Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / May 2007
bogus pre-text stop
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Fred G. Mackey - 22 May 2007 01:35 GMT A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly.
The cop then told him that "a lot of people in this year and model car are up to no good" and let him off with a verbal warning to fix his windows - the cop never used any kind of tint meter to check the windows.
The car is a late '80s Lincoln Mark VII - I guess this is the new choice of cars for people who "are up to no good".
Scott en Aztlán - 22 May 2007 06:51 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day >allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >The car is a late '80s Lincoln Mark VII - I guess this is the new choice >of cars for people who "are up to no good". What is it with people and tinted windows - especially that cheap plastic film that just sticks onto the surface and looks like total sh.t?
For years now automobile glass has come from the factory with UV blocker built right into the glass - this keeps out most of the solar heat gain, so WTF do you need tinting for? All it does is reduce your visibility (kinda like wearing sunglasses at night - STUPID) and attract attention from cops (who HATE tinted windows because they cannot see inside your vehicle - and when they can't see your hands, they assume you're holding a gun and react accordingly). Plus the tinting film f.cks up the defrogger elements on your rear window.
In short, tinting has no upside and a HUGE downside, so why do it?
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Fred G. Mackey - 22 May 2007 07:40 GMT > "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > plastic film that just sticks onto the surface and looks like total > sh.t? Dunno about the cheap sh.t, but I like my tinted windows and I do think they look good. They'd look better if I had "limo" tint on my front side windows. Why do you want to see in my car anyway?
> For years now automobile glass has come from the factory with UV > blocker built right into the glass - this keeps out most of the solar > heat gain, so WTF do you need tinting for? hmm - you're getting dangerously close to the same perspective as SADDAM claiming that Corvettes are "useless". You're not there yet, but if I want my windows tinted, why should anyone stop me?
I like them - that is enough reason.
> All it does is reduce your > visibility Yeah - It does do that - particularly at night when I am backing out of a parking space. Hey, other people should have their lights on.
During the daytime, it doesn't reduce my visibility at all - no more than wearing sunglasses anyway.
> (kinda like wearing sunglasses at night - STUPID) and > attract attention from cops (who HATE tinted windows because they > cannot see inside your vehicle - and when they can't see your hands, > they assume you're holding a gun and react accordingly). I've been pulled over with my tinted windows before. Apparently MY car isn't on THE LIST of cars that people "who are up to no good" drive" and I was treated quite respectfully by the cop.
> Plus the > tinting film f.cks up the defrogger elements on your rear window. I've had absolutely no problem with that at all. Perhaps you got a bad tint job way back when, but my rear defroster works just fine even with the "limo" tint in back.
> In short, tinting has no upside and a HUGE downside, so why do it? Because I want to.
One could make similar arguments about your 'vette - except that cops wouldn't have a similar excuse to pull you over on the BS excuse that your tint is too dark - without even testing it.
And yet IIRC you have complained about being harassed by cops just because your car can accelerate too fast (or am I mis-remembering? - someone here complained about their car accelerating too fast while staying below the speed limit).
So maybe you consider tinted windows to be in the same class as pink flamingos on your front lawn, but they are legal - as is bad taste.
The point of my post was that they associated older once-luxury cars with people who "are up to no good". Let us know when they consider Corvette drivers to be "up to no good" just because you drive a car that could easily exceed the speed limit and tell us how you feel.
And note that I wasn't even the one pulled over, but my windows are just as dark as his, yet my car is much newer and probably isn't associated with people who "are up to no good".
Brent P - 22 May 2007 13:35 GMT > During the daytime, it doesn't reduce my visibility at all - no more > than wearing sunglasses anyway. Except at night visibility is considerably reduced. At least it was in the car with tinted windows I got to drive at night a couple of times. I could see much less than I could with my own cars.
Fred G. Mackey - 23 May 2007 03:13 GMT >>During the daytime, it doesn't reduce my visibility at all - no more >>than wearing sunglasses anyway. > > Except at night visibility is considerably reduced. At least it was in > the car with tinted windows I got to drive at night a couple of times. I > could see much less than I could with my own cars. Yeah - backing can be a real bitch at night sometimes with the "limo" tint in back, but fortunately, most of my driving is forwards.
Scott en Aztlán - 22 May 2007 14:45 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>> What is it with people and tinted windows - especially that cheap >> plastic film that just sticks onto the surface and looks like total [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > they look good. They'd look better if I had "limo" tint on my front >side windows. Why do you want to see in my car anyway? I don't, but cops sure do.
Personally, my concern is your ability to see out, not my ability to see in.
>if I want my windows tinted, why should anyone stop me? Um, because it's illegal? (I'm talking about the front windows, of course).
>> All it does is reduce your >> visibility > >Yeah - It does do that - particularly at night when I am backing out of >a parking space. Hey, other people should have their lights on. That says it all right there.
>One could make similar arguments about your 'vette What's illegal about my Corvette?
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Fred G. Mackey - 23 May 2007 03:37 GMT > "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I don't, but cops sure do. Nosy bastards. Whenever I'm pulled over - which is not a regular thing - I always roll down my window for the officers and keep my hands on the steering wheel so they can see them and not have to worry.
> Personally, my concern is your ability to see out, not my ability to > see in. The only time I have a problem is if I'm backing in a dimly lit parking lot at nite. I can see fine out the front windows and windshield even at nite.
>>if I want my windows tinted, why should anyone stop me? > > Um, because it's illegal? (I'm talking about the front windows, of > course). I just checked the laws here - they are strict as hell about tinting and I'm surely in violation. I'm lucky I drive a car not deemed to be common among people who are "up to no good".
http://csp.state.co.us/faq_detail.cfm?FAQ_ID=91
<quote> In Colorado, it’s legal to darken windows behind the driver’s seat as dark as you want them IF the front windows, driver’s side and passenger’s side, along with the windshield are at least 70% (clear automobile glass with NO tint).
Or, you can tint all of the windows in the car except the windshield to a maximum of 27%. Remember though that at no time, can your two, front side windows be darker than 27%.
Also in Colorado no mirrored or reflective tint is allowed on any window of the vehicle. </quote>
Mine aren't reflective, but my rear windows are definitely darker than 27% and I suspect my front windows are too since I told the shop to tint them as dark as the law allows in a state that allows 33% tint. I have nothing on the windshield - nor would I want any.
>>>All it does is reduce your >>>visibility [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That says it all right there. Yep - it's certainly more dangerous for people to be driving around at nite without lights than for me to have tinted windows.
There are some vehicles, which don't even have rear windows.
>>One could make similar arguments about your 'vette > > What's illegal about my Corvette? Hmmm - not sure what I was thinking there. I'm sure I didn't mean there was anything illegal about it though.
But tint laws seem to vary widely from state to state. The fine - IF I ever get a ticket for it would be cheaper than retinting them to comply with the stupid laws here.
Scott en Aztlán - 23 May 2007 04:10 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>> "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Nosy bastards. This is news to you?
>Whenever I'm pulled over - which is not a regular thing >- I always roll down my window for the officers and keep my hands on the >steering wheel so they can see them and not have to worry. Smart man. However, it seems that having tinted windows (especially on the "wrong" type of car) could be precisely what gets you pulled over in the first place.
>I just checked the laws here - they are strict as hell about tinting and >I'm surely in violation. I'm lucky I drive a car not deemed to be >common among people who are "up to no good". That's the problem with cops - any type of car you happen to be driving can be "common among people who are up to no good" if the cop wants it to be.
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Fred G. Mackey - 23 May 2007 04:22 GMT >>> One could make similar arguments about your 'vette >> >> What's illegal about my Corvette? > > Hmmm - not sure what I was thinking there. Okay - you snipped too much context.
Check back and you'll see that statement was made in response to:
>>> In short, tinting has no upside and a HUGE downside, so why do it? One could argue that your 'vette has no upside and a HUGE downside.
It's small (no room for passengers or cargo), a cop-magnet, poor mileage, higher insurance rates, more expensive to purchase in the first place, and it really won't get you where you're going any faster than my car will get me where I'm going - unless you want to risk ticket and/or arrest each time you drive.
I'm not arguing that you should get your windows tinted just as you're not arguing that I should drive a Corvette.
OTOH, I'm not asking you why you should drive a Corvette. I like my car just fine, but I wouldn't expect you to want to buy one.
Scott en Aztlán - 23 May 2007 15:13 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>> One could make similar arguments about your 'vette >>> >>> What's illegal about my Corvette? > >One could argue that your 'vette has no upside and a HUGE downside. You're insane.
It's primary upsides are POWER and HANDLING, making it a) an effective tool to escape the clutches of Sloths and MFFYs, and b) a BLAST to drive. It is also pretty nice to look at.
"No upside" my a.s!
>It's small (no room for passengers or cargo) That's an advantage - that means I don't have to act like a bus driver when lunch time rolls around; we'll all pile into someone else's SUV instead. As for cargo space, I don't use a screwdriver as a chisel, and I don't use a sports car to haul cargo.
>a cop-magnet That's the only downside I have found so far.
>poor mileage Define "poor." My car gets better mileage than most SUVs, not to mention the 2003 Mustang Cobra I used to have. And it's only a few MPG lower than the Acura TL I used to have.
>higher insurance rates Again, higher than what? My teenaged son pays more than double what I do to insure his Honda Civic.
>more expensive to purchase in the first place Not a problem - I can afford it. If price were my only criterion, I'd buy a Yaris.
>and it really won't get you where you're going any faster than my >car will get me where I'm going Ah, but I will have more fun getting there.
>unless you want to risk ticket and/or arrest each time you drive. According to you I already do (see your "cop-magnet" comment above).
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Brent P - 23 May 2007 15:23 GMT > Again, higher than what? My teenaged son pays more than double what I > do to insure his Honda Civic. With fart can and oversized wing?
Scott en Aztlán - 24 May 2007 14:49 GMT tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in rec.autos.driving:
>> Again, higher than what? My teenaged son pays more than double what I >> do to insure his Honda Civic. > >With fart can and oversized wing? No - just tinted windows. :)
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Fred G. Mackey - 24 May 2007 02:56 GMT > "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > tool to escape the clutches of Sloths and MFFYs, and b) a BLAST to > drive. It is also pretty nice to look at. You don't need a vette to escape the clutches of sloths and my car looks pretty nice too.
Of course, "nice to look at" is subjective. I think my car looks better with tinted windows.
> "No upside" my a.s! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > instead. As for cargo space, I don't use a screwdriver as a chisel, > and I don't use a sports car to haul cargo. Yeah - fair enough - I joked a while back that 5 people could get in my car to go to lunch. f.cking idiots didn't realize I was joking, but they all piled into it anyway.
>>a cop-magnet > > That's the only downside I have found so far. There ya' go!
>>poor mileage > > Define "poor." My car gets better mileage than most SUVs, not to > mention the 2003 Mustang Cobra I used to have. And it's only a few MPG > lower than the Acura TL I used to have. It's all relative.
>>higher insurance rates > > Again, higher than what? My teenaged son pays more than double what I > do to insure his Honda Civic. Higher than you would pay in another vehicle.
>>more expensive to purchase in the first place > > Not a problem - I can afford it. If price were my only criterion, I'd > buy a Yaris. Well, it's certainly your right to buy a Corvette, but I could afford one and I prefer the compromise I've made between a Yaris and a Corvette.
>>and it really won't get you where you're going any faster than my >>car will get me where I'm going > > Ah, but I will have more fun getting there. More fun that me?
>>unless you want to risk ticket and/or arrest each time you drive. > > According to you I already do (see your "cop-magnet" comment above). Which you admitted was the case.
Scott en Aztlán - 24 May 2007 14:55 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>You don't need a vette to escape the clutches of sloths No, but it's one of the better tools for the job.
>>>a cop-magnet >> >> That's the only downside I have found so far. > >There ya' go! Even that isn't so bad. Except for a couple of odd incidents toward the end of last month, it doesn't seem to attract much attention from cops.
>>>higher insurance rates >> >> Again, higher than what? My teenaged son pays more than double what I >> do to insure his Honda Civic. > >Higher than you would pay in another vehicle. Higher than a 911? Higher than a Murcielago?
>>>unless you want to risk ticket and/or arrest each time you drive. >> >> According to you I already do (see your "cop-magnet" comment above). > >Which you admitted was the case. People in Yarises can get tickets, too. You risk tickets and arrest no matter what you drive.
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Scott en Aztlán - 24 May 2007 14:58 GMT "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>>All it does is reduce your >>>>visibility [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Yep - it's certainly more dangerous for people to be driving around at >nite without lights than for me to have tinted windows. So we should equip pedestrians, bus stop benches, sign posts, garbage cans, and every other potential obstacle that you could run into with bright lights so that you can drive around half-blind at night?
 Signature MFFYCam Videos Galore: http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
Fred G. Mackey - 25 May 2007 05:11 GMT > "Fred G. Mackey" <do@not.spam> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > cans, and every other potential obstacle that you could run into with > bright lights so that you can drive around half-blind at night? Yes - that's why I have headlights.
Or is that bus-stop bench going to somehow sneak around and attack me from the rear?
FFS, my windshield is not tinted and even at night I can see fine out of my front windows..
I can see fine out of my back window too as long as there is light. The onyl time I ever have trouble seeing out the back is when I'm backing out of a parking space in an unlit lot at nite.
I can still check my mirrors and if I'm really unsure I can stop and open the door and look behind me - you know, for those pesky toddlers who crawl behind cars at nite - or drop the top.
Larry Bud - 22 May 2007 14:32 GMT > A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day > allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The car is a late '80s Lincoln Mark VII - I guess this is the new choice > of cars for people who "are up to no good". I think I've said this before, but I've been pulled over no less than twice in my Vette just because I "looked too young" to be driving a Vette. I was in my mid 20's at the time. No laws were broken, no tickets written. I guess I was "DWY" (driving while young).
I'm no cop lover, but I can see both sides of this issue.
Fred G. Mackey - 23 May 2007 03:26 GMT >>A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day >>allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I'm no cop lover, but I can see both sides of this issue. What's the other side of this issue?
Cops pulling people over because they think they look guilty of something because they're driving a car it doesn't look like they should be able to afford or because they think they're driving a car that's too shitty (in the case of my friend)?
Hardpan - 23 May 2007 23:22 GMT >>>A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day >>>allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >be able to afford or because they think they're driving a car that's too >shitty (in the case of my friend)? If you live in America, the cops need "Probable Cause" to make a legitimate stop. Driving in a certain public location is NOT probable cause, no matter what the black-clad thug in uniform tells you.
If you open up your yap and say the wrong words you will be cuffed and stuffed, so here is good old uncle Hardpans' 12-step advice lesson in dealing with unwarranted police stops while driving in a motor vehicle on public roads.
1. Be polite to the officer at all times, unless s/he becomes abusive. Stay rational no matter what he says or does. Remember s/he is not YOUR attorney and s/he doesn't know all of the "laws" that have been passed by your congress-critters anymore then you do.
Hell, s/he might even be one of the very few *good* honest police officers that is actually just doing his job, so watch your manners.
2. Don't make any sudden moves or you can end up with a cocked and locked 9mm Glock pointed at your mug. There are plenty of people that are dead and buried due to "Blue Suicide" (unless, of course, that's the way you want to die).
Hey, to each his own, I always say <bg>
3. Ask the officer why you were stopped. Keep asking if you can leave are you free to go. If the cops says no, ask why not. Again and again!
4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on.
This isn't Nazi Germany where you are asked for your papers, or a Luger is drawn and you are shot on the spot for refusing to speak, at least not yet :-(
5. Don't volunteer to take the "sobriety walk" if you are sober. Tell the gun-toting SOB you want a urine or blood test for alcohol in your system. "Don't drop a dime and don't walk *their* line!". They can claim you stumbled or tipped and haul you off to jail, even if you are sober as a church mouse.
6. If the officer calls in backup (another officer or three or six) you are now perceived as a danger (most modern-day cops are quite cowardly to say the least) or they want more witnesses and guns on hips to scare you into spilling the beans, if any.
More then likely you are with someone else who can be used as a witness in a courtroom and the donut-munchers needs some cover when they perjure themselves in court (you _did_ know that cops routinely lie in court, as a rule of thumb, didn't you?).
Just ask any criminal defense attorney who hasn't worked as a deputy DA, (meaning s/he covered for the police) if you don't believe it.
7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you with, you just gave up your rights protecting you from illegal search, in a court of "law" if you say "OK" or "go ahead".
8. If the coffee-addled, badge-wearing government-paid marksman wants permission to search your trunk (or your toolbox/camper-shell in a pickup) always say "NO"!
In some instances and states police are allowed to search the immediate passenger compartment, but _NOT_ the trunk or other place out of reach to the occupants, unless they have PC, which they usually don't have. They need a warrant to search without your go-ahead.
Again, NEVER give any permission to do so no matter what they say.
9. A cop can _legally_ lie his or her head off about what they "Have On You", but often this is a pretence or a flat-out lie. Its a scare tactic to use you to "confess" yourself right into a jail-cell.
DONT FALL FOR IT !
Just remain quiet, polite and rational and do not give up your right to remain silent. You don't need to be talking to these badge-wearing, constitutional-law hating, cowardly donut thieves anyway, do you?
Also, it doesn't hurt to put a "what kind of an idiot do you think I am" look on your face when these six-pack beer-swilling, pork-rind chomping goons pull that old trick out of the hat, however. They cat cite you for that, at least not yet.
10. If the fuzz does decide to cuff and stuff you, just remember that they are nowadays a highly unionized, heavily militarized (SWAT) agents of the government, who are often enforcing unconstitutional laws; the same Constitution they took an oath to uphold and defend.
IOW, they are hypocrites. Nothing on this earth is worse then then a hypocrite! Nothing!
11.If you *are* arrested, by doing a few hours in jail and perhaps spending thousands of your hard-earned dollars defending yourself from the onslaught of the cops' partners-in-crime, the District Attorneys' office, you will have been doing what every American should be doing: upholding the valid constitutional laws and ignoring the rest.
12. Lastly, always remember that the police are flawed, defective human creatures, like all of us and many, if not most police officers are guilty of mild to very serious crimes, either very recently or in their pasts. The police "accidentally" kill innocent people all the time and are NOT held accountable in most cases.
The point really is that no matter the nice uniform, the shiny badge or the big gun is, this man-ape standing before you is no better then you are, and probably much, much worse, as defective human killer-apes go.
The homicide and suicide rates, as well as so-called "disabilty" claims (s/he stubbed a toe while in hot pursuit) are the _very_ highest amongst the members (and former members) of the human-swine club, not to mention the criminal activities they they are often involved up to their flat-footed snoots in, all too often.
Don't give the bastards any ammunition to use against you in a court of so-called "law"! Shut your damn mouth, remember everything and everyone involved, write it down and then find a good attorney.
Remember: "JUST SAY "NO" to the police!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
Brent P - 23 May 2007 23:40 GMT > If you live in America, the cops need "Probable Cause" to make a > legitimate stop. That was solved long ago by making everyone satisify the conditions. The most common form is to set the speed limit much lower than the actual speed of traffic. Thusly driving normally is a violation, driving legally is an odd behavior that generates reasonable suspicion and cause for a stop.
> Driving in a certain public location is NOT probable > cause, no matter what the black-clad thug in uniform tells you. Then they just call it a safety check... get some federal money and run a good old soviet style checkpoint under a different name. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/17/1767.asp
> 1. Be polite to the officer at all times, unless s/he becomes abusive. > Stay rational no matter what he says or does. Remember s/he is not > YOUR attorney and s/he doesn't know all of the "laws" that have been > passed by your congress-critters anymore then you do. They actually know less. They do what they are told. They are foot soliders.
> Hell, s/he might even be one of the very few *good* honest police > officers that is actually just doing his job, so watch your manners. Like a good robot.
> 3. Ask the officer why you were stopped. Keep asking if you can leave > are you free to go. If the cops says no, ask why not. Again and again! They won't like that. Either of it.
> 4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where > you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you > are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on. They don't like that. It can upset them.
> This isn't Nazi Germany where you are asked for your papers, or a > Luger is drawn and you are shot on the spot for refusing to speak, > at least not yet :-( You're woefully out of date. It is the new soviet america and you better have your papers in order if you are driving. Soon this will be extended to peds.
> 5. Don't volunteer to take the "sobriety walk" if you are sober. Tell > the gun-toting SOB you want a urine or blood test for alcohol in your > system. "Don't drop a dime and don't walk *their* line!". They can > claim you stumbled or tipped and haul you off to jail, even if you are > sober as a church mouse. Good luck with that.
> 6. If the officer calls in backup (another officer or three or six) > you are now perceived as a danger (most modern-day cops are quite > cowardly to say the least) or they want more witnesses and guns on > hips to scare you into spilling the beans, if any. It's all about intimidation and fear.
> More then likely you are with someone else who can be used as > a witness in a courtroom and the donut-munchers needs some cover when > they perjure themselves in court (you _did_ know that cops routinely > lie in court, as a rule of thumb, didn't you?). I've seen them lie.
> 7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say > it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you > with, you just gave up your rights protecting you from illegal search, > in a court of "law" if you say "OK" or "go ahead". Of course one needs to say no. But saying no doesn't make them happy.
You do understand they will just bring the dog out and say the dog alerted or have the dog fake an alert.
> 10. If the fuzz does decide to cuff and stuff you, just remember that > they are nowadays a highly unionized, heavily militarized (SWAT) > agents of the government, who are often enforcing unconstitutional > laws; the same Constitution they took an oath to uphold and defend. Yep. The era of the peace officer is gone, they are closer to an occupation force now.
> IOW, they are hypocrites. Nothing on this earth is worse then then a > hypocrite! Nothing! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > should be doing: upholding the valid constitutional laws and ignoring > the rest. The problem is, the courts have been subverted as well. We are heading towards the 12th century and charges related to driving are leading the way with streamlining the system.
> 12. Lastly, always remember that the police are flawed, defective > human creatures, like all of us and many, if not most police officers > are guilty of mild to very serious crimes, either very recently or in > their pasts. The police "accidentally" kill innocent people all the > time and are NOT held accountable in most cases. They (with the judges) *ARE* the law all too often.
Hardpan - 26 May 2007 12:23 GMT >> If you live in America, the cops need "Probable Cause" to make a >> legitimate stop. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >good old soviet style checkpoint under a different name. >http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/17/1767.asp Right on. Of course its all done under the guise of safety these days.
>> 1. Be polite to the officer at all times, unless s/he becomes abusive. >> Stay rational no matter what he says or does. Remember s/he is not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >They actually know less. They do what they are told. They are foot >soliders. You bet!
>> Hell, s/he might even be one of the very few *good* honest police >> officers that is actually just doing his job, so watch your manners. > >Like a good robot. Or a soldier, which is what they act like these days.
Didn't someone at one time think having soldiers act as a police force was a very BAD idea?
I think it was all those dead, white, evil founders of this country, as I recall.
>> 3. Ask the officer why you were stopped. Keep asking if you can leave >> are you free to go. If the cops says no, ask why not. Again and again! > >They won't like that. Either of it. I like watching humans get upset. Particulary, stupid ignorant people like the fuzz.
>> 4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where >> you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you >> are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on. > >They don't like that. It can upset them. See above. Who cares ?
>> This isn't Nazi Germany where you are asked for your papers, or a >> Luger is drawn and you are shot on the spot for refusing to speak, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >have your papers in order if you are driving. Soon this will be extended >to peds. It already is in some states, if I am not mistaken.
>> 5. Don't volunteer to take the "sobriety walk" if you are sober. Tell >> the gun-toting SOB you want a urine or blood test for alcohol in your [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Good luck with that. Been there done that and I didn't go to jail either.
Needless to say but cops and other proto-fascist human swine don't scare me much.
>> 6. If the officer calls in backup (another officer or three or six) >> you are now perceived as a danger (most modern-day cops are quite >> cowardly to say the least) or they want more witnesses and guns on >> hips to scare you into spilling the beans, if any. > >It's all about intimidation and fear. Yes, it is.
>> More then likely you are with someone else who can be used as >> a witness in a courtroom and the donut-munchers needs some cover when >> they perjure themselves in court (you _did_ know that cops routinely >> lie in court, as a rule of thumb, didn't you?). > >I've seen them lie. So have I, on the stand and out in public. Disgusting !
>> 7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say >> it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you >> with, you just gave up your rights protecting you from illegal search, >> in a court of "law" if you say "OK" or "go ahead". > >Of course one needs to say no. But saying no doesn't make them happy. Better that then have your right to fourth amendment protections given away to the swine and their buddies down at the DA's office.
Beside, why would anyone want to make a cops day ? :-)
Better to have him go home pissed off, beat his wife and kick the dog, I always say <grin>
>You do understand they will just bring the dog out and say the dog >alerted or have the dog fake an alert. They could but they will still have to plant evidence if you have nothing they can find.
That's why I advise keeping up with the "can I go now", routine.
They will look like damn fools in a courtroom when they cant come up with a good reason for holding a free person without good cuase.
>> 10. If the fuzz does decide to cuff and stuff you, just remember that >> they are nowadays a highly unionized, heavily militarized (SWAT) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Yep. The era of the peace officer is gone, they are closer to an >occupation force now. Yes, or as I say, the days of "Adam-12" are long gone, right along with many of our past freedoms.
>> IOW, they are hypocrites. Nothing on this earth is worse then then a >> hypocrite! Nothing! [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >towards the 12th century and charges related to driving are leading the >way with streamlining the system. Yes, they even take drivers licenses away for back-child support payments these days, as well as stealing cars outright if you are in the "wrong neighborhood", whatever that means, taking automobiles without due process.
Whooda thunk it could happen here in Amerika?
>> 12. Lastly, always remember that the police are flawed, defective >> human creatures, like all of us and many, if not most police officers [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >They (with the judges) *ARE* the law all too often. That's why I like the idea of "hanging judges" (pun intended) <bg>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
taxthis2007@yahoo.com - 24 May 2007 02:16 GMT > >>>A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day > >>>allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 150 lines] > > - Show quoted text - You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus charge.
Nate Nagel - 24 May 2007 02:21 GMT > You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would > be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus > charge. IMHO anyone who could utter the above sentence with a straight face should be deported to some third world hellhole. No, you can't have my civil rights, I'm still using them, a.shole.
nate
 Signature replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Matthew T. Russotto - 25 May 2007 22:03 GMT >> You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would >> be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus >> charge. > >IMHO anyone who could utter the above sentence with a straight face >should be deported to some third world hellhole. Perhaps Gitmo?
>No, you can't have my civil rights, I'm still using them, a.shole. That line, unfortunately, is only effective after shooting the offender. And not for long after that.
 Signature There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one.
Hardpan - 26 May 2007 12:18 GMT >> You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would >> be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >should be deported to some third world hellhole. No, you can't have my >civil rights, I'm still using them, a.shole. Bingo!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
Jim Yanik - 26 May 2007 18:32 GMT >>> You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society >>> would be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a >>> bogus charge. Isn't that what the USSR used to do? Is he suggesting that we adopt that system?
I SWEAR these schmucks never actually think through what they propose.
>>IMHO anyone who could utter the above sentence with a straight face >>should be deported to some third world hellhole. No, you can't have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -Thomas Jefferson
 Signature Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net
Brent P - 27 May 2007 04:44 GMT > Isn't that what the USSR used to do? > Is he suggesting that we adopt that system? > > I SWEAR these schmucks never actually think through what they propose. They are like that in real life. When I mentioned to a cop at the check point that 'this was like living in a communist country' it went right over his head. He didn't even grasp that what he was doing was one of the things what we were supposedly fighting the cold war to prevent.
Brent P - 24 May 2007 03:10 GMT > You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would > be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus > charge. Boy, do you think your masters are going to favor you because you serve them? Hell, they'll have you die on a whim. Your family, your children, aren't any safer than those of the rest of us. You better wake up quick boy and figure out what the Bill of Rights is really about.
BTW, seems your masters don't think you'll do the deed when the time comes. As some predicted years ago, the push to have foreign nationals as police officers has begun. Foreign nationals will have even less of a clue about 'rights' and they won't have a problem harming US citizens. An american cop might start questioning what he is doing once the orders go beyond some threshold.... the foreign national, from some keptocracy knows that's just the way police are and it won't be his neighbor he's abusing..
----------------- http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/may/16/santa-fe-cops-may-recruit-mexicans/ Santa Fe cops may recruit Mexicans
Associated Press Wednesday, May 16, 2007
SANTA FE . The Santa Fe Police Department is considering the possibility of recruiting Mexican nationals to fill vacant police jobs. -----------------------
Think about that next time an illegal alien is let go because that's what the policy is.... (google sactuary city) Then again, maybe if you do real well, the president of Mexico might give your local PD an award too.
-------------------
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/police/release05_1103.htm
APD Presented "Ohtli" Award from the Mexican Government
The Mexican Government has chosen Assistant Chief Rudy Landeros of the Austin Police Department as a recipient of the prestigious "Ohtli Award". The award will be presented on Thursday, November 6, at 8:00 a.m. in the Stone's Crossing room at the Four Seasons Hotel located at 98 San Jacinto Boulevard. Assistant Chief Rudy Landeros will accept the award for the Austin Police Department with Mexican President, Vicente Fox, in attendance.
In recognition of the Austin Police Department's efforts in promoting public policy and the rights of immigrants, the Mexican Government has chosen Assistant Chief Landeros as the recipient of the "Ohtli Award". <...> -------------------
Hardpan - 26 May 2007 12:18 GMT >> You seem to have a real attitude problem , boy. I think society would >> be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >comes. As some predicted years ago, the push to have foreign nationals as >police officers has begun. Some banks are already employing armed Mexicans (not native-born) as bank guards, out here in CA.
Uncle Bush is using Blackwater mercenaries in Iraq, calling them "contractors" (contract killers is more like it) in place of of US troops.
How much long will it be until "Pedro" from Chihuahua, Mexico is riding shotgun with a fellow blue bandito here in the US as a police officer?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
Scott en Aztlán - 26 May 2007 12:41 GMT tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in ca.driving:
>SANTA FE . The Santa Fe Police Department is considering the possibility >of recruiting Mexican nationals to fill vacant police jobs. Probably because they will work for less money.
Hardpan - 26 May 2007 12:18 GMT >> >>>A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day >> >>>allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 154 lines] >be better off with you in jail even if we have to make up a bogus >charge. So you like the idea of living in a fascist, corporatocrasy, do you little man?
Go back to speeding in your patrol car while heading down to the local "donut hole" with your pals, bacon-breath ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
Lash Rambo - 27 May 2007 03:06 GMT > If you open up your yap and say the wrong words you will be cuffed > and stuffed, so here is good old uncle Hardpans' 12-step advice > lesson in dealing with unwarranted police stops while driving in a > motor vehicle on public roads. > > 1. Be polite to the officer at all times, Good advice.
> 3. Ask the officer why you were stopped. Keep asking if you can leave > are you free to go. If the cops says no, ask why not. Again and again! If he says no, I recommend you drop it; else, he may feel you're testing his authority and, thus, need a personal demonstration (by being written a ticket, or worse).
> 4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where > you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you > are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on. Just tell him you're going home, or to work, or shopping. After all, you are, eventually, right?
> 7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say > it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you > with, you just gave up your rights protecting you from illegal search, > in a court of "law" if you say "OK" or "go ahead". Hmm.... Seems were a cop bent on framing you, he'd write you up whether or not you gave him access to your car, then plant the evidence while you were being hauled off. In other words, you're f.cked no matter what.
Hardpan - 27 May 2007 09:18 GMT >> If you open up your yap and say the wrong words you will be cuffed >> and stuffed, so here is good old uncle Hardpans' 12-step advice [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >his authority and, thus, need a personal demonstration (by being written a >ticket, or worse). I agree to a point. I have gotten out of traffic citations by being honest and polite with the cop, but that was some time ago now.
Things have really changed with the militarization of the police into unconstitutional military-style sniper/spotter tag-teams and most the the old timers are gone or retired now, many in disgust at what had once been a stand-up profession where it took some guts to be a cop.
No more it doesn't.
These new breed of cowards who wear black-clad outfits, face-masks to hide their faces, body-armor and carry sub-machineguns make me sick.
>> 4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where >> you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you >> are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on. > >Just tell him you're going home, or to work, or shopping. After all, you >are, eventually, right? Bingo!!!
>> 7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say >> it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >not you gave him access to your car, then plant the evidence while you were >being hauled off. In other words, you're f.cked no matter what. Well, I might be and I might not be.
You see, if anyone dared to frame me, they would have a real rough road to ride all the way back to hell, where I would gladly dispatch them when, not if, I got my freedom back ;-/
Payback is such an awful bitch and most humans NEVER really think that some very bad things might happen to them when they screw around with other peoples' freedoms and property so cavalierly, passing law after law and hoping no one ever notices, as it happens so slowly over time.
Unfortunately, they are dead wrong.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe I did well and maybe I led the battle but nobody ever said we were going to win this thing at any point in time. Eternal vigilance is required and there have to be people who step up to the plate, who believe in liberty, and who are willing to fight for it."
-- Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Brent P - 27 May 2007 21:11 GMT > Things have really changed with the militarization of the police into > unconstitutional military-style sniper/spotter tag-teams and most the > the old timers are gone or retired now, many in disgust at what had > once been a stand-up profession where it took some guts to be a cop. > No more it doesn't. Certainly. In various cross posted threads with the cop groups I have argued that police work in a free society is difficult by definition and it is part of the price of freedom. Making police work easy, which seems to be the aim of far too many, means an end to freedom. Needless to say the point was not comprehended.
> These new breed of cowards who wear black-clad outfits, face-masks to > hide their faces, body-armor and carry sub-machineguns make me sick. Me too. Instead of heading towards the sci-fi future of 'star trek' we are headed towards the one of 'dark angel' and 'a scanner darkly'. Something more like 'a brave new world' or '1984'. Or even the fall of the republic in 'star wars'.
> Payback is such an awful bitch and most humans NEVER really think that > some very bad things might happen to them when they screw around with > other peoples' freedoms and property so cavalierly, passing law after > law and hoping no one ever notices, as it happens so slowly over time. > Unfortunately, they are dead wrong. Not only that, we see these same idiots chastising Ron Paul for daring to mention the obvious in a presidential debate. People around the world just want to be left the f*ck alone. It's really that simple. They want to be left alone, not bothered by the government where they live, by their neighbors, and certainly not a foreign government.
The militarized police, the checkpoints, and much of the rest are federally funded programs. The federal government has been slowly taking over the state and local governments. The laws we see on the state and local level seem to follow centralized templates or are even blackmailed into place by the federal government.
I don't think it is too far fetched to predict another civil war in the USA. There are number of states already begining to show signs of rebelion against the federal government legislatively. With Texas, I've heard that people have already promised a shooting war if they come to take their land. I wouldn't go bet a grand that there will be a civil war, but if the right or wrong series of events occurs, I would not be surprised by it either.
Hardpan - 31 May 2007 06:43 GMT >> Things have really changed with the militarization of the police into >> unconstitutional military-style sniper/spotter tag-teams and most the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >to be the aim of far too many, means an end to freedom. Needless to say >the point was not comprehended. Of course not. We no longer live in a society that understands such concepts. That's really the core of the problem, right there.
>> These new breed of cowards who wear black-clad outfits, face-masks to >> hide their faces, body-armor and carry sub-machineguns make me sick. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >more like 'a brave new world' or '1984'. Or even the fall of the republic >in 'star wars'. Yes, that is what I envision myself. Whatever it is, it will not be pretty, but we are past the point of stopping it now until many more people are incarcerated and destroyed by this behemoth.
>> Payback is such an awful bitch and most humans NEVER really think that >> some very bad things might happen to them when they screw around with [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >to be left alone, not bothered by the government where they live, by >their neighbors, and certainly not a foreign government. The government we have right now has become foreign to the concept of freedom and liberty, all cloaked up in a pretense of existing only for our safety and well-being.
"People get the government they deserve."
Its an old saying and still true.
>The militarized police, the checkpoints, and much of the rest are >federally funded programs. The federal government has been slowly taking >over the state and local governments. The laws we see on the state and >local level seem to follow centralized templates or are even blackmailed >into place by the federal government. And much of it because the wrong side won the first Civil War, to a large extent, allowing for an expanded federal government and states rights to be interfered with by same.
>I don't think it is too far fetched to predict another civil war in the >USA. There are number of states already begining to show signs of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >war, but if the right or wrong series of events occurs, I would not be >surprised by it either. Could be, but I have my doubts about a new civil war until things get far, far worse then they are right now.
More "safety" checkpoints, Gitmo-style prison camps and other tools of the totalitarian-proletariat police state will have to be in place before most people wake up, and by that time it will be far too late.
IMO, people in the US at present are still far too comfortable living in a proto-fascist nanny state to even think about picking up weapons and taking back their liberty by force of arms.
Hell, most of them cant be bothered to even get out and vote every four years, much less conceive of casting a "vote" in another manner far more "inconvenient" and less safe then the ballot box.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe I did well and maybe I led the battle but nobody ever said we were going to win this thing at any point in time. Eternal vigilance is required and there have to be people who step up to the plate, who believe in liberty, and who are willing to fight for it."
-- Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Hardpan - 27 May 2007 09:18 GMT >> If you open up your yap and say the wrong words you will be cuffed >> and stuffed, so here is good old uncle Hardpans' 12-step advice [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >his authority and, thus, need a personal demonstration (by being written a >ticket, or worse). I agree to a point. I have gotten out of traffic citations by being honest and polite with the cop, but that was some time ago now.
Things have really changed with the militarization of the police into unconstitutional military-style sniper/spotter tag-teams and most the the old timers are gone or retired now, many in disgust at what had once been a stand-up profession where it took some guts to be a cop.
No more it doesn't.
These new breed of cowards who wear black-clad outfits, face-masks to hide their faces, body-armor and carry sub-machineguns make me sick.
>> 4. Do not answer ANY questions about where you were going or where >> you came from, particularly if you did nothing wrong and know that you >> are legal and the heat doesn't have a case to stand on. > >Just tell him you're going home, or to work, or shopping. After all, you >are, eventually, right? Bingo!!!
>> 7. If the cops want to search your car _ALWAYS_ say "NO", and say >> it often. If that crooked cop plants something in your car to book you [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >not you gave him access to your car, then plant the evidence while you were >being hauled off. In other words, you're f.cked no matter what. Well, I might be and I might not be.
You see, if anyone dared to frame me, they would have a real rough road to ride all the way back to hell, where I would gladly dispatch them when, not if, I got my freedom back ;-/
Payback is such an awful bitch and most humans NEVER really think that some very bad things might happen to them when they screw around with other peoples' freedoms and property so cavalierly, passing law after law and hoping no one ever notices, as it happens so slowly over time.
Unfortunately, they are dead wrong.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe I did well and maybe I led the battle but nobody ever said we were going to win this thing at any point in time. Eternal vigilance is required and there have to be people who step up to the plate, who believe in liberty, and who are willing to fight for it."
-- Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Paul Hovnanian P.E. - 30 May 2007 21:09 GMT > A friend of mine was telling me he got pulled over the other day > allegedly because his windows were tinted too darkly. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The car is a late '80s Lincoln Mark VII - I guess this is the new choice > of cars for people who "are up to no good". I always thought the choice of most riff-raff was a Crown Victoria. :-)
 Signature Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Fast wine, loose cars, old women.
|
|
|