Attorney Shield, gets you face to face with legal counsel in less than 30 seconds. Developed by LackLuster and Long Island Audit. Please get the app, the first call is free.
FOIA their body camera. You do have everything on camera. When you go to your first court date, if you haven’t received it yet, tell the Judge you have evidence in your defense that you have requested but the City/County/Parrish hasn’t yet provided it.
In 2016 or 2017, window tint became a primary offense in Ohio, where it had previously been a secondary offense. In 2017, I got pulled over by an Ohio state cop because of my tint. The cop held me up for 45 minutes. During that stop, he asked me 4 times if the address on my license was my current address. The fourth time, I looked at him and said, "I've answered that question 3 times. If you can't remember my answer, maybe you should see a doctor." He didn't like that and shouted, "just answer the question! I looked at him and said "I already did. Are you going to write me a ticket, or am I free to go?" Of course I got a ticket, and then the cop followed me 6 miles out of town. I put my cruise control on 54mph. Eventually, he got bored and turned around, probably looking for someone else to victimize. 2017 me wasn't as financially secure as 2025 me, so if it ever happens again, you can bet I'm going to fight it.
I once had a cop insist I lower my window ALL THE WAY DOWN during a traffic stop in a rain storm… he said, and I QUOTE, “If I have to stand out in the rain and get wet, you and your car can get wet too”. After the rain damaged my interior of the car, I submitted a complaint with the county sheriff and was told to “stop stirring sh!t or I’d get thrown in jail”. What was the offense you ask? Driving 12mph in a parking lot (technically private property) and “I appeared to be traveling too fast for conditions”
I had a sheriff of a county (the actual SHERIFF) tell me he would bury me under the new jail! This county had broke ground on a new annex. I believed he would actually do it!!! Karma ALWAYS comes around though and he got arrested by his own deputies for driving while REAL intoxicated and he lost his job!! Then he died a few years later of a heart attack! Karma is a bitch!!!🤷
@@pache2112 That's not a good ending at all. But I see your point. I would write an ending like this: The Sheriff was sentenced to fines and costs of $2000 and 10 weekends serving at the animal shelter. 5 years later, the former Sheriff is still serving voluntarily at the county animal shelter in early retirement. Isn't that much better?
@@bchap1233...if it is an "emergency vehicle". Cop's personal cars can't have illegal levels of tint, but they all do anyway. Rules for thee, not for me.
Cops and some citizens feel that when you assert your rights you’re making yourself look guilty, and if you have nothing to hide it shouldn’t matter. But it’s exactly those stigmas that hurts our rights even more, and is more of a reason to always assert them.
@@princequestly2218 It’s also a stigma that lets you be more easily controlled by governmental ‘agents.’ It’s way easier to have people police their own thoughts and feelings, to fall in line with ‘society’ than to force them to do it by an external means.
Agree with statement of existing stigma when defending yourself. However, we must counter that stigma and remind our fellow countrymen that it is their responsibility to know the law (and suffer the consequences for ignorance of the law). Of course, also inform / remind them that they can pay an attorney for $x thousands of dollars for a case, like missing a DUI breathalyzer or other conclusive evidence of DUI.
You comply with them they'll just throw you into jail anyway so that's why you gotta stand up to build a strong case to protect yourself or you're just plain idiot
Funny because that's not how it works. I know from experience the cop doesn't have to be present. The DA is the one charging you and they are present. Worse case scenario on criminal charges they will reschedule for when the officer is available. You are full of crap, my friend.
I got a speeding ticket on a vespa scooter for going 65 in a 30. I proved to the Judge with manfacturer specifications the scooter maxed out at 47 mph. The Judge then tried to say, well then you were going 47 in a 30. I just said (uncle's a lawyer and he coached me...) Well Judge, I reject your assertion, I was NOT speeding, I will appeal your ruling. He convicted me so I appealed and on the advice of my uncle lawyer, subpoenaed the Judge, The prosecuting Atty for the City, and the COP, and the Police Chief. Of course NONE of them appeared in the appeal and it was dropped. I then went back to the City Hall and filed legal complaints on all of them for running a Criminal Enterprise issuing illegal tickets then finding the driver guilty because they can. That got their attention! I took it to court with my Uncle Lawyer at my side and ended up winning a judgement of over $2,000!
@@miltonturner2977 It can happen. I always try and draw out a ticket for as long as I can. 4-6 hearings, and bait them with a checkbook and an unsigned guilty plea if they'll provide any evidence that any of their code applies to me. Whether that actually works (is debatable), BUT what I DO know is that if you make it more expensive for them to prosecute than to let you go? They'll let you go. 4 tickets with that tactic. I've never had a cop testify, and I've always had the chief vampire for their traffic division come down and bargain with me. We know they don't follow the law, but I sure as rain can prove that they will drop a heavy expensive case. Every time...
I got stopped for speeding on the Ohio turnpike I was doing 71 in a 65 mph zone. The trooper was very nice told me he had to give a ticket but he was going to be on leave on the court date. So I showed up to court and he wasn’t there. Case dismissed.
Yes what a nice road pirate who I'm sure went 20 over the speed limit and possibly dangerously changed lanes to get up to you from a stop all to harass you for driving in a way that's objectively safer than going the arbitrary number on a sign decided decades ago (when cars were far less safe as well) because you're going with the flow of traffic. SO NICE. Oh and he was fishing for other reasons to throw you in a cage too btw. This is the average NPC "centrist" type view on pigs. This is how enslaved they are. And you're happy that way. It's honestly sad.
Funny result of tint, was the officer who claimed he couldn’t see through the window due to tint…but then later points to something inside the car through the window.😂
"that ticket right there!" He said, as he pointed THROUGH the window he just said he couldn't see through and was thus OBVIOUSLY illegal, despite not having the tint measuring tool to check
@chiquita683 This is true because literally the police can do anything they want to you....they have the courts and judges in their pockets, so they DONT WORRY ABOUT BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE
DISCLAIMER: This is not advice. This is information. For legal advice find a legal lawyer. Do your own due diligence. You are responsible for your own actions & mistakes. Information void where prohibited by law or tyrants. Not a lawyer. These are my non-lawyer personal opinions. I'm simply a madman, don't listen to me. ---------------------------- "Is that a lawful order officer?" Now he has to decide if it is or not and if he wants to lie about it or not. 1. I have the right to travel as an American. It is a fundamental Constitutionally protected right. I don't need a license to do what I have the right to do. 2. Mr. Policy Officer, you have violated my right to travel by stopping me from traveling in my non-commercial machine. Unless of course you have evidence that I've committed a crime. 3. I would like to leave now, may I leave? No? So you're detaining me against my will. That's the definition of kidnapping and under color of law too. Keep those crimes coming Mr. POLIC yE nforcer that works for the state, county or city corporation and wouldn't know a law if it jumped up and waved. Only the Sheriff's dept enforces law. Traffic infractions are a violation of rules, not a crime. A contractual violation from when you got your license. No license, no contract, no rules other than not infringing on other's rights to also drive on the road without harm or damage. 4. "Judge" sets bail? That would be the ransom. Uh oh, I smell a conspiracy brewing. 5. Prosecutor confirms charges? And the conspiracy against rights is complete. 6. And oh boy, those civil lawsuit damages will really add up! State these things to the wrong cop, with the wrong tone of voice, at the wrong time... expect the possibility of being beaten to death or otherwise mistreated very badly. I don't recommend it. I do recommend doing your own research and determining for yourself the facts & truth. Again, these are my opinions so get your own! For professional help, find a professional!
@@DrDangerPuppyyoure not just mad. You're stupid. You can travel all you want. You want to DRIVE, you need a licence and registration for the vehicle. I mean, if you don't recognise the law, why would you start by asking if he's giving you lawful orders?
It seems 2 things are in play: 1) police are in the wrong line of work since they seem to do everything from a state of fear and 2) we live in a quasi-police state already, it seems.
The problem is that the person who can put up with that level of stress and not become paranoid or depressed or stressed out is extremely rare. There aren't enough to go around, especially if some of them go into other high stress jobs. If you look at a cop and see an ordinary person doing a difficult and thankless job, life becomes mush easier for everyone.
@@fh5926a lot of that is Hollywood copaganda. Nursing is more hazardous than being a police officer. It’s not even in the top 10. Cops don’t become psychos. Psychos become cops.
When I get pulled over, I roll down my window about 4 inches(enough to be able to reach your door locks from outside), turn my radio off, take the key out of the ignition, grab all my papers out of the glove box to have ready when the officer gets to the door. While grabbing my papers, I leave the keys in the glove box and close it. After handing over my papers, I put my hands on the wheel until everything is given back to me. If they give back my papers before the tickets are ready, I will put them on the dash, and hands back on the wheel. I do this so that: 1) The officer can't claim I was about to flee cause the car was still running. 2)With the radio off, any recordings won't be hard to hear, and the cop has a harder time saying he can't hear me and wants the windows down more. 3) With the keys not in the ignition, I'm not physically able to roll down the windows. 4) With my papers ready when he arrives at the window, I won't need to rummage around in the car, this takes away one of the safety concerns he can claim. Though they can still try to say your movements of getting stuff out of the glove box were furtive. 5) With the keys in the glove box, they would need a warrant to search the glove box, and if they ask you to get them out of the box to start your car to roll down the windows, those both work against the officer claiming fear since there could be weapons in the glove box, and you could flee if you turn the car on. 6) Since you haven't moved your hands since handing over your papers, it would be hard to claim they were afraid. 7) If asked to get out of the car anyways, you should have enough points to argue in court, so comply by slowly moving both hands fingers up towards the door. With one hand pull the handle, and immediately lock it with the other as soon as its slightly open. Open only as much as is needed to get out, and immediately close behind you. 8) Since the car is locked now, and the keys are in the glove box, they can't ask you to open the door, and without a warrant, they can't legally reach in the window, but since there is room that they can, it (forgive the pun) leaves a window open for them to walk into a lawsuit. When the stop is over, you can reach in and unlock it yourself. Over the years I have changed how I handle the stops and added a few steps that set bait so to speak, and this is what I've come up with so far. If anyone disagrees with any steps, or have other tricks to use that both protect you and trap them, please let me know. Be safe, there are lots of pirates on the roads *edits for spelling
Many cars won’t allow the car to lock if the key fob is left inside the car so if your trying to lock the door after you put the keys in the glove box ain’t gonna work. Trust me I’ve tried it.
@@auxmike718 I suppose that is true. Hadn't factored that in. Though honestly if they feel they have the right to get in, they will break a window. Legally it's enough if they even open the door without PC. At least if it's unlocked, you don't gotta pay for the window.
@@Colgate64 It's simple. I have the right to travel. You do not have the right to stop me unless I have committed a crime. Speeding is a traffic infraction, not a crime.
@@DrDangerPuppy You have the right to travel. You do not have the right to drive a motorized vehicle on the public roadways. Amendment X of the Constitution lets states regulate driving by enacting laws. Speeding is a violation of one of those laws. A violation of that law is a civil offense, punishable by fine and/or restrictions to your drivers license. It doesn't have to be a crime in order to be punished by the law.
Cop: Sir, please roll down the window You: No, do you have probable cause? Else this is an illegal search. *BLAM BLAM BLAM* Cop: 999 Shots fired. Suspect refused to roll down window therefore endangering my safety/life. Court: Qualified immunity and fear of life. Case dismissed.
With regards to window tint… if I can legally own a panel van that can conceal anything stored in it, then why can’t I have window tint dark enough to also conceal the contents of my vehicle?
The window tint rule only applies to the windshield and the windows by the driver and passenger seats. When driving at night the tint would greatly reduce your ability to see things like pedestrians in dark clothing. Applying a heavy tint creates what is considered an unsafe vehicle. Nobody cares about anything behind the driver because you don't even need windows back there. At least in CA, you can tint the front side windows as long as the tint remains *above* your eye level with the seat upright. The top part of a windshield can be tinted too. It has to be well above eye level and not opaque.
So here's what I learned watching 12 minutes of this video. Officers May violate your rights on the side of the road but it's in your best interest to go along with it
That court is wrong and should be appealed. If the Arizona car meets Arizona regulations it shouldn't be fined in any other state. That would be like saying you also need to register and have a license in the state you're traveling through.
Sometimes I feel like the only one who thinks America's state and national laws are genuinely insane. Like if I'm living in a state with legal recreational marijuana, but I'm moving a few states over and have to drive through non-legal states, you would be hit with a felony for not just possession but additionally for traveling with it (and that's assuming they don't also hit you with an "intent to sell" charge as well). Doesn't matter if it was legal where I bought it or legal where I'm going or that its stored properly or anything.
I'm a former resident of NY, now living in Ohio. When I drove back to NY, a cop tried to give me a ticket for no front license plate. Ohio only issues one plate, for the rear. I explained that but the cop didn't believe me and started writing a ticket anyway. Another cop, his Sargent, showed up. I explained the situation to the Sarge. After about 10 minutes of confering and probably looking it up, the Sarge said I was free to go. The first cop was pissed and drove off without saying anything else 😆
Right, or in the case of Arizona and California you would have to get a front plate from Arizona to legally travel in California since California requires a front and rear license plate. In Arizona you are not required to have a front license plate.
That window tint stop happened to me once. It was not too dark but the cop was just trying to find something to give me a ticket for. I managed to get a picture of him, his car, and the number on his car and a date stamp. When I went to court with his bogus tint ticket I showed the Judge the cops car and how dark the tint was on it. The Judge dismissed my ticket. It was worth missing a day at work to see the cop lose, he was in there for several other violations he had written.
We need an AI attorney in our vehicles. Whenever we're pulled over by the cops, it automatically responds to the cops for us citing all the laws the cop doesn't even know and informs the driver what to do and not to do.
Law enforcement is not about enforcing the law, it is about generating revenue for the city, county, state, or nation. Law enforcement personnel do not believe the laws apply to them; they believe that they are exempt.
@@josephboone4453 Absolutely. There are states that have contractual agreements with the companies that run private prisons, contracts that guarantee minimum "occupancy" i.e., incarceration.
Why is this the same all around the world?! I thought this was only a thing in my Eastern EU country. 😵 They have quotas to fill. They usually give tickets in October and November. I wonder why…
I'm so sick of hearing "for Officer Safety" and combined with lack of understanding of the law, poor training, abuse of power, out of control egos and the legal ability to lie through their teeth it's a literal mine field and John Q public is always on the losing end. You'd have a better chance of winning the Powerball than coming across a decent cop these days.
Actually it is for officer safety to have windows lowered and such. It is recognized and in certain states , the courts would rather have the officer order people out of the car rather just ask about weapons in the car . Most cops are killed in traffic accidents followed by domestic and violence at car stops . Before the officer safety exceptions , the number one cause of officer deaths were during car stops - that’s why SCOTUS recognized it and made such realistic exceptions. Remember the constitution protects against unreasonable searches. The bill of rights in the constitution did not apply to local and state law enforcement until Mapp v Ohio in 1960. Miranda warnings didn’t come until 1962 etc.
I am a prosecutor in one jurisdiction, and I do criminal defense in other jurisdictions. While I totally encourage you not to voluntarily consent to having your car searched; when you start playing these little games on the side of the road of whether you’re going to roll down your window or whether you’re going to give your drivers license, etc. - one thing is usually going to happen. The officer is going to say that you are refusing a lawful order, get you out of the car (either voluntarily or by force), and arrest you. You’re going to get taken to jail, booked, locked in Jail cell, have to get bonded out - which means paying a bail bondsman, hire an attorney (which will cost a few thousand dollars), go to court (which usually means taking two days off from your job - one for your arraignment and one for your trial date), and very, possibly being found guilty and having a criminal record. You need to highly consider if you really want to get into a pissing contest over nothing. Now, if you have something to hide, it might be worth it. As I say - I always encourage you not to consent to the search. But as for the other little games - you might ultimately beat the charge, but you won’t beat the ride!
"ROLL DOWN THE WINDOW!" "DON'T MOVE!" "LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS!" "I SAID DON'T MOVE M'FER!" "GET OUT OF THE F'ING CAR!" "I SAID DON'T MOVE!" BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM "The suspect wouldn't obey my commands and kept making furtive movements. I was in fear for my life, your honor. "
I also live in TEXAS. Thank you for all you do. IF I am ever stopped I am recording the whole dang thing. If I get into trouble...hope you understand, I will be calling you!!
@@sc7453good luck getting it in time for your case. So now you’re in a position to have to issue a the PD a subpoena of evidence pursuant to pending case, and if they don’t get it to you in time now you have to go to the court case and make a motion to reschedule the hearing until the PD provides the evidence and gives ample time to formulate a defense.
It is important to note that while there are around eight WARRANT exceptions, there are no probable cause exceptions. Lawyers never clarify this. This means if a cop uses a warrant exception for a search or seizure, he still must have hard, probable cause evidence BEFORE executing the search or seizure. "Probable cause to BELIEVE." (this is a very misleading phrase) I also want to point out the probable cause evidence is NOT a belief. Probable cause evidence refers to multiple, hard FACTS, not beliefs, not hearsay, not opinions. The police can only use force based on FACTS.
@@raidensama1511fighting in court is dumb when you get wrung out anyways. Best thing to do is escalate if you know you're doing nothing wrong/have done nothing wrong. Once they use excessive force at the very least you can sue for that
@@raidensama1511 so you make it so they can't ignore violations. courts aren't willing to punish officers or pay for their mistakes unless it's a bigger violation.
I read Mimms. Where does it say anything about using force or violence to get a driver out of the car? Once an officer uses violence including breaking your window, they have drawn "First Blood" and the driver is entitled to use all available self defense measures including lethal to defend themselves.
Simple. Before you get out, roll up all your windows, turn off your car, place the keys on your dash, and as you're exiting the car, lock all your doors.
Alcohol is odorless as expelled from your lungs so unless he says he smells the odor of alcoholic beverage or sees open containers or something else that is a fail.
I was pulled over in Illinois for my window tint. He acknowledged that my car was registered to another state. He suggested I drive with my driver's side window down to prevent getting pulled over when outside of my state. He was very polite and helpful. If you are clearly visible via your driver window open... you shouldn't have any problems. If you do have problems, they are looking for a reason to screw with you.
a detainment is a seizure. cuffing someone for officer safety is also unconstitutional. this shit needs to end. there shouldn't be an on and off switch for govt to deny us our rights.
I was hit head on by a drunk driver and my right hand went through the windshield, i was punched in the face by a suspect who had a warrant for assault on Police, I have been in many fights and lastly crippled making a narcotics arrest and falling on concrete. Strange enough the other officer who was there while I was on the ground trying to recover narcotics evidence just stood there and did nothing. I do agree with you that when a cop gets a scratch it is team coverage on the news and when four construction guys get killed it is barely a blip. American people are really messed up because of all the bullshit with cops. I had a firearm, soft body armor, a car and a radio. People work everyday in very dangerous jobs at WAWA and they have nothing yet people do not really care about them. I would just like to say thank you for your service to the people who work and feed us and build this country everyday and get no fucking credit or appreciation.
@@thomasturner2966 $15/month doesn't protects you from any of that. Call and ask about civil asset forfeiture protection. The problem is supreme court rulings.
An unelected official is allowed to dictate policy. That policy has law enforcement backing it. No one has any idea how many policies there are in the federal government. So if want to avoid ignorance stat calling every department in the federal government and ask for all of the policies and hope they don't change tomorrow.
Well…. This video was depressing. Basically you’re fucked when the cop pulls you over. The cops can claim anything they want and the courts will uphold their claims.
Functionally true. Even if the cop is doing something blatantly illegal, resisting a police officer will never end well for you, unless you have lots of witnesses and cameras. And even then it's not a guarantee.
@@markhammar3977 no but i know they're in the same boat we are. americans have lost our constitutional rights and canadians lost their charter rights. we're all just slaves now
Yes exactly. There is different levels of enforcement and justice depending on various factors, number one is money then who you know and your race, gender etc.
Calmly asserting your rights can be misapplied as disobedience to an officer which can be falsely labeled as an officer safety issue. Driver’s rights are meaningless.
First of all, invoking your rights can not and will not be construed as a crime. Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 94 S. CT. 316, 38 L. Ed. 2d 274 [1973]. (Confirmed) Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547, 142 U.S. 563-564. (Confirmed) McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34, 40, 45 S.Ct. 16, 17, 69, L.Ed. 158 [1924] (Confirmed Westlaw) And second, driving is a privilege, not a right.
The following should be mandatory for becoming any form of law enforcement. (REVISED & UPDATED) 1) No criminal history. 2) Mandatory 1 yr constitutional law, civil rights, and de-escalation education/training. 3) Mandatory annual continued constitutional law, civil rights and de-escalation education/training. 4) Mandatory national registry. (same as child offenders). 5) Prior citizen complaints follow for life. 6) Prior reprimands follow for life. 7) Limited qualified immunity with mandatory liability insurance. 8) Mandatory body cameras and mandatory termination, prosecution, and/or jail time for muting, tampering, obstructing, or deleting body camera footage. (Remove mute buttons altogether) 9) Mandatory full accountability and enforcement for breaching laws/ malfeasance. (such as threatening nonviolent civilians, filing a false report, and /or lying on a report/in court). THEY HAVE BODY CAMS TO REWATCH WHAT THEY DID... NO REASON TO ACCEPT LIES OR MANIPULATION. Send this to your congressman. COPY, PASTE, AND SHARE...
@leonidfro8302 so what would you propose? Leaving things "AS IS" or "STATUS QUO"... isn't working. When they made other professions measure up to higher standards, it brought out the best... people started respecting their fields and, most importantly, the PEOPLE in that field.
@@stevenjones3248 Drugs legalization would be a great start. This will immediately eliminate searches of cars (what is there to look for?). Next - demilitarization of police force. Next - no jail for victimless crime.
Is there any legal argument to be made for CITIZENS SAFETY? Officers are armed and when THEY exhibit aggressive behavior I'd be hesitant to comply with their orders!
Not complying generally doesn't make them less aggressive. And a rolled up window won't really protect you. Not saying you said that, but many people seem to think that. I would say bodycams are a good mechanism for ensuring citizens safety.
Well, they hang out with other cops off duty and (just like career criminals) talk about nothing other than how to fuck over the public. Cops and criminals are very much the same in attitude.
My biggest problem with Pennsylvania vs Mimms is it doesn't make sense. How can it make the officer safe by pulling the person out it actually makes him more unsafe.
California also has emissions laws so when you're travelling through Californian you have to have an emissions sticker too? Officer Safety is just Copsplaining for, "I'm going to violate your rights and there isn't anything you can do about it."
I am not legally obligated to point to, or help law enforcement obtain evidence to be used against me. This also holds true for DUI stops. A great deal of intimidation and coercion is used to make people SUBMIT to testing conducted and directed by officers. First of all, none of them have the required skill set or credentials to effectively administer testing designed to aid in a neurological diagnosis and treatment plan...NOT to VIOLATE human rights. We also take oaths preserving constitutional rights. The results of their testing is NOT and CANNOT be granted as the legal authority. Years of experience on a daily basis where these tests are administered multiple times a day, vary with multiple different people give the examiner CREDIBLE testimony. Practitioners are trained without bias. When we examine a person, we have NO idea what the cause or causes might be for the individuals impairment. When cops conduct testing it is ALWAYS done with SPECIFIC regards to the causative agents of drugs and or alcohol, further proof it is CLEARLY a conflict of interest. Law enforcement agencies rely more on smoke and mirrors to manipulate the public perception and approval. As law abiding citizens, we support our officers because we have ENTRUSTED them to act on the side of law as shaped by the constitution. We must stop doing that as the gap between law and practice is growing ever wider. Drug Recognition Experts play FICTIONAL roles. As a practitioner of over 30 years, I would love to know what a DRE officer is taught in 1 month that would enable him with a skill doctors and nurses do not have after years of training and decades of clinical experience!!! This is why BLOOD is their holy grail for evidence. But there's a problem...doctors and nurses are the only professionals who are trained and credentialed to perform INVASIVE procedures on LIVING persons and because of laws and policies that govern such things as a blood draw create a most unfortunate obstruction in their process of evidence collection. This is precisely the charge ordered by Officer Jeff Payne when he arrested Alex Wubbles, a registered nurse in SLC Utah. He was fired, she got a half million dollars in the wrongful arrest lawsuit. There is a REASON law enforcement got slapped down. The officer went beyond his scope of practice and discovered the limits of his perceived authority. It seems to me as being quite evident, it is sheer ignorance and arrogance that plague law enforcement. The most EGREGIOUS law enforcement practice is the use of IMPLIED CONSENT. Law enforcement officers have been trained to believe that any person who accepted a driver's license IMPLIED their consent to submit to testing conducted or directed by law enforcement officers. But there's a problem...they lack a critical element in order that implied consent may be LEGALLY executed. They lack EXIGENCY. An exigent event or circumstance requires immediate intervention. It permits me to presume a person in peril, loss of life and limb would give me CONSENT to take measures that would either improve their condition or spare their life. Law enforcement blood draws for alcohol and drugs do NEITHER of these things. Sorry, Mr. Policeman...your subject is just potentially drunk. There is no emergency here, therefore, the use of implied consent cannot be valid and is ILLEGAL. In addition, a person has the right to rescind or withdraw implied consent at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all. Taped to my licence are the words, "Implied consent to law enforcement is revoked from the date of issue until the date of expiration on this license. Implied consent is expressly reserved for a physician ONLY". Why? Because if you draw blood under implied consent, this action MUST be performed for the benefit and welfare of the person from which the blood is drawn and NOT a second or third party. Any action taken under implied consent MUST be a NECESSARY action resulting in improving the persons status. Officers, judges and attys have no need to know the laws governing my profession...it is beyond the scope of their practice and credentials. Today, officers are being sent to a class to learn how to draw blood themselves, circumventing doctors and nurses. This is WRONG
As a former cop I will say this, I'll remove my tent when they remove there's, the tent on the cops windows are so dark you can't even see anybody sitting in there, cops are supposed to be enforceing the law, so they should be held to the same standards!!!!!
I get your point about cops being held accountable and agree 100 percent but you know and I know that some exemptions are needed just like operating a patrol car when you are on a priority call (lights and sirens are required in Pennsylvania by Police when doing so) you are going to break laws, speed limits, use caution but still disregard traffic signals and I do not know how many insane pursuits I have been in. Yes accountability but it will NEVER happen.
A tent is what you sleep in when you go camping. (Among other things, though, notably not the window coating that attenuates light transmission through said window, that being a tint.)
I have never had a cop ask me to roll my window down. Because I always roll it down immediately so I can yell _”What is the meaning of this? This is an outrage!!!”_ while I’m handing them my license. Cops love it when you make jokes.
The cops will almost always claim they have some, "officer safety concern." BUT, many cops do not wear the seat belt in their patrol car, and the majority of cops are fifty pounds or more overweight, both of which are also very harmful to, "officer safety."
My state has something called implied consent where if you refuse a field sobriety test or breathalyzer test your DL will automatically be suspended.. I believe that to be punishment without due process and imo unconstitutional
@@billcook4768 all. Read your drivers license card and get in lexusnexus and research it. Legal definition for license, and right of travel type stuff. It's all there. Been there for a century, but barely anyone reads it.
I've heard that you can use the 5th Amendment to keep cops from making you roll up your window for a tint check. You don't have to incriminate yourself by making that window available for a tint measurement.
Why is illegal window tint allowed to be sold in America? They should bust not only the driver but the window tint place or the chain of supply, and stop it completely, otherwise it's entrapment and a RACKET
@BeUnotATVrobot beside the fact that window tint is used for many more reasons than just vehicle windows, the fact IS WE ARE ADULTS and CAPABLE OF MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS. We can choose to read the legislation about what is or isn't allowed as a modification to our vehicles or risk being ticketed. NOTE, it STARTS with your LAW-MAKERS so if a rule is oppressive petition your legislature (just like the law enforcers DID to get that law into place...
@@waaynneb1808 Your first statement gets at why. There is window tinting sold to be used on things like house windows that is too dark for safe driving. People why argue otherwise could be directed at window frosting kits. Window frosting is sold for house windows, often bathrooms, to block clear vision of people within. What level of window frosting is compatible with the safe operation of a vehicle on the road? (hint: pretty much none)
@@MonkeyJedi99 I actually agree with the laws in my state and just bought a crap car and will remove the side wing tinting and it is a pain to do so. This will put me in compliance. I think emissions and inspection though are bullshit.
@@johnleca Yeah! (cough, cough) who gets to tell me my car isn't safe enough to drive! I know what I'm doin... (crash). - Because for every person who knows how to keep their vehicle in solid mechanical condition, there are hundreds or thousands who don't. And we're all on the same roads.
Dumbest comment. Because someone carries a gun and body armor indicates they can’t be killed by another? When does basic safety decisions depend on how armed you are? 😂 your logic falls on its face
@@heromuff7338 Not really a dumb comment. The police can write off any behavior as an officer safety issue. They can just use one of the magical incantations like "furtive movement" to justify an officer safety issue. You sneeze, furtive movement, officer safety. Police also like to perpetuate the myth of how dangerous their jobs are when the reality is school crossing guard is a more dangerous job. Line of duty deaths for police is pretty low. 2022 there were only 118. Frankly you could probably cut about 1/3 of them out _if_ police would wear their seatbelts as vehicle crashes are a big contributor to officer fatalities. Their officer safety issue are pretty tiny but they big it up and you'll never hear the end of it.
How do we get power back from these tyrants? Can we strip them of these powers and get rid of the office safety crap? This all seems like abuse of power.
Dueling and bounty law. Short of that, file against the municipality's insurance or bond. You won't get a payout, but like a truck driver with too many accidents, they won't employ them under the company's insurance.
I have a serious question. Why does officers safety trump the citizens safety they are sworn to protect? They will turn a person videotaping them into a safety issue so they can point weapons and demand the public do as they say using their safety as the reason. I thought their job is to protect citizens rights from being violated and defend the people who do have their rights violated. What happened to protect and serve the public? It seems more like the police want to protect our government and themselves.
Meh, my windows is already rolled down by the time they reach the door. I also turn the engine off, set the parking brake. And at night, I turn on the interior dome light too. If I am in a bad neighborhood, I hold both hands out the window so they can see my hands.
Aren't you a good boy. Until they think putting your hands out the window is suspicious, because clearly you've had some criminal interaction before. Do you check your license plate lights before every trip? You might want to start, of course being in the hood with a fully functioning car might also be suspicious.
@@gunnydeeP.I. Quite the opposite. I do that as well. All four windows down, engine off, dome light on, and lic/reg/ins in hand. I've never had an officer go fishing for any additional information. Last two pull overs, I left with a verbal warning. And if one day they decide to start a fishing expedition, I'll simply respond with "I've already gone above and beyond the constitutional requirements to make the stop as easy as possible for you. Don't expect anything more."
@@gunnydeeP.I. I am with the others. It is about a semblance of respect. Some cops can be shitty, but many are doing their job. And too many people feel that if they don't try and start shit with the cops, they are being violated. I've been pulled over a couple of times because my car matched a description of drug runners (Apparently they really prefer Buick Centuries). What did I do? I cooperated and was cool with the police. Was it an inconvenience? Probably. But who da fuq cares? I ended up have some great conversations with them. My first time I had a bunch of weapons in my car as I was moving. I told the cop. We ended up checking out my M44 rifle because he has never seen a Russian Bolt Action is almost new condition. Too many people think police are the enemy. And channels like this just add fuel to the fire.
Ordering someone out of their car without any real recourse for consequences if the officer happens to not have probable cause is about as intrusive upon ones rights as it gets actually. Considering you are relying entirely on a DA or other government employee to press charges against the cop for the lack of probable cause, there is not real recourse. Courts are just in favor of government control in general.
At 13:59 Regarding locking your car doors if told to get out of your car: This will not work if you have one of the stupid key fob "keyless start" cars. As long as you are within a few feet of your car (and fob is in your pocket) ANYBODY can pull the door handle and open the door. :((
Buy a Ford with a keyless entry on the door panel. It can be locked with your keys in your vehicle. Only way to unlock is through the Ford app or by knowing the code.
When I am stopped, all windows are rolled down and the keys are placed on the dash. Both hands are on the wheel with license, insurance and registration. If it’s night the same thing happens but all interior lights are on.
I love how window tint has become criminal activity. Makes me wonder why so many citizens would get together and petition to make this a criminal offense?? Oh ya, they didn't. Our government isn't suppose to be creating new laws. That isn't part of their original duties. Now we pay them to sit in rooms and create statues every day to use against "we the people".
@@billcook4768 Negative. Dueling with civil penalties for refusal and bounty law. Anything short of that is filing against a municipality's bond or insurance.
@billcook4768 brilliant. You think that might really work? Elect more people into the same position to perform the same duties because they believe that's what they are suppose to do. I'm pretty sure we are way beyond that point. Police can't even recite a basic explanation of the Constitution they are sworn to protect. Politicians creating statutes "for our safety" without any support for the people. Agencies spying on it's citizens, documenting and keeping files. Lobbyists, huge corporations where we never hear any concerns of monopolies anymore, sitting down Mom and Pop stores during cov but keeping box stores open. It's sad but this government is the absolute opposite of the system that was put into place to protect us from exactly what we have put right back into power. They are even changing rules and guidelines for elections and doing it in a way the openly violates the procedural rules. And when people do stand up like you are OBLIGATED TO DO. IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO. A large percentage of citizens speak out against it and side with the crooks. Ya, maybe we should just elect better politicians. I'm sure it we just use the same ignorance to research and vote for the same arrogance it will be fixed by the second Tuesday of next week. Way to be a part of the problem! Gotta make yourself and your loved ones feel real proud of you!!
2:30 - So here’s a scenario I just made up: cop pulls you over claiming your window tint is too dark, then tries to use the tint meter thing. Does using the tint meter prove that the cop didn’t actually know your tint was too dark, and by extension the cop didn’t have the necessary probable cause to pull you over?
Not a lawyer or anything, but I would assume that any level of tint would be sufficient in court to establish a valid reason for the stop. Because it's obviously not non-tinted. And our eyes can't see the difference between legal and non-legal tint, except in the extremes of that spectrum. So if they see a tinted window, there is a possibility that it's too dark. Giving them enough reason to stop you and investigate a potential violation.
Apply this same login to them using breathalyzer to get your blood alcohol level. They have a feeling you are intoxicated based on what they see. So they use a device to put a somewhat scientific measure of the level you are at.
While all of these efforts are supported by the Supreme Court to "only" provide "Officer Safety". What this means is that the Supreme Court has decided that Innocent Citizens do "NOT" have any rights for "Citizens Safety" whatsoever. This was the reason for the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. It was to protect the Citizens against the tyranny of the Courts and of the Police and or Sheriffs. The Bill of Rights has been so criminally watered down by the Courts, the Bill of Rights will very soon become the "Papers of the Socialist Government". It has happened before, and it is occurring now in the United States. This was affirmed when the Supreme Court decided that Police Officers, Sheriffs, and other Government Peace Officers had "absolutely" no requirement to protect a citizen from any criminal event whatsoever, and that at the "discretion" of the Officer, they can either take action to save a citizen's life, or they can ignore the criminal action and ignore the safety of a citizen and simply not act at all even if it means the death of the citizen. I believe that this is the real reason that the citizens of the United States no longer respect or believe anything that an officer says or does. This was never the case 70 years ago when I was born. Officers received respect and honor back then because they were not so eager to kill innocent citizens. That is no longer the case and now it has become a "sporting event" to see the kill with most officers
@wfussner I get what you're saying. But at same time your the one that stand in line for the roller-coaster just like people signed up for being a cop. I just can't stand when they it's for safety and there's ones that put themselves in danger and violate people's rights
Let me warn you that if you drive in the People's Republic of California and stop at a parking meter in Santa Monica or West Hollywood, you are in the Parking Nazi Zone. They buzz around 24/7 writing a fist full of tickets each hour. They chalk mark the tires and often return sooner than the sign postings. I know, my desk looks outside, and I can see it happen often enough to witness it. It keeps their city budget afloat. My parents had a handicap placard and still got tickets twice, the second time court/police refused to return the placard. So calling them Nazis is clearly the closest name for their actions...
Wrong. You don't "receive" your rights from the Constitution; rights aren't gifts from government. The Constitution attempts to limit government from infringing on your rights.
I got pulled over for rear window tint because the officer “couldn’t see through the vehicle”. Soooo… I asked why he wasn’t pulling over the windowless van that was passing us.
@JeshuaSquirrel No, cops don't get to do whatever they want. That's how cops get hurt or killed. Cops shouldn't break the law like they do all the time, but they do. When I had to deal with an asshole pig accusing me of being wrong, I called the sheriff on that cop and put the cop under citizens arrest. As we both went to the sheriffs office to settle the dispute I was released the same day with no charges. The cop got blasted by his superiors.
Police watching this video: "Uh, actually, we don't NEED people's consent to search their car! Just like when we break into people's home... and pull our gun out... aaaand arrest them with disorderly conduct or something."
Every time, you know why? they(the cops) signed up for this job!!It It certainly is not our problem if they have a short fuse or dont' know how to behave properly in public!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A point I'd like to make is that you do not have to hand over or surrender any documents. I will paraphrase but the laws state that you only need to show the documentation. The best method is to roll down your windows a few inches, enough to be heard but not enough that the officer can reach inside and press the documents against the window. They all have pens and notepads, so make them use them.
Fighting these constant and flagrant violations is nice and all, but we need something better for the people. We can't just expect to cycle people thru a system unlimitedly and indefinitely when there is no real public concern of a valid crime etc.
Something better is the Constitution. It simply needs to be enforced by those that took an oath to enforce it. If they're not enforcing it, find out if it's ignorance or malice. Correct either one the lawful way.. If you don't know what that is, do your research.
Check your local laws first, but i know in my state of NJ (Which we all know is corrupt AF) the police cant stop you for tint any longer,its now a secondary charge. Same thing with the license plate frames, they used to be able to stop us if we had a license plate frame,like from the dealership you bought the car from. Well, no longer. So again check your local laws and ALWAYS have a dashcam. It will save your ass every time.
@e-curb ok so I live in NJ. So if the license plate frame covered even a fraction of any of the letters of NEW JERSEY on the plate they would pull you over and ticket yiu for having an obscured license plate. Just a money making scam
Every single state has made a law since Mimms citing the significant danger of being at the side of the road during a stop. Mimms is no longer a minimal intrusion. The #1 cause of death in cops is being hit at the side of the road, and they're putting that danger on the driver.
The idea that the officer safety is always somehow at risk is a joke. They have unlimited backup and force multipliers. Unless the person they are attempting to criminalize is a known criminal who would typically pose a threat would be the only reason to make unreasonable demands. So the idea of fishing for probable cause over a minor traffic infraction rather than simply issuing the citation is really on the perpetrators. Unnecessarily placing one's self in harms way for a $500 ticket is really foolish anyhow. These jokers commit many more crimes than the criminal they pretend to protect us from.
Infractions are not law. Traffic "laws" are rules. Rules you agreed to when you got a license. Even though a license is permission, when you already have the right to travel.
Yup! Cop charged me with obstruction cause I refused to roll my passenger window down for a backup officer for “officers safety” after I insisted they were safe. I got pulled out of the car, more officers were called, I was searched thoroughly multiple times & nothing was found. All over a expired paper tag😂
Which law provides for driver and passenger safety? I keep hearing about officer safety but it's the officers brutalizing and killing drivers. Not the other way around.
My rights do not end... where a cop's fear begins
Good luck using that in court.
@@krane15we have to continue to stand our ground even if it means going to court. Don't be soft.
Maybe you didn’t see the video but that is exactly where your rights end 😂
@@gib3ll1n Wrong small hat propagandist.
If only there was a Civil Rights Attorney who used that as his motto! 🙂
I feel like the court system is just like one big board game but without a set of dice. Lol
Or there is a set of dice ... but it's loaded.
Or they don't allow you a turn at the dice!!
Great analogy! Obviously, we know it’s a rigged game.
Its monopoly... Thats what happens when your countrymen/women Choose to be NPCs. We All,get treated like NPCs
You play games on a court the Judge is the referee
The problem is.... if you don't have video of the conversation... you will more than likely lose in court!!!
dont give up
Attorney Shield, gets you face to face with legal counsel in less than 30 seconds. Developed by LackLuster and Long Island Audit. Please get the app, the first call is free.
yeah because the courts always believe liers
FOIA their body camera. You do have everything on camera. When you go to your first court date, if you haven’t received it yet, tell the Judge you have evidence in your defense that you have requested but the City/County/Parrish hasn’t yet provided it.
YOU WILL LOSE ANYWAY...THE JUDGE IS TOTALLY ON COPS SIDE IN ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON
NEVER TRUST A COP. NEVER.
Never
👏👍💯&🎯
@@lookingdown8290 AND NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE WILLINGLY...THEY ARE TRAINED LIARS
I trust cops, to do anything they can to arrest you for doing nothing.
I say amen to that amen amen oh amen
In 2016 or 2017, window tint became a primary offense in Ohio, where it had previously been a secondary offense. In 2017, I got pulled over by an Ohio state cop because of my tint. The cop held me up for 45 minutes. During that stop, he asked me 4 times if the address on my license was my current address. The fourth time, I looked at him and said, "I've answered that question 3 times. If you can't remember my answer, maybe you should see a doctor." He didn't like that and shouted, "just answer the question! I looked at him and said "I already did. Are you going to write me a ticket, or am I free to go?" Of course I got a ticket, and then the cop followed me 6 miles out of town. I put my cruise control on 54mph. Eventually, he got bored and turned around, probably looking for someone else to victimize. 2017 me wasn't as financially secure as 2025 me, so if it ever happens again, you can bet I'm going to fight it.
tinted window? They break it. Isn't that destruction of evidence?
I once had a cop insist I lower my window ALL THE WAY DOWN during a traffic stop in a rain storm… he said, and I QUOTE, “If I have to stand out in the rain and get wet, you and your car can get wet too”. After the rain damaged my interior of the car, I submitted a complaint with the county sheriff and was told to “stop stirring sh!t or I’d get thrown in jail”. What was the offense you ask? Driving 12mph in a parking lot (technically private property) and “I appeared to be traveling too fast for conditions”
I had a sheriff of a county (the actual SHERIFF) tell me he would bury me under the new jail! This county had broke ground on a new annex. I believed he would actually do it!!! Karma ALWAYS comes around though and he got arrested by his own deputies for driving while REAL intoxicated and he lost his job!! Then he died a few years later of a heart attack!
Karma is a bitch!!!🤷
He should quit his job if he hates it that much.
@@pache2112 That's not a good ending at all. But I see your point. I would write an ending like this: The Sheriff was sentenced to fines and costs of $2000 and 10 weekends serving at the animal shelter. 5 years later, the former Sheriff is still serving voluntarily at the county animal shelter in early retirement.
Isn't that much better?
@@pache2112
Unfortunately karma doesn’t get most of them.
mr4x4s Tell me you got an attorney and sued their ass off for that?
If window tint was truly a danger to society, cops themselves wouldn’t be exempt from it
They aren't exempt from it. But the cops aren't gonna write themselves a ticket.
@@zakglove6536 No. In some places, cops and private investigators are exempted from the statute.
@ first responders are exempt and can have dark tint.
They claim their exempt because of sensitive equipment no matter what they do their exempt from the law because they're special 😅
@@bchap1233...if it is an "emergency vehicle". Cop's personal cars can't have illegal levels of tint, but they all do anyway. Rules for thee, not for me.
Cops and some citizens feel that when you assert your rights you’re making yourself look guilty, and if you have nothing to hide it shouldn’t matter. But it’s exactly those stigmas that hurts our rights even more, and is more of a reason to always assert them.
@@princequestly2218 It’s also a stigma that lets you be more easily controlled by governmental ‘agents.’ It’s way easier to have people police their own thoughts and feelings, to fall in line with ‘society’ than to force them to do it by an external means.
it's nonsense that doesn't apply to themselves because they hide and look guilty more than anyone
Agree with statement of existing stigma when defending yourself.
However, we must counter that stigma and remind our fellow countrymen that it is their responsibility to know the law (and suffer the consequences for ignorance of the law).
Of course, also inform / remind them that they can pay an attorney for $x thousands of dollars for a case, like missing a DUI breathalyzer or other conclusive evidence of DUI.
You comply with them they'll just throw you into jail anyway so that's why you gotta stand up to build a strong case to protect yourself or you're just plain idiot
@@MaddOreolol. They don’t throw you in jail for complying it’s the other way around.
I've gotten four traffic tickets in my 40 years, *and all 4 times, the cop failed to appear in court and the ticket was dismissed.*
You're lucky.
Right. Best go take your ticket and go home. This is nuts.
Funny because that's not how it works. I know from experience the cop doesn't have to be present. The DA is the one charging you and they are present. Worse case scenario on criminal charges they will reschedule for when the officer is available. You are full of crap, my friend.
I got a speeding ticket on a vespa scooter for going 65 in a 30. I proved to the Judge with manfacturer specifications the scooter maxed out at 47 mph. The Judge then tried to say, well then you were going 47 in a 30. I just said (uncle's a lawyer and he coached me...) Well Judge, I reject your assertion, I was NOT speeding, I will appeal your ruling.
He convicted me so I appealed and on the advice of my uncle lawyer, subpoenaed the Judge, The prosecuting Atty for the City, and the COP, and the Police Chief. Of course NONE of them appeared in the appeal and it was dropped. I then went back to the City Hall and filed legal complaints on all of them for running a Criminal Enterprise issuing illegal tickets then finding the driver guilty because they can. That got their attention! I took it to court with my Uncle Lawyer at my side and ended up winning a judgement of over $2,000!
@@miltonturner2977 It can happen.
I always try and draw out a ticket for as long as I can. 4-6 hearings, and bait them with a checkbook and an unsigned guilty plea if they'll provide any evidence that any of their code applies to me. Whether that actually works (is debatable), BUT what I DO know is that if you make it more expensive for them to prosecute than to let you go? They'll let you go. 4 tickets with that tactic. I've never had a cop testify, and I've always had the chief vampire for their traffic division come down and bargain with me.
We know they don't follow the law, but I sure as rain can prove that they will drop a heavy expensive case. Every time...
I got stopped for speeding on the Ohio turnpike I was doing 71 in a 65 mph zone. The trooper was very nice told me he had to give a ticket but he was going to be on leave on the court date. So I showed up to court and he wasn’t there. Case dismissed.
He filled the quote and gave you a break. an Unusual Cop!
Still making people jump through hoops just to fill their BS quota. It's a bunch of crap.
The bizarre thing for me, as a Gwrman, is the fact that there’s a court date for a speeding ticket. That’s sounds like a massive waste of resources
Yes what a nice road pirate who I'm sure went 20 over the speed limit and possibly dangerously changed lanes to get up to you from a stop all to harass you for driving in a way that's objectively safer than going the arbitrary number on a sign decided decades ago (when cars were far less safe as well) because you're going with the flow of traffic. SO NICE. Oh and he was fishing for other reasons to throw you in a cage too btw.
This is the average NPC "centrist" type view on pigs. This is how enslaved they are. And you're happy that way. It's honestly sad.
Funny result of tint, was the officer who claimed he couldn’t see through the window due to tint…but then later points to something inside the car through the window.😂
"that ticket right there!" He said, as he pointed THROUGH the window he just said he couldn't see through and was thus OBVIOUSLY illegal, despite not having the tint measuring tool to check
@@jamesloar8693 AND THE OFFICERS CAR HAS BLACK OUT TINT AS WELL....
Not rolling down your window is asking for trouble
Yea, if you play that video to the judge he will be forced to dismiss your case as the COP is full of BS!
@chiquita683 This is true because literally the police can do anything they want to you....they have the courts and judges in their pockets, so they DONT WORRY ABOUT BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE
I highly recommend a quality dash camera that records front, interior and rear, plus sounds, mounted in your Personal Owned Vehicles.
TRUTH!!
How does one get the footage if arrested? Assuming of course the cops don't delete the footage after the arrest.
And GPS..
@@JeshuaSquirrel No, they just 'edit' it.
Live stream it.
They tell you to roll your window down as a test to see if you will obey them or not.
Finally yes they assert dominance from the beginning no matter what it is hands outta pocket anything to test you. Fuck that
DISCLAIMER: This is not advice. This is information. For legal advice find a legal lawyer. Do your own due diligence. You are responsible for your own actions & mistakes. Information void where prohibited by law or tyrants. Not a lawyer. These are my non-lawyer personal opinions.
I'm simply a madman, don't listen to me.
----------------------------
"Is that a lawful order officer?" Now he has to decide if it is or not and if he wants to lie about it or not.
1. I have the right to travel as an American. It is a fundamental Constitutionally protected right. I don't need a license to do what I have the right to do.
2. Mr. Policy Officer, you have violated my right to travel by stopping me from traveling in my non-commercial machine. Unless of course you have evidence that I've committed a crime.
3. I would like to leave now, may I leave? No? So you're detaining me against my will. That's the definition of kidnapping and under color of law too. Keep those crimes coming Mr. POLIC yE nforcer that works for the state, county or city corporation and wouldn't know a law if it jumped up and waved. Only the Sheriff's dept enforces law.
Traffic infractions are a violation of rules, not a crime. A contractual violation from when you got your license. No license, no contract, no rules other than not infringing on other's rights to also drive on the road without harm or damage.
4. "Judge" sets bail? That would be the ransom. Uh oh, I smell a conspiracy brewing.
5. Prosecutor confirms charges? And the conspiracy against rights is complete.
6. And oh boy, those civil lawsuit damages will really add up!
State these things to the wrong cop, with the wrong tone of voice, at the wrong time... expect the possibility of being beaten to death or otherwise mistreated very badly. I don't recommend it. I do recommend doing your own research and determining for yourself the facts & truth.
Again, these are my opinions so get your own! For professional help, find a professional!
@@DrDangerPuppyyoure not just mad. You're stupid. You can travel all you want. You want to DRIVE, you need a licence and registration for the vehicle.
I mean, if you don't recognise the law, why would you start by asking if he's giving you lawful orders?
It's so that they can then claim that they smell marijuana, or alcohol on your breath.
Have you ever talked with someone with a closed window on a street with traffic? Gee, why so hysteric?
It seems 2 things are in play: 1) police are in the wrong line of work since they seem to do everything from a state of fear and 2) we live in a quasi-police state already, it seems.
Wait until they breakout the robocops.
The problem is that the person who can put up with that level of stress and not become paranoid or depressed or stressed out is extremely rare. There aren't enough to go around, especially if some of them go into other high stress jobs.
If you look at a cop and see an ordinary person doing a difficult and thankless job, life becomes mush easier for everyone.
@@fh5926a lot of that is Hollywood copaganda. Nursing is more hazardous than being a police officer. It’s not even in the top 10.
Cops don’t become psychos.
Psychos become cops.
Cops don’t become psychos.
Psychos become cops.
When I get pulled over, I roll down my window about 4 inches(enough to be able to reach your door locks from outside), turn my radio off, take the key out of the ignition, grab all my papers out of the glove box to have ready when the officer gets to the door. While grabbing my papers, I leave the keys in the glove box and close it. After handing over my papers, I put my hands on the wheel until everything is given back to me. If they give back my papers before the tickets are ready, I will put them on the dash, and hands back on the wheel.
I do this so that:
1) The officer can't claim I was about to flee cause the car was still running.
2)With the radio off, any recordings won't be hard to hear, and the cop has a harder time saying he can't hear me and wants the windows down more.
3) With the keys not in the ignition, I'm not physically able to roll down the windows.
4) With my papers ready when he arrives at the window, I won't need to rummage around in the car, this takes away one of the safety concerns he can claim. Though they can still try to say your movements of getting stuff out of the glove box were furtive.
5) With the keys in the glove box, they would need a warrant to search the glove box, and if they ask you to get them out of the box to start your car to roll down the windows, those both work against the officer claiming fear since there could be weapons in the glove box, and you could flee if you turn the car on.
6) Since you haven't moved your hands since handing over your papers, it would be hard to claim they were afraid.
7) If asked to get out of the car anyways, you should have enough points to argue in court, so comply by slowly moving both hands fingers up towards the door. With one hand pull the handle, and immediately lock it with the other as soon as its slightly open. Open only as much as is needed to get out, and immediately close behind you.
8) Since the car is locked now, and the keys are in the glove box, they can't ask you to open the door, and without a warrant, they can't legally reach in the window, but since there is room that they can, it (forgive the pun) leaves a window open for them to walk into a lawsuit. When the stop is over, you can reach in and unlock it yourself.
Over the years I have changed how I handle the stops and added a few steps that set bait so to speak, and this is what I've come up with so far.
If anyone disagrees with any steps, or have other tricks to use that both protect you and trap them, please let me know.
Be safe, there are lots of pirates on the roads
*edits for spelling
Nice and well thought out.
Many cars won’t allow the car to lock if the key fob is left inside the car so if your trying to lock the door after you put the keys in the glove box ain’t gonna work. Trust me I’ve tried it.
@@auxmike718Most cars built till 2015 can do this, so the option is still viable for some.
I once swallowed the trunk key. This procedure is much simpler. 😆
@@auxmike718 I suppose that is true. Hadn't factored that in. Though honestly if they feel they have the right to get in, they will break a window. Legally it's enough if they even open the door without PC. At least if it's unlocked, you don't gotta pay for the window.
When a officer says he smells weed in my car, I generally replay, "That's funny, all I can smell is bacon".
My urge at "I smell [substance]." is to respond, "Well stop using [substance] while you're at work!"
If in officer ever says that to me, my response is "Well stop smoking weed and you won't smell it everyplace you go."
How's that work for you?
😂😂
The rest of that statement probably ends with and then the cop was taking me!! 😅😅
The real reason for rolling the window down is the ‘I smell pot.’ excuse.
Attorney Shield
or alcohol
Thankfully a lot of states have changed the law a so that cant be uses as an excuse to violate you r rights.
If you don't have pot then comply with rolling window down.
@@Asidebar What makes you think pot actually has to be present for them to 'claim' they smell pot?
IF You Don't Insist On Your Rights, Then You Won't Soon 🔜 Have Any!
Then you'd better first actually understand what the rights are - and aren't before you start showing the cop an attitude.
Ok bootlicker.
@@Colgate64 It's simple. I have the right to travel. You do not have the right to stop me unless I have committed a crime. Speeding is a traffic infraction, not a crime.
@@DrDangerPuppy so a cop can't stop you for speeding or any traffic offence?
@@DrDangerPuppy You have the right to travel. You do not have the right to drive a motorized vehicle on the public roadways. Amendment X of the Constitution lets states regulate driving by enacting laws. Speeding is a violation of one of those laws. A violation of that law is a civil offense, punishable by fine and/or restrictions to your drivers license. It doesn't have to be a crime in order to be punished by the law.
Cop: Sir, please roll down the window
You: No, do you have probable cause? Else this is an illegal search.
*BLAM BLAM BLAM*
Cop: 999 Shots fired. Suspect refused to roll down window therefore endangering my safety/life.
Court: Qualified immunity and fear of life. Case dismissed.
"Why does everyone hate us and laugh when we get our retirement 187 plan filled out?"
With regards to window tint… if I can legally own a panel van that can conceal anything stored in it, then why can’t I have window tint dark enough to also conceal the contents of my vehicle?
The window tint rule only applies to the windshield and the windows by the driver and passenger seats. When driving at night the tint would greatly reduce your ability to see things like pedestrians in dark clothing. Applying a heavy tint creates what is considered an unsafe vehicle. Nobody cares about anything behind the driver because you don't even need windows back there. At least in CA, you can tint the front side windows as long as the tint remains *above* your eye level with the seat upright. The top part of a windshield can be tinted too. It has to be well above eye level and not opaque.
I'm buying a windowless van. Case closed 😊
So here's what I learned watching 12 minutes of this video. Officers May violate your rights on the side of the road but it's in your best interest to go along with it
"Just comply." said a former high-ranking NYC cop.
"Just comply" said the "intimate assaulter".
Enabling bad behavior is how we got here. Should have been stopped from the very beginning.
Yep
That’s basically the point of all of this guy’s videos.
Consider your circumstances, and be deliberate and clear when you choose to assert your rights.
That court is wrong and should be appealed. If the Arizona car meets Arizona regulations it shouldn't be fined in any other state. That would be like saying you also need to register and have a license in the state you're traveling through.
Sometimes I feel like the only one who thinks America's state and national laws are genuinely insane. Like if I'm living in a state with legal recreational marijuana, but I'm moving a few states over and have to drive through non-legal states, you would be hit with a felony for not just possession but additionally for traveling with it (and that's assuming they don't also hit you with an "intent to sell" charge as well). Doesn't matter if it was legal where I bought it or legal where I'm going or that its stored properly or anything.
🐑tolerate ALL of the STATES FIREARM "RESTRCTIONS" FROM 1 STATE 2THE NEXT,SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?
That is exactly how it works with our natural right of self defense. Direct violation of the 2A and 14A
I'm a former resident of NY, now living in Ohio. When I drove back to NY, a cop tried to give me a ticket for no front license plate. Ohio only issues one plate, for the rear. I explained that but the cop didn't believe me and started writing a ticket anyway. Another cop, his Sargent, showed up. I explained the situation to the Sarge. After about 10 minutes of confering and probably looking it up, the Sarge said I was free to go. The first cop was pissed and drove off without saying anything else 😆
Right, or in the case of Arizona and California you would have to get a front plate from Arizona to legally travel in California since California requires a front and rear license plate. In Arizona you are not required to have a front license plate.
That window tint stop happened to me once. It was not too dark but the cop was just trying to find something to give me a ticket for. I managed to get a picture of him, his car, and the number on his car and a date stamp. When I went to court with his bogus tint ticket I showed the Judge the cops car and how dark the tint was on it. The Judge dismissed my ticket. It was worth missing a day at work to see the cop lose, he was in there for several other violations he had written.
Essentially threw the ticket away, the ticket wasn't justified and the Judge thought so as well.
That didn’t happen in any universe😂
So U lost a days pay & lil piggy(probably)got pd.OT! HA-HA! FOOL
The cop lost? Not really, he got paid OT for his time in court while you lost a day's pay.
If a cop loses too many cases his credibility gets thrown out in any case
We need an AI attorney in our vehicles. Whenever we're pulled over by the cops, it automatically responds to the cops for us citing all the laws the cop doesn't even know and informs the driver what to do and not to do.
Abolish police unions. Abolish qualified, judicial and prosecuratorial immunity
Law enforcement is not about enforcing the law, it is about generating revenue for the city, county, state, or nation. Law enforcement personnel do not believe the laws apply to them; they believe that they are exempt.
@@josephboone4453 Absolutely. There are states that have contractual agreements with the companies that run private prisons, contracts that guarantee minimum "occupancy" i.e., incarceration.
So why isn’t Oakland a thriving community if this is true? They were the model of defund the police.
Wow .
Why is this the same all around the world?! I thought this was only a thing in my Eastern EU country. 😵 They have quotas to fill. They usually give tickets in October and November. I wonder why…
Elect better politicians and judges.
I'm so sick of hearing "for Officer Safety" and combined with lack of understanding of the law, poor training, abuse of power, out of control egos and the legal ability to lie through their teeth it's a literal mine field and John Q public is always on the losing end. You'd have a better chance of winning the Powerball than coming across a decent cop these days.
Officer safety is a joke, most are injured in trafffic accidents when not wearing seatbelts.
That is why they a Fascists.
Actually it is for officer safety to have windows lowered and such. It is recognized and in certain states , the courts would rather have the officer order people out of the car rather just ask about weapons in the car . Most cops are killed in traffic accidents followed by domestic and violence at car stops . Before the officer safety exceptions , the number one cause of officer deaths were during car stops - that’s why SCOTUS recognized it and made such realistic exceptions. Remember the constitution protects against unreasonable searches. The bill of rights in the constitution did not apply to local and state law enforcement until Mapp v Ohio in 1960. Miranda warnings didn’t come until 1962 etc.
I am a prosecutor in one jurisdiction, and I do criminal defense in other jurisdictions. While I totally encourage you not to voluntarily consent to having your car searched; when you start playing these little games on the side of the road of whether you’re going to roll down your window or whether you’re going to give your drivers license, etc. - one thing is usually going to happen. The officer is going to say that you are refusing a lawful order, get you out of the car (either voluntarily or by force), and arrest you. You’re going to get taken to jail, booked, locked in Jail cell, have to get bonded out - which means paying a bail bondsman, hire an attorney (which will cost a few thousand dollars), go to court (which usually means taking two days off from your job - one for your arraignment and one for your trial date), and very, possibly being found guilty and having a criminal record.
You need to highly consider if you really want to get into a pissing contest over nothing. Now, if you have something to hide, it might be worth it. As I say - I always encourage you not to consent to the search. But as for the other little games - you might ultimately beat the charge, but you won’t beat the ride!
@@robertharenski8340 and that's why you go after that immunity every single time.
If the officer smells Marijuana, he should clean his uniform after he smokes a joint. 😮 😅
"ROLL DOWN THE WINDOW!"
"DON'T MOVE!"
"LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS!"
"I SAID DON'T MOVE M'FER!"
"GET OUT OF THE F'ING CAR!"
"I SAID DON'T MOVE!"
BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM
"The suspect wouldn't obey my commands and kept making furtive movements. I was in fear for my life, your honor. "
If a police officer fears for their life because someone won’t roll down their window they they have no right being a cop if they are that skittish
I also live in TEXAS. Thank you for all you do. IF I am ever stopped I am recording the whole dang thing. If I get into trouble...hope you understand, I will be calling you!!
Ha ha ha l.o.l
Don’t worry, the cops record everything too.
@@sc7453good luck getting it in time for your case. So now you’re in a position to have to issue a the PD a subpoena of evidence pursuant to pending case, and if they don’t get it to you in time now you have to go to the court case and make a motion to reschedule the hearing until the PD provides the evidence and gives ample time to formulate a defense.
@@sc7453 those recordings tend to get lost when they do something wrong.
12:05 All the false need in some cases.
The fact you need videos like this says everything
It is important to note that while there are around eight WARRANT exceptions, there are no probable cause exceptions. Lawyers never clarify this. This means if a cop uses a warrant exception for a search or seizure, he still must have hard, probable cause evidence BEFORE executing the search or seizure.
"Probable cause to BELIEVE." (this is a very misleading phrase)
I also want to point out the probable cause evidence is NOT a belief. Probable cause evidence refers to multiple, hard FACTS, not beliefs, not hearsay, not opinions. The police can only use force based on FACTS.
The police use whatever reason they want for probable cause. Always have always will, and will NEVER see any punishment for it.
This is why it’s always better to protect your rights politely, be respectful and fight in court.
@@raidensama1511fighting in court is dumb when you get wrung out anyways. Best thing to do is escalate if you know you're doing nothing wrong/have done nothing wrong. Once they use excessive force at the very least you can sue for that
@ you’re going to court regardless how you act. It’s going to cost you, at the least time, and otherwise a lot of legal fees and time.
@@raidensama1511 so you make it so they can't ignore violations. courts aren't willing to punish officers or pay for their mistakes unless it's a bigger violation.
I read Mimms. Where does it say anything about using force or violence to get a driver out of the car? Once an officer uses violence including breaking your window, they have drawn "First Blood" and the driver is entitled to use all available self defense measures including lethal to defend themselves.
so, a cop can say he smells pot, and he then gets to break my window? how is the cop going to establish evidence that he did in fact smell pot?
"Windows too dark" is the new "I smell the odor of marijuana"
Don't illegally tint your windows and don't smoke weed in your car and you won't have anything to hide😂😅🤣😅😅😲😲
It's different. One is probable cause for a traffic stop, the other is probably cause for a search after the traffic stop is made.
@@JefferyRaley If the cop want's to , he will!!!!
If a night stop, turn on your interior lights. Shows what is inside, even if it is tinted.
And turn off the engine..
No to both
The cop will just say "I smell Alcohol, step out of the car" and do whatever he wants and get away with it.
Simple. Before you get out, roll up all your windows, turn off your car, place the keys on your dash, and as you're exiting the car, lock all your doors.
Alcohol is odorless as expelled from your lungs so unless he says he smells the odor of alcoholic beverage or sees open containers or something else that is a fail.
@@johnleca😂😂😂
You need to scream "I do not consent" and "I do not contract with you" over and over til the charges go away 😂
Qualified Immunity allows them to step on the constitution.
I was pulled over in Illinois for my window tint. He acknowledged that my car was registered to another state. He suggested I drive with my driver's side window down to prevent getting pulled over when outside of my state. He was very polite and helpful. If you are clearly visible via your driver window open... you shouldn't have any problems. If you do have problems, they are looking for a reason to screw with you.
That was nice of him 😊
😐
He knew you were from another state before he pulled you over. He was being a dick
California will make you remove the tint, on the spot.
@@jcadult101 That's destruction of private property
Patting your pockets is also a search. Officer safety is abused. 99.99% of police interactions never result with a cop being injured.
a detainment is a seizure. cuffing someone for officer safety is also unconstitutional. this shit needs to end. there shouldn't be an on and off switch for govt to deny us our rights.
@@jacobpmesserElect better politicians
Patting is not a search, but manipulating the pocket is. This is covered under Terry v ohio
I was hit head on by a drunk driver and my right hand went through the windshield, i was punched in the face by a suspect who had a warrant for assault on Police, I have been in many fights and lastly crippled making a narcotics arrest and falling on concrete. Strange enough the other officer who was there while I was on the ground trying to recover narcotics evidence just stood there and did nothing. I do agree with you that when a cop gets a scratch it is team coverage on the news and when four construction guys get killed it is barely a blip. American people are really messed up because of all the bullshit with cops. I had a firearm, soft body armor, a car and a radio. People work everyday in very dangerous jobs at WAWA and they have nothing yet people do not really care about them. I would just like to say thank you for your service to the people who work and feed us and build this country everyday and get no fucking credit or appreciation.
99.99786%, to be precise. Of 60,000,000 police public contacts, approximately 15,863 are violent.
Qualified immunity, civil asset forfeiture, silence is compliance, ignorance of the law isn't a defense.
Sure you stand a chance...sure...
Forgot fraternal order of police.
Attorney Shield
@@thomasturner2966 $15/month doesn't protects you from any of that. Call and ask about civil asset forfeiture protection. The problem is supreme court rulings.
Ignorance of the law is an excuse. It's called pignorance.
An unelected official is allowed to dictate policy. That policy has law enforcement backing it. No one has any idea how many policies there are in the federal government. So if want to avoid ignorance stat calling every department in the federal government and ask for all of the policies and hope they don't change tomorrow.
Well…. This video was depressing. Basically you’re fucked when the cop pulls you over. The cops can claim anything they want and the courts will uphold their claims.
let me save you guys 15 minutes: you don't have any rights and the cops can do whatever they want to you
Functionally true. Even if the cop is doing something blatantly illegal, resisting a police officer will never end well for you, unless you have lots of witnesses and cameras. And even then it's not a guarantee.
Are you Canadian? Cause they can do whatever they want...
@@ianbattles7290 go after their bond! There are ways to hold them accountable.
@@markhammar3977 no but i know they're in the same boat we are. americans have lost our constitutional rights and canadians lost their charter rights. we're all just slaves now
CORRECT!
Unless you have money, it don't matter whether they can justify what they do or not.
Yes exactly. There is different levels of enforcement and justice depending on various factors, number one is money then who you know and your race, gender etc.
Calmly asserting your rights can be misapplied as disobedience to an officer which can be falsely labeled as an officer safety issue. Driver’s rights are meaningless.
First of all, invoking your rights can not and will not be construed as a crime.
Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 94 S. CT. 316, 38 L. Ed. 2d 274 [1973]. (Confirmed)
Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547, 142 U.S. 563-564. (Confirmed)
McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34, 40, 45 S.Ct. 16, 17, 69, L.Ed. 158 [1924] (Confirmed Westlaw)
And second, driving is a privilege, not a right.
The following should be mandatory for becoming any form of law enforcement. (REVISED & UPDATED)
1) No criminal history.
2) Mandatory 1 yr constitutional law, civil rights, and de-escalation education/training.
3) Mandatory annual continued constitutional law,
civil rights and de-escalation education/training.
4) Mandatory national registry. (same as child offenders).
5) Prior citizen complaints follow for life.
6) Prior reprimands follow for life.
7) Limited qualified immunity with mandatory liability insurance.
8) Mandatory body cameras and mandatory termination, prosecution, and/or jail time for muting, tampering, obstructing, or deleting body camera footage. (Remove mute buttons altogether)
9) Mandatory full accountability and enforcement for breaching laws/ malfeasance. (such as threatening nonviolent civilians, filing a false report, and /or lying on a report/in court). THEY HAVE BODY CAMS TO REWATCH WHAT THEY DID... NO REASON TO ACCEPT LIES OR MANIPULATION.
Send this to your congressman.
COPY, PASTE, AND SHARE...
... and than you wonder why nobody want to be a cop.
I agree, but US cops are too stupid to pass any of those
@slappy200 best reply ever... 😆😆😆
@leonidfro8302 so what would you propose?
Leaving things "AS IS" or "STATUS QUO"... isn't working. When they made other professions measure up to higher standards, it brought out the best... people started respecting their fields and, most importantly, the PEOPLE in that field.
@@stevenjones3248 Drugs legalization would be a great start. This will immediately eliminate searches of cars (what is there to look for?). Next - demilitarization of police force. Next - no jail for victimless crime.
Thats why douguts are round. They removed the corners for officer safety.
Is there any legal argument to be made for CITIZENS SAFETY? Officers are armed and when THEY exhibit aggressive behavior I'd be hesitant to comply with their orders!
Not complying generally doesn't make them less aggressive. And a rolled up window won't really protect you. Not saying you said that, but many people seem to think that.
I would say bodycams are a good mechanism for ensuring citizens safety.
It’s amazing how many excuses the cops can find to avoid abiding by the law.
Well, they hang out with other cops off duty and (just like career criminals) talk about nothing other than how to fuck over the public. Cops and criminals are very much the same in attitude.
My biggest problem with Pennsylvania vs Mimms is it doesn't make sense. How can it make the officer safe by pulling the person out it actually makes him more unsafe.
The mimms case the guy had a gun
@bboywolf and police abuse the reason behind regularly.
California also has emissions laws so when you're travelling through Californian you have to have an emissions sticker too?
Officer Safety is just Copsplaining for, "I'm going to violate your rights and there isn't anything you can do about it."
I am not legally obligated to point to, or help law enforcement obtain evidence to be used against me. This also holds true for DUI stops. A great deal of intimidation and coercion is used to make people SUBMIT to testing conducted and directed by officers. First of all, none of them have the required skill set or credentials to effectively administer testing designed to aid in a neurological diagnosis and treatment plan...NOT to VIOLATE human rights. We also take oaths preserving constitutional rights.
The results of their testing is NOT and CANNOT be granted as the legal authority. Years of experience on a daily basis where these tests are administered multiple times a day, vary with multiple different people give the examiner CREDIBLE testimony. Practitioners are trained without bias. When we examine a person, we have NO idea what the cause or causes might be for the individuals impairment. When cops conduct testing it is ALWAYS done with SPECIFIC regards to the causative agents of drugs and or alcohol, further proof it is CLEARLY a conflict of interest.
Law enforcement agencies rely more on smoke and mirrors to manipulate the public perception and approval. As law abiding citizens, we support our officers because we have ENTRUSTED them to act on the side of law as shaped by the constitution. We must stop doing that as the gap between law and practice is growing ever wider. Drug Recognition Experts play FICTIONAL roles. As a practitioner of over 30 years, I would love to know what a DRE officer is taught in 1 month that would enable him with a skill doctors and nurses do not have after years of training and decades of clinical experience!!! This is why BLOOD is their holy grail for evidence. But there's a problem...doctors and nurses are the only professionals who are trained and credentialed to perform INVASIVE procedures on LIVING persons and because of laws and policies that govern such things as a blood draw create a most unfortunate obstruction in their process of evidence collection. This is precisely the charge ordered by Officer Jeff Payne when he arrested Alex Wubbles, a registered nurse in SLC Utah. He was fired, she got a half million dollars in the wrongful arrest lawsuit. There is a REASON law enforcement got slapped down. The officer went beyond his scope of practice and discovered the limits of his perceived authority.
It seems to me as being quite evident, it is sheer ignorance and arrogance that plague law enforcement. The most EGREGIOUS law enforcement practice is the use of IMPLIED CONSENT. Law enforcement officers have been trained to believe that any person who accepted a driver's license IMPLIED their consent to submit to testing conducted or directed by law enforcement officers. But there's a problem...they lack a critical element in order that implied consent may be LEGALLY executed. They lack EXIGENCY. An exigent event or circumstance requires immediate intervention. It permits me to presume a person in peril, loss of life and limb would give me CONSENT to take measures that would either improve their condition or spare their life. Law enforcement blood draws for alcohol and drugs do NEITHER of these things. Sorry, Mr. Policeman...your subject is just potentially drunk. There is no emergency here, therefore, the use of implied consent cannot be valid and is ILLEGAL.
In addition, a person has the right to rescind or withdraw implied consent at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all. Taped to my licence are the words, "Implied consent to law enforcement is revoked from the date of issue until the date of expiration on this license. Implied consent is expressly reserved for a physician ONLY".
Why? Because if you draw blood under implied consent, this action MUST be performed for the benefit and welfare of the person from which the blood is drawn and NOT a second or third party. Any action taken under implied consent MUST be a NECESSARY action resulting in improving the persons status.
Officers, judges and attys have no need to know the laws governing my profession...it is beyond the scope of their practice and credentials. Today, officers are being sent to a class to learn how to draw blood themselves, circumventing doctors and nurses. This is WRONG
You would think so!
As a former cop I will say this, I'll remove my tent when they remove there's, the tent on the cops windows are so dark you can't even see anybody sitting in there, cops are supposed to be enforceing the law, so they should be held to the same standards!!!!!
I get your point about cops being held accountable and agree 100 percent but you know and I know that some exemptions are needed just like operating a patrol car when you are on a priority call (lights and sirens are required in Pennsylvania by Police when doing so) you are going to break laws, speed limits, use caution but still disregard traffic signals and I do not know how many insane pursuits I have been in. Yes accountability but it will NEVER happen.
Can you spell?
@@sgt.grinch3299 Are you referring to the word typed as "tent" rather than tint? I just thought it was a typographical error.
A tent is what you sleep in when you go camping. (Among other things, though, notably not the window coating that attenuates light transmission through said window, that being a tint.)
@jnawk83 I didn't spell it Google did!!!
I have never had a cop ask me to roll my window down.
Because I always roll it down immediately so I can yell _”What is the meaning of this? This is an outrage!!!”_ while I’m handing them my license.
Cops love it when you make jokes.
Keep licking them boots boy
🤔😮🤣
I always keep jelly donuts in my car for situations like this
The cops will almost always claim they have some, "officer safety concern." BUT, many cops do not wear the seat belt in their patrol car, and the majority of cops are fifty pounds or more overweight, both of which are also very harmful to, "officer safety."
When stopped ,for any reason, YOUR safety is 99.9% in jepordy !
As I recall, many (and maybe a majority of) police officers are seriously injured or killed in automobile accidents.
True enough, but I still had to laugh at you're comment!
My state has something called implied consent where if you refuse a field sobriety test or breathalyzer test your DL will automatically be suspended.. I believe that to be punishment without due process and imo unconstitutional
What state? And are you sure it covers field sobriety tests?
@@billcook4768 all. Read your drivers license card and get in lexusnexus and research it.
Legal definition for license, and right of travel type stuff. It's all there. Been there for a century, but barely anyone reads it.
Always record any type of interaction with the police. Your cellphone is your best defense 🇺🇸
I've heard that you can use the 5th Amendment to keep cops from making you roll up your window for a tint check. You don't have to incriminate yourself by making that window available for a tint measurement.
Interesting point
Why is illegal window tint allowed to be sold in America? They should bust not only the driver but the window tint place or the chain of supply, and stop it completely, otherwise it's entrapment and a RACKET
@BeUnotATVrobot beside the fact that window tint is used for many more reasons than just vehicle windows, the fact IS WE ARE ADULTS and CAPABLE OF MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS. We can choose to read the legislation about what is or isn't allowed as a modification to our vehicles or risk being ticketed. NOTE, it STARTS with your LAW-MAKERS so if a rule is oppressive petition your legislature (just like the law enforcers DID to get that law into place...
@@waaynneb1808 Your first statement gets at why.
There is window tinting sold to be used on things like house windows that is too dark for safe driving.
People why argue otherwise could be directed at window frosting kits.
Window frosting is sold for house windows, often bathrooms, to block clear vision of people within.
What level of window frosting is compatible with the safe operation of a vehicle on the road? (hint: pretty much none)
@@MonkeyJedi99 I actually agree with the laws in my state and just bought a crap car and will remove the side wing tinting and it is a pain to do so. This will put me in compliance. I think emissions and inspection though are bullshit.
Because most states allow dark tint on back windows. You can also have dark tint on a show car that isn't used on public roads.
@@johnleca Yeah! (cough, cough) who gets to tell me my car isn't safe enough to drive! I know what I'm doin... (crash).
-
Because for every person who knows how to keep their vehicle in solid mechanical condition, there are hundreds or thousands who don't.
And we're all on the same roads.
They always use officer safety as a reason when they are armed and have a vest plus stun gun and pepper spray , baton ,and backup.
Dumbest comment. Because someone carries a gun and body armor indicates they can’t be killed by another? When does basic safety decisions depend on how armed you are? 😂 your logic falls on its face
Police officer isn’t even in the top 15 of most dangerous jobs. What a boot licker comment
@@heromuff7338 I can't walk down the street armed to the teeth for my personal safety, can I?
@ are you dealing with calls for service, shootings, criminals, assaults, assault with deadly weapons, etc etc etc. nope didn’t think so 👍
@@heromuff7338 Not really a dumb comment. The police can write off any behavior as an officer safety issue. They can just use one of the magical incantations like "furtive movement" to justify an officer safety issue. You sneeze, furtive movement, officer safety. Police also like to perpetuate the myth of how dangerous their jobs are when the reality is school crossing guard is a more dangerous job. Line of duty deaths for police is pretty low. 2022 there were only 118. Frankly you could probably cut about 1/3 of them out _if_ police would wear their seatbelts as vehicle crashes are a big contributor to officer fatalities. Their officer safety issue are pretty tiny but they big it up and you'll never hear the end of it.
How do we get power back from these tyrants? Can we strip them of these powers and get rid of the office safety crap? This all seems like abuse of power.
Elect better politicians
Dueling and bounty law.
Short of that, file against the municipality's insurance or bond.
You won't get a payout, but like a truck driver with too many accidents, they won't employ them under the company's insurance.
I have a serious question. Why does officers safety trump the citizens safety they are sworn to protect? They will turn a person videotaping them into a safety issue so they can point weapons and demand the public do as they say using their safety as the reason. I thought their job is to protect citizens rights from being violated and defend the people who do have their rights violated. What happened to protect and serve the public? It seems more like the police want to protect our government and themselves.
Meh, my windows is already rolled down by the time they reach the door.
I also turn the engine off, set the parking brake. And at night, I turn on the interior dome light too.
If I am in a bad neighborhood, I hold both hands out the window so they can see my hands.
Aren't you a good boy. Until they think putting your hands out the window is suspicious, because clearly you've had some criminal interaction before. Do you check your license plate lights before every trip? You might want to start, of course being in the hood with a fully functioning car might also be suspicious.
Good job inviting them to violate your rights. Because that's exactly what they see when you do that.
@@gunnydeeP.I. Quite the opposite. I do that as well. All four windows down, engine off, dome light on, and lic/reg/ins in hand. I've never had an officer go fishing for any additional information. Last two pull overs, I left with a verbal warning. And if one day they decide to start a fishing expedition, I'll simply respond with "I've already gone above and beyond the constitutional requirements to make the stop as easy as possible for you. Don't expect anything more."
@@gunnydeeP.I. I am with the others. It is about a semblance of respect. Some cops can be shitty, but many are doing their job. And too many people feel that if they don't try and start shit with the cops, they are being violated. I've been pulled over a couple of times because my car matched a description of drug runners (Apparently they really prefer Buick Centuries). What did I do? I cooperated and was cool with the police. Was it an inconvenience? Probably. But who da fuq cares? I ended up have some great conversations with them. My first time I had a bunch of weapons in my car as I was moving. I told the cop. We ended up checking out my M44 rifle because he has never seen a Russian Bolt Action is almost new condition. Too many people think police are the enemy. And channels like this just add fuel to the fire.
Keep believing that. You'll be ok.
This is why we sue and sue everytime.
Tell the officer you have tested positive for COVID, and ask if he wants to be exposed.
What year are you living in? Do you still wear the cloth mask to the store too?
I didn't say when I tested positive. Bird flu also would work.
@@weirdweaver149 Any other viral infectious disease will work.
It's 2025 Skippy. Move on.
@@SOBXNEWS ok then Bird Flu, or whatever they are saying at the time, that will kill you.
This really remind's me of thieves trying to get their foot in the door!
Ordering someone out of their car without any real recourse for consequences if the officer happens to not have probable cause is about as intrusive upon ones rights as it gets actually.
Considering you are relying entirely on a DA or other government employee to press charges against the cop for the lack of probable cause, there is not real recourse.
Courts are just in favor of government control in general.
At 13:59 Regarding locking your car doors if told to get out of your car: This will not work if you have one of the stupid key fob "keyless start" cars. As long as you are within a few feet of your car (and fob is in your pocket) ANYBODY can pull the door handle and open the door. :((
good point - those pesky key fobs
Ngl that sounds like a safety issue for the rough parts of town.
Buy a Ford with a keyless entry on the door panel. It can be locked with your keys in your vehicle. Only way to unlock is through the Ford app or by knowing the code.
Many fobs can be put to sleep.
When I am stopped, all windows are rolled down and the keys are placed on the dash. Both hands are on the wheel with license, insurance and registration. If it’s night the same thing happens but all interior lights are on.
Policing for profit is a real thing. When only honest people have dash cams, they'll try to take them away too.
I love how window tint has become criminal activity. Makes me wonder why so many citizens would get together and petition to make this a criminal offense?? Oh ya, they didn't. Our government isn't suppose to be creating new laws. That isn't part of their original duties. Now we pay them to sit in rooms and create statues every day to use against "we the people".
So elect better politicians
@@billcook4768 Negative. Dueling with civil penalties for refusal and bounty law.
Anything short of that is filing against a municipality's bond or insurance.
@billcook4768 brilliant. You think that might really work? Elect more people into the same position to perform the same duties because they believe that's what they are suppose to do. I'm pretty sure we are way beyond that point. Police can't even recite a basic explanation of the Constitution they are sworn to protect. Politicians creating statutes "for our safety" without any support for the people. Agencies spying on it's citizens, documenting and keeping files. Lobbyists, huge corporations where we never hear any concerns of monopolies anymore, sitting down Mom and Pop stores during cov but keeping box stores open. It's sad but this government is the absolute opposite of the system that was put into place to protect us from exactly what we have put right back into power. They are even changing rules and guidelines for elections and doing it in a way the openly violates the procedural rules. And when people do stand up like you are OBLIGATED TO DO. IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO. A large percentage of citizens speak out against it and side with the crooks.
Ya, maybe we should just elect better politicians. I'm sure it we just use the same ignorance to research and vote for the same arrogance it will be fixed by the second Tuesday of next week.
Way to be a part of the problem! Gotta make yourself and your loved ones feel real proud of you!!
Better yet why is a judge making people pay these fines for the same tint he or she has on there cars !
2:30 - So here’s a scenario I just made up: cop pulls you over claiming your window tint is too dark, then tries to use the tint meter thing. Does using the tint meter prove that the cop didn’t actually know your tint was too dark, and by extension the cop didn’t have the necessary probable cause to pull you over?
Not a lawyer or anything, but I would assume that any level of tint would be sufficient in court to establish a valid reason for the stop.
Because it's obviously not non-tinted. And our eyes can't see the difference between legal and non-legal tint, except in the extremes of that spectrum.
So if they see a tinted window, there is a possibility that it's too dark. Giving them enough reason to stop you and investigate a potential violation.
Apply this same login to them using breathalyzer to get your blood alcohol level.
They have a feeling you are intoxicated based on what they see. So they use a device to put a somewhat scientific measure of the level you are at.
While all of these efforts are supported by the Supreme Court to "only" provide "Officer Safety". What this means is that the Supreme Court has decided that Innocent Citizens do "NOT" have any rights for "Citizens Safety" whatsoever. This was the reason for the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. It was to protect the Citizens against the tyranny of the Courts and of the Police and or Sheriffs. The Bill of Rights has been so criminally watered down by the Courts, the Bill of Rights will very soon become the "Papers of the Socialist Government". It has happened before, and it is occurring now in the United States. This was affirmed when the Supreme Court decided that Police Officers, Sheriffs, and other Government Peace Officers had "absolutely" no requirement to protect a citizen from any criminal event whatsoever, and that at the "discretion" of the Officer, they can either take action to save a citizen's life, or they can ignore the criminal action and ignore the safety of a citizen and simply not act at all even if it means the death of the citizen. I believe that this is the real reason that the citizens of the United States no longer respect or believe anything that an officer says or does. This was never the case 70 years ago when I was born. Officers received respect and honor back then because they were not so eager to kill innocent citizens. That is no longer the case and now it has become a "sporting event" to see the kill with most officers
I have to agree with you and, BTW I am over eighty!! On the same note, where's the sanctity of live in America???
Case law is not the law. Only Congress and state legislators can make laws.
Police safety is staying in their mother's basement where it is cozy and warm
Officer Safety equals Officer Cowardice.
There the ones that signed up for the job.
@D41-j5s but they still quake in their under pants. Just like people on roller-coasters, we are terrified of them, yet we still go on them.
@wfussner I get what you're saying. But at same time your the one that stand in line for the roller-coaster just like people signed up for being a cop. I just can't stand when they it's for safety and there's ones that put themselves in danger and violate people's rights
The entire court system is currupt. They all work for the same entity. It is a conflict of intrest.
Let me warn you that if you drive in the People's Republic of California and stop at a parking meter in Santa Monica or West Hollywood, you are in the Parking Nazi Zone. They buzz around 24/7 writing a fist full of tickets each hour. They chalk mark the tires and often return sooner than the sign postings. I know, my desk looks outside, and I can see it happen often enough to witness it. It keeps their city budget afloat. My parents had a handicap placard and still got tickets twice, the second time court/police refused to return the placard. So calling them Nazis is clearly the closest name for their actions...
Wrong. You don't "receive" your rights from the Constitution; rights aren't gifts from government. The Constitution attempts to limit government from infringing on your rights.
In your AZ / CA example of window tint holds true then why do you not need a front license plate to drive your AZ vehicle in CA?
I got pulled over for rear window tint because the officer “couldn’t see through the vehicle”.
Soooo… I asked why he wasn’t pulling over the windowless van that was passing us.
You said something that is unethical. If the police decide to not follow the rules.. that needs to change
Needs to. Will it? No.
Cops get to do whatever they want. Some judges will check them, but not many.
@@JeshuaSquirrel oh they do? Might want to let the judge that sent derrick chauvin to prison know
@JeshuaSquirrel No, cops don't get to do whatever they want. That's how cops get hurt or killed. Cops shouldn't break the law like they do all the time, but they do. When I had to deal with an asshole pig accusing me of being wrong, I called the sheriff on that cop and put the cop under citizens arrest. As we both went to the sheriffs office to settle the dispute I was released the same day with no charges. The cop got blasted by his superiors.
@@dakotasteele8546 perhaps you missed the sentence after that one?
So, cops who are dressed for the freezing conditions outside, but I am not, I have to get out of the car for THEIR safety.
Police watching this video: "Uh, actually, we don't NEED people's consent to search their car! Just like when we break into people's home... and pull our gun out... aaaand arrest them with disorderly conduct or something."
That was my lovely hometown of Saginaw, MI that got rapped for chalking tires.
California too,4th Amendment violation 😅
Citizen safety should trump officer safety.
right on!
Every time, you know why? they(the cops) signed up for this job!!It It certainly is not our problem if they have a short fuse or dont' know how to behave properly in public!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A point I'd like to make is that you do not have to hand over or surrender any documents. I will paraphrase but the laws state that you only need to show the documentation. The best method is to roll down your windows a few inches, enough to be heard but not enough that the officer can reach inside and press the documents against the window. They all have pens and notepads, so make them use them.
In short, police can do whatever they want.
Fighting these constant and flagrant violations is nice and all, but we need something better for the people. We can't just expect to cycle people thru a system unlimitedly and indefinitely when there is no real public concern of a valid crime etc.
Elect better leaders and judges is the only answer.
Something better is the Constitution. It simply needs to be enforced by those that took an oath to enforce it. If they're not enforcing it, find out if it's ignorance or malice. Correct either one the lawful way.. If you don't know what that is, do your research.
Check your local laws first, but i know in my state of NJ (Which we all know is corrupt AF) the police cant stop you for tint any longer,its now a secondary charge. Same thing with the license plate frames, they used to be able to stop us if we had a license plate frame,like from the dealership you bought the car from. Well, no longer. So again check your local laws and ALWAYS have a dashcam. It will save your ass every time.
And encourage politicians to pass more laws giving rights to people like these.
License frame? What was the concern there?
@@e-curb The license frame is under suspicion on a crime.
@e-curb ok so I live in NJ. So if the license plate frame covered even a fraction of any of the letters of NEW JERSEY on the plate they would pull you over and ticket yiu for having an obscured license plate. Just a money making scam
Every single state has made a law since Mimms citing the significant danger of being at the side of the road during a stop. Mimms is no longer a minimal intrusion. The #1 cause of death in cops is being hit at the side of the road, and they're putting that danger on the driver.
Leading cause of death in officers is vehicle crash. Not being struck by vehicle during traffic stop. You are incorrect sir.
Here law enforcement comes to the side of the car on the shoulder. unless there is zero space, like a jersey barrier.
When a cop ask you to jump, don’t ask "how high?" 😂
They (6 officers) just walked into a wrong address over a stolen weedwhipper and shot the man. None of this matters. There are no laws
I see that 'Murika becomes a lawyers heaven. Soon, even breathing will demand legal counsel. :(
7:30 good reason to spend your tourism/travel budget somewhere other than California.
I can’t wait to escape!
The idea that the officer safety is always somehow at risk is a joke. They have unlimited backup and force multipliers.
Unless the person they are attempting to criminalize is a known criminal who would typically pose a threat would be the only reason to make unreasonable demands. So the idea of fishing for probable cause over a minor traffic infraction rather than simply issuing the citation is really on the perpetrators. Unnecessarily placing one's self in harms way for a $500 ticket is really foolish anyhow. These jokers commit many more crimes than the criminal they pretend to protect us from.
Infractions are not law. Traffic "laws" are rules. Rules you agreed to when you got a license. Even though a license is permission, when you already have the right to travel.
Yup! Cop charged me with obstruction cause I refused to roll my passenger window down for a backup officer for “officers safety” after I insisted they were safe. I got pulled out of the car, more officers were called, I was searched thoroughly multiple times & nothing was found. All over a expired paper tag😂
Window down a few inches: Roll your window down. I can hear you officer. I said roll your window down! DO YOU WANT MY COVID OFFICER?
Which law provides for driver and passenger safety? I keep hearing about officer safety but it's the officers brutalizing and killing drivers. Not the other way around.
So what your saying is we have no rights
Make tinted windows legal again.