Am I being detained?

[FiendWithoutAface]

http://checkpointusa.org/blog/index.php/2008/01/09/p79

What do you guys think of this?

[SuperMegatron]

I assume the police have the right to stop you on the road for any reason. I dont really get the point he is making.

[Ex-Cyber]

I don't think there's enough information here to form a clear opinion about it, particularly in light of "reasonable suspicion" (which may well involve factors that aren't shown in the video or described in the text). It seems pretty obvious that what we're seeing is not the whole story.

I assume the police have the right to stop you on the road for any reason.

Not really, although they can probably get away with it anyway in most cases.

I dont really get the point he is making.

The point he's making is that "border patrol" officers are stopping and questioning people who are not entering or leaving the country, with no clear justification.

[Veggita2099]

If you are pulled over the police officer has to have a reason. Of course all they have to say is you were swerving and that is enough reason to usually justify it. I have heard of cases though where people have gotten out of a DUI over this type of situation. Police officer says they was swerving and then they ask for the tape. If the tape is reviewed and the driver is not seen to be swerving they get out of it because the Cop had no reason to pull them over to begin with.

[Lartrak]

Sometimes they claim people have a broken tail light, and then kick it out themselves if they find anything.

I wish I was joking.

[butters]

If you are pulled over the police officer has to have a reason.

Not true. Because a vehicle requires a license to operate, a police officer can pull you over at any time to check your license, insurance, inspection etc.

[SuperMegatron]

If you are pulled over the police officer has to have a reason.

Not true. Because a vehicle requires a license to operate, a police officer can pull you over at any time to check your license, insurance, inspection etc.

Thats what I am thinking as well. They only need a reason to search the car.

[JuddWack]

I once got pulled over for "looking too young to buy beer". I know some of you guys are going to say that there must be more to the story but there really isn't. I took the train home from school, got in my car and picked up a 6 pack at the bar between my house and the train station. As soon as I came out the cops driving by pulled a u-turn. By the time they reached me I was in my car pulling out onto the road. They flashed the lights and pulled me over.

When the officer reached my window I asked very politely "Did I do something wrong officer?". He was nice and said, "I'd just like to check your ID, this bar is notorious for selling beer to minors." I found that hard to believe because I've always been carded. Anyway I showed it to them. The part that really pissed me off came up next. At this point they had already learned that I was 23, hadn't been drinking and on my way home. Another cop came by and was peering through my windows. He opened up the passenger door and grabbed a crumpled up wad of tin foil, opened it and smelled it, clearly a sandwich wrapper. Then they began questioning me about drugs. If I had any with me, if I knew what he thought the paper was, etc.

Anyway in regards to this story, yeah I think it sucks. Citizen's rights at traffic stops are quite vague, and don't skew in our favor.

[Ex-Cyber]

I once got pulled over for "looking too young to buy beer". I know some of you guys are going to say that there must be more to the story but there really isn't.

I'm not sure there needs to be. As far as I know, cops don't need to meet the "probable cause" standard just to stop and ask questions / check license; they need "reasonable suspicion" (although there is an exception for at least DUI checkpoints) which is a much more lenient standard.

[curt_grymala]

You guys are all talking about the regulations that govern why and why not police officers are allowed to pull you over, but you're ignoring one major element:
Those rules vary from state-to-state.

In most states, a police officer has to observe you committing a "primary" violation in order to pull you over. However, in a lot states, not wearing a seatbelt is considered a "primary" violation, meaning that a police officer is fully within his/her rights to pull you over if they suspect you are not wearing a seatbelt.

In addition, in most states, police officers are allowed to set the speed limit at whatever they feel it should be. Therefore, even if you are driving ten miles an hour less than the posted speed, a police officer is still within his/her rights to issue you a speeding ticket if they feel you were going faster than the maximum "safe" speed. Of course, they would have to offer justification in court as to why they reduced the speed limit, but they'd probably rarely lose the challenge.

Finally, the original poster was referring to Homeland Security officers, not regular police officers. Thanks to "The Patriot Act", Homeland Security officers are pretty much allowed to do whatever the hell they feel like doing, even if it violates every single one of your Constitutional rights.

[Ex-Cyber]

You guys are all talking about the regulations that govern why and why not police officers are allowed to pull you over, but you're ignoring one major element:
Those rules vary from state-to-state.

This is true in a practical sense, although the rules I'm talking about come from US Supreme Court opinions (and so presumably represent a limit on what states can allow).

[ace]

I'm a huge proponent of police (working for the Toronto Police Service, I had better), and even I think that's ridiculous. There should never be a reason that a law enforcement officer, in uniform, should refuse to give their name, badge number, and supervisor's name... But then I guess that's the Dept. of Homeland Security for you.

[jaredfogle]

I'm not a fan of this ever-increasing police prescence.

Don't tell me things always have and will be like this. It is escalating. The first police forces were only created in the late eighteenth century amid the French Revolution, etc. This was when we first saw the phenomenon we would call "police."

Police forces tend to emerge when an establishment is threatened. Look at major urban areas during the communism/union scares of the early 20th century.

In my experience, policemen and women who are there to protect and serve are the exception, not the rule. Perhaps it isn't as bad as I just implied, but I assure you that the inverse is NOT ture.

[butters]

I'm not a fan of this ever-increasing police prescence.

Don't tell me things always have and will be like this. It is escalating. The first police forces were only created in the late eighteenth century amid the French Revolution, etc. This was when we first saw the phenomenon we would call "police."

Police forces tend to emerge when an establishment is threatened. Look at major urban areas during the communism/union scares of the early 20th century.

In my experience, policemen and women who are there to protect and serve are the exception, not the rule. Perhaps it isn't as bad as I just implied, but I assure you that the inverse is NOT ture.

Would you rather have thugs going around stealing everything in site? Would you rather have rapers and murderers go free? Before the establishment of police forces you were responsible for apprehending the guy that breaks in and rapes your wife/gf/significant other. I know this stretches things a little bit too far and I'll get criticized for it, but don't act like you don't want police to exist at all.

[|darc|]

Before the establishment of police forces you were responsible for apprehending the guy that breaks in and rapes your wife/gf/significant other.

And you aren't now? What do you do, sit around and hope the guy doesn't prematurely ejaculate while the cops get there?

[cak!]

I once got pulled over for "looking too young to buy beer". I know some of you guys are going to say that there must be more to the story but there really isn't. I took the train home from school, got in my car and picked up a 6 pack at the bar between my house and the train station. As soon as I came out the cops driving by pulled a u-turn. By the time they reached me I was in my car pulling out onto the road. They flashed the lights and pulled me over.

When the officer reached my window I asked very politely "Did I do something wrong officer?". He was nice and said, "I'd just like to check your ID, this bar is notorious for selling beer to minors." I found that hard to believe because I've always been carded. Anyway I showed it to them. The part that really pissed me off came up next. At this point they had already learned that I was 23, hadn't been drinking and on my way home. Another cop came by and was peering through my windows. He opened up the passenger door and grabbed a crumpled up wad of tin foil, opened it and smelled it, clearly a sandwich wrapper. Then they began questioning me about drugs. If I had any with me, if I knew what he thought the paper was, etc.

Anyway in regards to this story, yeah I think it sucks. Citizen's rights at traffic stops are quite vague, and don't skew in our favor.

why would you buy packaged beer from a bar? wouldnt it be way more expensive? i dont even think i know a single bar that sells packaged beer.

anyways back on topic, that video is stupid and that guy is a dipshit. if i were that border agent id let him go too just so i wouldnt have to deal with his dumbass. he kept asking her the same questions and she would answer, but he didnt get the answers he wanted so he kept asking like a little kid. that video just makes him look like a dumbass.

EDIT!

Sometimes they claim people have a broken tail light, and then kick it out themselves if they find anything.

I wish I was joking.

i saw that movie too

[Lartrak]

i saw that movie too

[/quote]

I actually don't know what you're talking about. If you don't think police do this, fine. Argue against me. Don't make broad assumptions based on nothing.

[|darc|]

anyways back on topic, that video is stupid and that guy is a dipshit. if i were that border agent id let him go too just so i wouldnt have to deal with his dumbass. he kept asking her the same questions and she would answer, but he didnt get the answers he wanted so he kept asking like a little kid. that video just makes him look like a dumbass.

I think he was being a douche too, but he wasn't asking repeatedly out of immaturity, he was asking it because if he wasn't being detained then he should have been free to go. His point is that he shouldn't have to do anything if he wasn't being detained and since he wasn't he could have just pulled off.

The real point here in my opinion is that since these checkpoints can't detain someone, under the law they can do absolutely nothing. If someone comes through the checkpoint and is doing whatever illegal thing they're checking for, they can just leave by saying they cannot be detained, anyway.

Also, if you read his previous posting on the issue, there are border patrol agents at places that aren't near the border that are checking people at checkpoints. In my mind, this is a dangerous precedent. I wouldn't want checkpoints all over the fucking place in the name of border control...

[ace]

Why do you hate America?

[cak!]

anyways back on topic, that video is stupid and that guy is a dipshit. if i were that border agent id let him go too just so i wouldnt have to deal with his dumbass. he kept asking her the same questions and she would answer, but he didnt get the answers he wanted so he kept asking like a little kid. that video just makes him look like a dumbass.

I think he was being a douche too, but he wasn't asking repeatedly out of immaturity, he was asking it because if he wasn't being detained then he should have been free to go. His point is that he shouldn't have to do anything if he wasn't being detained and since he wasn't he could have just pulled off.

The real point here in my opinion is that since these checkpoints can't detain someone, under the law they can do absolutely nothing. If someone comes through the checkpoint and is doing whatever illegal thing they're checking for, they can just leave by saying they cannot be detained, anyway.

Also, if you read his previous posting on the issue, there are border patrol agents at places that aren't near the border that are checking people at checkpoints. In my mind, this is a dangerous precedent. I wouldn't want checkpoints all over the fucking place in the name of border control...

1. just because he wasn't being detained doesn't mean they don't have the right to stop him and ask him questions. border patrol agents are police with a different name. to me this is no different than a drunk driving checkpoint.

2. these checkpoints most likely CAN detain someone. they probably felt he was more of an annoyance than a threat, so they let him go. i do however understand your argument, and it is somewhat valid. given the circumstances they could probably assume he wasn't a threat though.

3. @lardtrak i'm sure something like that has happened before, but i'm sure it happens rarely. i'm not calling your friend a liar, i'm just saying it's hard to believe.

4. i'm not supporting these cops in any way. i trust cops about as much as i trust a fat kid not to eat cake.