mercy on all of us.
Do you get that? The police are NOT ALLOWED TO DO THIS. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW. lol
I, personally, respect this man. You guys may believe that the authorities are above the law, but I strongly disagree.
im sure if the dog had actually acted as if it detected a person he would have let them search his car, his point was they wanted to do it for no obvious reason