Another Blow to the Constitution

[BUZO71]

No, but refusing to exit a vehicle when officers have probable cause to search it does warrant such treatment.

+1

 

[wakeadrian]

No, but refusing to exit a vehicle when officers have probable cause to search it does warrant such treatment.

I agree, however, they had said that the dog gave them probable cause which he didn't ever see happen, and when he asked them to show him again what the dog did, they refused. Then they wouldn't show the other LEO when they asked (Which I find hard to believe). Which makes me want to call BS on their part.

(Assuming all of what he said is true)

 

[gunnoob75]

They didn't find anything in his car. So the dog didn't actually smell anything. (It couldn't have. I can't smell a bacon burger if there's no bacon around.) Enough said.

 

[candyman]

the dog dosnt have a secret handshake
when they hit on something they go ape
if the dog had hit on somethin he would be complaining about how the dog tryed to claw its way threw his trunk and messed up his paintjob

 

[gunnoob75]

More evidence that they didn't have probable cause.

A hillsboro police officer (Female) stepped on my head once while I was trying to tell them to get the two knee's off of Adrian's back while we were not resisting, laying face down, in handcuffs. Was I being a little belligerent? "She's f'ing PREGNANT!", yes. Did they need to tackle us with eight officers when we complied with their initial command to lay down, from all the way down the street (Nearly two blocks away)? No.

Oh yeah, she was four months pregnant.


The point is, people with Authority can do whatever they want. Do not believe that anything, constitution or laws, will protect you from anyone. I'm glad this guy pushed the envelope. More people should, and not just roll over and play dead so they can make it home in time for dinner.

 

[wakeadrian]

More evidence that they didn't have probable cause.

A hillsboro police officer (Female) stepped on my head once while I was trying to tell them to get the two knee's off of Adrian's back while we were not resisting, laying face down, in handcuffs. Was I being a little belligerent? "She's f'ing PREGNANT!", yes. Did they need to tackle us with eight officers when we complied with their initial command to lay down, from all the way down the street (Nearly two blocks away)? No.

Oh yeah, she was four months pregnant.


The point is, people with Authority can do whatever they want. Do not believe that anything, constitution or laws, will protect you from anyone. I'm glad this guy pushed the envelope. More people should, and not just roll over and play dead so they can make it home in time for dinner.

Also, for the record, it was wrong place at the wrong time. They treated us like that and then found out we had absolutely no involvement what-so-ever! Stood us up, uncuffed us, and said "Uhh.. sorry.." And that was it.
Joe saying we were not resisting is an understatement. I actually thought we were in danger at first and that's why they were telling us to get down, not to become suspects. So HECK YEAH I was complying!
But they still treated us like crap because some guy "thought that it might have been us" from 2 blocks away when it was at night .:nuts:

 

[candyman]

atleast you got a sry ive never got that befor

 

[gunnoob75]

We got a sorry from two of the eight officers. The other officers were no where to be found. I couldn't find the female officer, either.

To this day, I no longer comply with Hillsboro police when I don't have to.

 

[BUZO71]

I agree, however, they had said that the dog gave them probable cause which he didn't ever see happen, and when he asked them to show him again what the dog did, they refused. Then they wouldn't show the other LEO when they asked (Which I find hard to believe). Which makes me want to call BS on their part.

(Assuming all of what he said is true)

Yeah, here's a little pet peave of mine. People assume they have the right to see the evidence right there on the scene, but they don't. So, they don't have to show him anything.

For instance, traffic stops. People want to see the radar. In the past, some officer probably let them see the radar. There is no requirement to allow speeders to see the radar on scene. If they want to see the evidence, go to court.

 

[candyman]

your missing the point theres no evidence to see

 

[BUZO71]

your missing the point theres no evidence to see

right... and you know this how?

 

[candyman]

it isnt subjective
if it was they wouldnt be able to use it as cause
either the dog gos crazy or he dosnt

besides they let him go

 

[BUZO71]

it isnt subjective
if it was they wouldnt be able to use it as cause
either the dog gos crazy or he dosnt

besides they let him go

Well, not when it comes to K9's. Yeah, they let him go... after he went to jail the result of the search doesn't change the probable cause.. again, they have no reason to show him anything at the scene.

 

[treemanx]

Got a little more of this story folks.....

Apparently, the video at the begining of this thread is the second run in with Border Patrol for this guy. The confrontation that caused this guy to be in trouble with the Border Patrol agents is captured on video tape, by the guy himself, as he tries to travel through a Border Patrol checkpoint 100 miles from the Mexico border.

Heres the link to the video..........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFS7oZtE8Ks

Adds a whole new angle to this story, very interesting.

 

[jason97496]

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/pastor_beaten_border_patrol_041809

Fox News in Phoenix ran a story on this last night

 

[capdek]

If we're truthful, the fact is, most of us want tougher borders and, as a result, we have indirectly given the border patrol much more leeway to defend our borders. And the price we pay for this is a loss of some of our freedoms and liberties within 100 miles of our border. The question is what do we want - a tightened border with some loss of liberty, or no loss of liberty and a more porous border? Practically, I don't think we can have it both ways.
There's no doubt many LEOs are becoming much more over-zealous in how they treat the public and are probably pushing their authority beyond what the constitution allows. But this is understandable when we realize police are only human, and they are constantly confronted with the dregs of society most of the time.
There is no law that I know of that I currently would not comply with - even though I don't necessarily agree with all of them (I don't know if I would comply with a law that requires all law-abiding citizens to surrender their firearms for example).
Because of this, I have made the personal decision to comply with LEOs - even when I'm not obligated to under the constitution - because I understand what LEOs are up against most of the time. But it's equally important for civilians to constantly remind law enforcement that it is we who grant them the authority they have, and a requirement of that authority is that they never lose sight of their obligation to uphold and defend the constitutional rights of the civilians they are sworn to serve and protect.

 

[Trlsmn]

Got a little more of this story folks.....

Apparently, the video at the begining of this thread is the second run in with Border Patrol for this guy. The confrontation that caused this guy to be in trouble with the Border Patrol agents is captured on video tape, by the guy himself, as he tries to travel through a Border Patrol checkpoint 100 miles from the Mexico border.

Heres the link to the video..........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFS7oZtE8Ks

Adds a whole new angle to this story, very interesting.

Great vid thanks, the guy may be provoking a situation but he is asserting his rights and I appreciate him for that.

 

[BUZO71]

Wow.... what an idiot.... he refuses to hear the law...

 

[BUZO71]

Great vid thanks, the guy may be provoking a situation but he is asserting his rights and I appreciate him for that.

but he's not asserting his rights. The law gives BPA the right to do certain things, this apparently one of them. BPA Hutchinson told him the law but he refused to listen.
Asserting his rights would apply to him if he was right, but he was not.

 

[candyman]

that guys a jackass by the end of the vid i wanted to beat him