He was still doing something illegal, if you agree with it or not is your own business. Failure to comply with these requests in a traffic stop (includes DUI checkpoint) is illegal. You cannot plead the fifth to get away with not identifying yourself.
@@lavakissy illegal or not it doesn’t give these “professionals” the right to be dicks and abusive (the cuffs). If your stupid and stab yourself does that give the dr a right to just stitch you up with no pain control? That cop that did that with the cuffs has done far far far worse I assure you and I also assure you the rest standing around would do nothing to stop him and would lie without a thought to cover it up.
@@lavakissy he absolutely was not doing anything illegal. Neither Florida nor California are stop and identify states. Meaning the police have to have reasonable suspicion you have committed a crime and be able to articulate the crime they are investigating you for. Objectively the 2 sides of argument are He went out of his way to make it harder on himself and the officers, vs the idea that any rights we don't stand up and fight for we will have taken away. You have no responsibility to assist an investigation against you. That is why you can always refuse sobriety tests. However driving is considered a privilege and some states will suspend that privilege up to a year for refusing a test.
@@robray8663 It was not a random stop. It was a DUI checkpoint which have been help up it's legality in the US supreme court which requires you to identify yourself and do the other things they requested in this video such as proving you are not under the influence of any alcohol. If you refuse to do it on the spot the police reserve the right to take a blood test to verify your sobriety levels.
If he was black and wearing dreads he would be face down in the road with knee on the back of his head. Can anyone imagine a black guy saying, “I don’t answer questions”? The last thing you want is a pissing contest with these clowns, then it becomes an emotional contest between the mob cops as to who is the toughest. My advice, always is, lie your head off. Tell them your dad was a cop, tell them you’re a Mormon and have never had a drink in your life, tell them you appreciate the fine work they do getting drunks off the road, tell them you just came from a memorial service for you mother, tell them you have to get home to relieve the baby sitter for your four kids, tell them you always answer questions, when they relate to something you actually did.
The ridiculousness of the cop saying ‘they are lawful orders. You MUST answer these simple questions.” If he was on drugs, or IF he was drinking, the questions are ordering you to incriminate himself. In direct violation of the 5th amendment. How, just absolutely HOW can a cop be that dumb and be allowed to carry a gun?
A cop can ask you to incriminate yourself, it is your own responsibility to plead the fifth. But the cops are actually right. They were enforcing the laws of the United States as well as the state of California. A DUI stop is legal as long as it is not discriminatory (stops based on race, gender, etc...) and you have to provide a valid drivers license and identification and other documents relating to the vehicle in a traffic stop failure to comply is illegal and you can be charged for it. You can of course refuse but then you must accept that they will break that fucking window and drag you out. That is the price of living in a society
Answering any question at a alcohol check point incriminates your self and justifies further detention. For example where were you tonight? (mind you it is a crime to lie to an officer, not a crime to take the 5th) You answer I went out to dinner. Now you have just admitted that you went to an establishment that might serve alcohol. O: Do they serve alcohol there. Citizen: Yes, I think so. (you have now confirmed you were at an establishment that served alcohol) O: Did you consume alcohol at this restaurant? C: No. O: well I smell alcohol on you. Or if C says I had one beer. Then you have now admitted consuming alcohol then driving. Officer: Sure it was just one? But you get the idea that answering questions will not help yourself.
The 4th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, The right to be secure in your papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated
@@emeralddragon2010 That they are really thought of as "crimes", they should be, at the most, considered infractions. Nobody should be thinking, oh my gosh the man is a criminal! He didn't provide ID or exit!! Ridiculous.
Reason so many cops are asshole now ... everyone is pussy or complys... so the 1 or 2 that fight back are all by themselves makes it alot easier to control and do bullshit when ur singled out... the system is smart but it definitely banks on the ignorance of the 85% that's deaf dumb and blind
@@barringtonstevens8791 What do you have to lose by complying your just making the cops job harder, the people behind you get delayed because of you. they are just asking simple questions, these DUI stops save lives, meanwhile, you are here whining that you have to answer simple questions. Let's just assume that the guy was drunk, and he didn't answer any questions, he would have gotten away and maybe even killed someone because of your stupid logic. JUST ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTIONS AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIVES!
I was behind this asshole I was on the way to the hospital to be with my family member , well I got to the hospital and she had passed away 15 min prior
"Step out of the vehicle! Step out of the vehicle! Step out of the vehicle!" I like how they always make their attacks seem like you're volunteering to be assaulted.
I hate how it becomes a narcissistic battle with the cops. This gentleman is obviously not intoxicated. As soon as the officers don't smell booze and determine the person is not intoxicated they should be free to go. The whole reason for the checkpoint is to determine if a person is intoxicated. This is the reason people don't trust the police.
It doesn't even matter if he is intoxicated or not. They have to subject all people to checks. 'Obviously not being intoxicated', if that is even a thing, is not a license to not cooperate with cops. All this talk about 4th and 5th amendment is complete crazy talk. You can only drive a car if you follow certain regulations. If you can't, you can't drive. If you refuse to answer questions or submit to inspections, you won't go to jail because of the 4th and 5th, but you can't drive. Complete misunderstanding of the law. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege that needs to be earned, in part by cooperating with the cops.
@@Prometheus4096, you are completely wrong as that is not how Due Process works for. Cops need cause to stop you, and be able to articulate what code violation they suspect you've committed. Without this would be a violation of the 4A. Further, no one is required to cooperate with the cops, 5A.
@@Prometheus4096 They should have the right, as clearly falls under the scope of the 4th Amendment, but for better or for worse, courts have carved out an exception for DUI stops.
Holy you don't know the law batman. No lawsuit as he resisted lawful orders. Learn the law then spee.your woke garbage. Funny how all the people who back this sorry excuse for a citizen are the same ones who think this clown of a president is doing a good job
Ever heard of "Failure to comply" or "Failure to identify" ? Yep. Little P***y acted up and was spanked for it. Most likely he eventually registered his car and/or transferred his DL to California and the charges were ultimately dismissed. It's just nice to hear him whine and cry. Hysterical. Pure Comedy Gold.
Driving is a privilege and not a right. One of the conditions of the privilege of driving which is granted by the license to drive is to provide proof of license, registration and insurance soon request by law enforcement. Failure to do so is a motor vehicle violation.
@@nathantemple5173 They are not speaking the truth. He is not required to speak to them and he is told that it is the law that requires him to comply. You can find cops who do this in every state.
I never saw him provide his drivers license. Why he is being asked to step out or forced to is not necessary nor should be required. His window is down far enough for an officer to bend down and smell for alcohol. Anyone drinking beyond legal limit driving with windows up and sitting with his window down 3 inches like his is will breath out alcohol odor easily distinguished to anyone not drinking. If they don't detect odor of alcohol and he has no other indicators of drinking such as slurred speech there isn't any reason to request him to exit vehicle.
Actually he didn’t need to hand them the drivers license, he only need present his license visually, her snatching his drivers license, is theft. Done without consent.
@@nintendokings can I ask you something seriously? How can you be so fucking ignorant? I'm being serious. Dhi checkpoints are legal. SCOTUS has ruled on that. An occupant of a vehicle must get out of the car when ordered to do so by a police officer. SCOTUS has also ruled on that. So since that does in fact make it LAW, and I have repeatedly told people this AND posted the links to the CASE LAW, it brings me back to my original question of how you can be so ignorant? My apologies if you are special needs
@@emeralddragon2010 Where did I say checkpoints are illegal? I didn’t. Demanding ID without probable cause: that’s the problem. But you’re acting like a right cunt so I guess you don’t properly read and argue in good faith…
Amazing how many untruths were spoken and laws were broken here by the police. I actually lost count. I hope this dude sues the hell out of these cops.
1 - 4th Amendment right Violated: Check 2 - No probable cause or reasonable suspicion: Check 3 - Fat fucking lawsuite against the police department: Check 4 - Go after every law enforcements badge involved, I would hope so. Good luck to ya sir and I hope you win.
***** Actually he will quite good luck with it because there are multiple Civil Rights violations under color of law... Several Unlawful orders.. Supreme Court has ruled that you can not change the scope of DUI check point into a License or vehicle safety check... End of story.. Your never legally required to comply with Illegal orders.
rainmechanic And actually- he can sue them in a civil court as well as going after their Bonds. If he can do that- they will never work in law enforcement again- which is what needs to happen. They are a danger to the public and should never be allowed near another firearm.
The selection process for police generally doesn't include the smartest people in the room. They want lackeys that will follow orders without question.
I don't answer questions. (Seriously, though, that punk was probably put in a sling and shot into the sun. It's what happens to these god-bothering sovereigns.)
Howdy there Willie, I agree 💯👍👍 Though from some of the comments on here, I believe some people like to be violated, so it seems. I think if they didn't know better, if asked to drop their britches and bend over, some actually would. My apologies, I don't like using profanity or profane examples. Much appreciated, C.I.M.
The cops keep saying..."this is a dui checkpoint". If so....why do they need to run his license and plates? Why are they shining lights into the vehicle? what are they looking for? They are not in any way checking for sobriety. DUI checkpoints are just an excuse to shakedown and perform what otherwise would be illegal to do.
Jimmy B They are looking for open containers. If they are out in the open and not hidden under the seat that would legally be able to get him out of the car by force. And we all know more and more police officers love to use force and then delete any evidence that it happened or try to do it away from the dash cam
Septantrionalis i dont think that the fuzz are doing anymore than "Shopping Around" Cyber-Town!~~~Can u say " We're looking to find something on this young stud -muscle to hang his sh** with?"..Hmmmm?.
@G T Interesting so a political ideology is determined by an opinion about the constitution? lol. "They are out there trying to keep drunks from killing us ," stopping every single car with no RS of any crime sir I don't care what you claim its for it is not legal under the law. The supreme court errored which is possible you realize? when they found it ok to stop people doing nothing wrong for the reason of checking their id and level of sobriety. The Constitution was not meant to be changed except by ways laid out in its own document. The court by admitting it was not within the rights of the Constitution to hold checkpoints, directly violated the very document they are tasked with upholding and among other things they committed treason in my opinion. The document was not made to be vague or out of date as the years go by. It is clear and direct in its rules and rights given. No govt person no matter what the excuse no matter what the excuse, NO MATTER WHAT THE EXCUSE, has the right to stop any person for the reason of checking anything at any time. This is not confusing the court admitted in its ruling it was in fact a violation of the 4th amendment, yet made some excuse as to why they felt they were able to rule against the direct statement against them in the Bill of Rights. FREE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE CHOICES ABOUT WHAT THEY DO. FREE PEOPLE WILL MAKE BAD CHOICES IT IS INHERENT IN THE WORDS. BY CLAIMING THE GOVT HAS THE RIGHT TO CHECK AND SEE IF EVERYONE MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE BEFORE GETTING INTO A VEHICLE. This will in fact cause some who are not checked and made a bad choice, get hurt and hurt others. This is the chance we all take by demanding to be free. If you do not approve of the risk posed by freedom then I suggest you move to a country where they can keep you safe your entire life because they check you every day and at all times that you are making the right choices. We choose to be free and understand it comes with risks and we may be hurt or even killed by others who are not responsible in their actions. Its a small price to pay for freedom.
Because it doesn't legally qualify as "questioning". It's a lawful order issued in the form of a question. It's a polite colloqualism but I understand the confusion. 5th Amendment isn't nearly as broad as people think. As long as a person follows directions and is cooperative then saying nothing is fine as the spirit of the 5th should be respected the same as the technicalities of it. 👍
And if one of your loved ones is killed by a drunk driver that could have been prevented by a checkpoint would you have a different opinion of them? The point is to keep impaired drivers off the road. I don’t see a problem with that.
Good Grief! He is sitting there having an on point conversation without slurring, or acting wobbly, his eyes are not bloodshot, this is strictly retaliation for the refusal of a rights violation!
They tell you that you can be on your way to keep you CALM and not think they are doing EVERYTHING in their Power to ARREST you. Even if you didn't do anything
A man who still has real balls, even if he may not think that he does. Good for him! We have lost most of our freedoms as individuals in this great country where we are to be CORPORATE PUPPETS that waddle into work as colony ants for Walmart, Amazon, Bank of America, etc. We lost our individual identities a long time ago as we are all supposed to be subservient little bees in the have. Love this guy....not many like him have survived the corporate cultural revolution.
@@ricooreily1597 Please explain how you came up with that comment.? Point out where in my comment where I said it was or wasn’t an easy job. I’ll wait….
22:04 wait a minute… failure to obey is what he’s being arrested for? ARE YOU FLIPPING KIDDING ME!!!! Cuz they know damn well they can’t get him on anything else!!!
Cop told him is a licence checkpoint and they ask him from the get go and he has the balls to say THEY NEVER ASK MY LICENCES... dumb b... he his don't get while they waste time with him a dangerous driver could slip trought and kill some one later on.... thanks dip s...
But they did smell weed, took his glasses off so he could fail test, lied about if he gave them id and got out, everything would be fine. He wasn't stupid, it never goes fine when they ask u to get out, or catch a attitude. And the woman cop was rude and condescending. Also putting the cuffs on tight and only loosen them if he takes test is wrong.
I'm English, I had no idea what "2814.2 of the California Vehicle Code" (as said by the Police Officers at 18:41) referred to. When I looked it up, it seems to me the gentleman in this video behaved perfectly correctly and was under no obligation to comply with any of the "orders" the police gave. (The below is from a lawyer's website) 2814.2. California Vehicle Code 2814.2 VC requires you to stop your vehicle at any DUI checkpoint which is being conducted by the police; and has posted signs and displays informing motorists to stop. Once you have stopped, you also have to submit to a DUI inspection. This typically involves rolling down your window and answering the police’s questions, such as “Have you been drinking?” and “Can I see your license?” If you appear sober, the police will permit you to continue driving. Though if the police smell alcohol or marijuana or believe that you are impaired, you may be asked to exit the vehicle to perform field sobriety tests. These include: the horizontal gaze nystagmus eye test the walk and turn test the one-legged stand test You may also be asked to submit to a preliminary alcohol screening (PAS). *Note that all these tests are optional.* If the police decide to arrest you for driving under the influence, your car may be impounded.
Never answer questions! Always record the police.These dui check points are NOT lawful! Charges of assault & battery ,kidnapping, etc. should be filed against each one of them. THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW OF THE LAND!
@@jackieskladd3138 At 3:59 the police officer says _"Right now you're being legal"_ and within seconds he's warning the driver they're going to "break the window".
Checkpoints are straight out of the Gestapo playbook. There's nothing "lawful" about stopping someone for no reason or no reasonable suspicion of someone committing a crime.
Seth Schiller so you’re the guy that comments on spelling and grammar on RUclips when you know exactly what they mean? Are you certain English is their primary language. Are you bilingual?
That is the entire purpose of the state. We can't refuse to pay property taxes, or lawful summons to appear in court. We can't murder, or defraud. We can't operate a vehicle without license, insurance and registration.
@@sethschiller832 it is " I am" not " iam... You must have proof read that. Maybe stop drinking in class. Also, learn the use of punctuation. It has been developed for a very good reason.
There is NO such thing as a "Legal Checkpoint." They are assuming you are drinking and driving, but they have no actual proof, so therefore, you do no have to provide anything to them, and them threatening him is garbage and a huge unnecessary lawsuit will come out of this if they proceed with what they are doing with this man.
And yet he exited his car and spent the night in jail. They not only have the right but they have the responsibility and authority. Too bad that some people just never grow up and realize that with our freedoms come responsibilities. One does not work without the other.
Wrong. They don't assume every person going through a checkpoint is drunk lol Only assume when there is a valid reason.. and at that point they can obtain proof. It's really really simple.
@@JohnLittleJr, SCOTUS "rulings" are the OPINIONS of 9 lawyers. Their ruling documents are even called OPINION. I've been asking for the evidence that PROVES the constitution applies to me and all anyone has been able to give are the opinions of lawyers. Are opinions facts, or are they opinions?
The fact the supervisor doesn't realize this guy was sent to the duo checkpoint from UCLA or is just a lawyer trying to get rid of theses checkpoints detention spots is mind blowing. She's well educated ,and knows what she is doing is unlawful.
"Failure to comply" presumes there's some requirement to comply. Yet no one has provided any evidence their constitution and laws actually apply to anyone.
@@comatoseps1382, what statement is untrue? And yes, I did want it that known I don't pay into that fund, as it gives me in opportunity to educate people on why they shouldn't either, and how I've done it. What exactly is it you have a problem with?
Jay MacDonnell DUI checkpoints are a huge grey area when it comes to the constitution. They make you answer questions when you really don’t have to they stop your vehicle without any reason of traffic violation which both violates our rights in the constitution. Police arrest people all the time unlawfully and sometimes just out of anger. Just because you get arrested doesn’t mean it’s a lawful arrest. Everyone has there day in court.
Jay MacDonnell you see it’s people like you that don’t realize how important our rights are in this country. Police are taking away those rights everyday. Yes sometimes comply with the officer but not if he’s disregarding the oath to the constitution that he took in the beginning of his career.
I will say.... this drivers tantrum only brings more attention to him and is most likely gonna get bad results by not cooperating. I have lost a member of my family to a drunk driver. She was 17 & excited about starting to date. On her first date ever. This driver may feel differently if he lost someone to drunk driving. I appreciate the officer's efforts.
I love how the woman cop comes in and is like "hey just to lyk we are about to break your window and violate your constitutional rights because you won't comply to an unlawful traffic stop." DUI checkpoints are unconstitutional and if it was about safety from DUIs they would see that he isn't drunk, doesn't smell of alcohol, and should be allowed to travel freely. Power trip to the fullest
Unlawful? Have you never heard of a road block. Typically it's outside of a venue where lots of people drinking. You must not know anyone killed by a drunk driver. I'd rather the police make sure no one is leaving fucked up... Like you
Typically doesn't mean all does it? I love how you assume that someone you disagree with is a drunk driver simply because they disagreed with you. The DUI checkpoints and roadblocks are forms of entrapment, has nothing to do with safety, like I said already if it was about safety they would've recognized that this guy in particular was doing nothing to indicate that he was intoxicated, instead they decided to escalate the situation.
@@TheSlayer432 You don't know the meaning of entrapment, obviously. Almost all states have you sign to comply with dui checkpoint before you can have the PRIVILEGE to drive. If you don't comply that PRIVILEGE can be revoked. I'm sure he don't have to answer a bunch of questions to incriminate himself but providing proof of insurance and registration were agreed to to get his license.
He don't even have a tag and he's from out of state and he's not respectful at all. I got pulled over for no tag once. I had to get out. They ran my identity, ran the vin on the car, checked my bill of sale and let me go. That simple. You'd be amazed how far a little respect goes. That's too everyone, not just police
What a stupid citizen. The police have the right to make sure drunk folks aren't out risking innocent peoples lives. Acting like this is how trouble happens. Just follow the law, show your shit & be on your way.
"That was not a question. I said ""is there any reason why you cannot provide......"" - Im sure primary school English taught me that she just asked a question LMAO
I’m sure her point was the asking for a license was more a direct command than a question. He’s driving a vehicle and at a DUI checkpoint. I don’t understand why he doesn’t understand why he doesn’t need to prove he is licensed to drive a vehicle and that the vehicle is registered. These checkpoints are California state law.
@@FluffheadsArmy So where Nazi check points, worked out well, why are people being stopped when they exhibit no violations, random searches are a violation of the basic concepts, we are fading fast...
@@FluffheadsArmy check points are legal. However, your constitutional rights still exist. You still have the right to remain silent and you are not obligated to to surrender your right against illegal search.
If you actually read the whole code and definitions...you're wrong and the officers are wrong. Go read it for yourself, look up the actual definitions. But sheep like you never will
The U.S. Supreme Court in Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868) declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right and therefore a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them. In United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), the Supreme Court reiterated its position that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement. However, Wheeler had a significant impact in other ways. For many years, the roots of the Constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause had only vaguely been determined.[5] In 1823, the circuit court in Corfield had provided a list of the rights (some fundamental, some not) which the clause could cover.[6][7] The Wheeler court dramatically changed this. It was the first to locate the right to travel in the privileges and immunities clause, providing the right with a specific guarantee of constitutional protection.[8] By reasoning that the clause derived from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, the decision suggested a narrower set of rights than those enumerated in Corfield, but also more clearly defined those rights as absolutely fundamental.[9] The Supreme Court began rejecting Wheeler's reasoning within a few years. Finally, in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Supreme Court overruled Chief Justice White's conclusion that the federal government could protect the right to travel only against state infringement.[2][3][10] The Supreme Court has specifically ruled that Crandall does not imply a right to use any particular mode of travel, such as driving an automobile. In Hendrick v. Maryland (1915), the appellant asked the Court to void Maryland's motor vehicle statute as a violation of the freedom of movement. The Court found "no solid foundation" for the appellant's argument and unanimously held that "in the absence of national legislation covering the subject, a state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles - those moving in interstate commerce as well as others."[11] The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states: (1) the right to enter one state and leave another (an inherent right with historical support from the Articles of Confederation), (2) the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the "Privileges and Immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2), and (3) (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause; citing the majority opinion in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Stevens said, "the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel."). Here you go live stock!!!!!!!
@@lestersmart8452 I don't think that says what you're trying to make it say...go read some more, like definitions. That's not even getting into the aspect of the govts being a corporation. Enforcement of transportation code lacks due process. They are rules not laws. Look up Eddie Craig here on RUclips
@@danieltrickey9285 you know when the rights of assholes like this are taken away? When he attempts to use his "rights" to navigate around being drugged while driving and destroys every other single person's right to be safe I the street. Dipshit.
@@mcwaff8661 Yes, now people say you can't get drunk in public, not even ordering a cab .... like driving DUI is a better aalternative, look at RUclips searching for cops arrested after a DUI check, and how many started being violent or treathening to other cops that did Identify themselves prior to that .... but here in this vid .... anything threathening happened I only saw one patronising person .... trying to be a tyranny.
We are the police. We are the true Sovereign citizens by our own definition. We are the police. We are the policy enforcers and revenue generators of America. It is our job to extract funds from the hard working American citizen so our politicians can live their lavish lifestyles.
Exsctly.it amazes me how many bloobtube pushes condoning thid nonsense.im in vs..death to tyrantd on the flag..and the blue crime familys are thr tyrants.burn in hell all of u that condon this shyte
@@EssexAggiegrad2011 that’s true. If you’re not drunk, you do have nothing to hide. However, it sounds like you like getting your rights violated. Other people take pride in their rights and don’t freely throw them away. Have a good weekend!
In Canada we have impaired driving spot checks, you are asked of you had anything to drink and say no and the cop doesn't smell anything you are on your way. Never been asked for drivers license or anything else.
Come out of the car,we won't hurt you. The Supreme court ruled in 1969 that cops can lie to you. Whether you like this guy or not is not the point. Point is all charges were dismissed. He was right to defend his rights, period.
Charges get dismissed for a myriad of reasons MOST of which have nothing to do with the validity of the stop or the probable cause to arrest. The standard of proof to convict in Court is much higher than the standard of proof required to make a valid arrest so just saying that the charges being dismissed does not tell us what the rational of the Court was.
@@realsecman There was no violation of the Constitution or law. DUI/License Check points have been ruled CONSTITUTIONAL by the US Supreme Court, they further have ruled that the Police can order you out of your vehicle. Failure to produce a license or comply with lawful orders then becomes an arrestable offense. the Police are the ones understanding the Constitution and the law, not the you tube idiot operating the vehicle.
@@realsecman The Courts, Appellate and Supreme have generally said that The people have a reduced expectation in Public. The Standard of proof required for an Arrest, with or without a warrant, or a search, with or without a warrant, is Probable Cause, PC. PC is considered when an Officer has enough basically to accuse a specific person of a violation of law and either make an arrest or in some instances a search. PC is not proof positive but basically more likely than not that an offense may have been committed and said person may have committed it. PC is basically 51 percent, not proof positive, (beyond a reasonable doubt) which is the Standard for conviction of said offense. So for PC a police officer doesn't have to be right only reasonable. To stop a person on the street,(temporary detainment), an Officer needs reasonable SUSPICION , RS, that criminal behavior may have or is about to happen. To stop a vehicle the Officer needs RS of the violation of any law, criminal or traffic, or ordinance, RS is a standard of proof that is even less than 50 pct only that the Officer , based on his subjective opinion, reasonably believes based on a totality of the circumstances, that the offender committed, is committing or is about to commit (a crime if on foot) or (any offense if operating a vehicle). Now most will agree as the law and the courts have said that if you operate a vehicle you need a license issued by a State and if you are lawfully stopped you shall produce said license. Now to the DUI/License check points, (CP)). The Supreme Court in 1990 has said that the very minor intrusion of a CP although not supported by any standard of proof, is reasonable because getting drunk drivers off our roads far out weighs the minor stop. Generally the Police will ask a few questions and may also have you produce your license. You may legally assert to remain silent by STATING SAME, not just sitting there however refusing to show your license is NOT remaining silent but now gives the Officer PC to arrest for either unlicensed, failure to produce and in most States an obstruction type charge.
Charges are dismissed for many reasons and most have NOTHING TO DO with the validity of an arrest. He says they were dismissed but doesn't say why. That is the prosecutors discretion not the Officers. Arrest requires only PROBABLE CAUSE, Conviction requires PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Mr.Rufus Rufus bless you! I’m in England it’s definitely not as bad here. My husband got pulled over on December 1st at first he was drunk then he had been smoking weed then his car smelled of weed and when they had nothing they said you must be going to that house (pointing to random house) to buy drugs! He said no I was driving along the road and if you remember you pulled ME over here I had no intention of stopping here! They tried I’ll give them that haha
Mr.Rufus Rufus If he was black talking that nonsense he would’ve been dragged out of the car and beaten or shot the very second he said “I don’t answer questions.” Have you EVER seen ANY video where someone Black can behave like that and not be gang swarmed and arrested? Unbelievable!
@@robert5c, yeah they also said I didn't have plates on my car and the VIN was covered, yet there's no evidence to support any of those claims. They had their own camera and could/should/would have turned to it show their claims. Why didn't they? You should stop blindly believing what you're told.
It's kinda sad when they basically say "most people don't know their rights and just comply with our orders, I don't know how to handle people who know their rights"
updown4455 well... they are cops.. they uphold the law soooo when it comes to simple things like producing your D.L and performing a sobriety test , It's a small price to pay for public safety . Unfortunately the law is the law. No point going against the grain.
@@4evabluegirl I don't give a fuck, I have my right to travel without being bothered without probable cause. Fuck them if they don't like my rights! Fuck the police
OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE IS A PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF WHATEVER STATE YOU ARE IN. COMPLY OR GET THE FUCK OFF THE ROADS. Asshole.
So stop and think for a moment. If the majority of civilians practiced and implimented the rights bestowed upon us. There would be no hill to die on. Police would not be militarized. We'd most likely see less violence from police.
@huntercanuck not sure what word you were trying to say but your one of those just comply idiots even if it's an uncomstitutional bullshit checkpoint. Also he is being ILLEGALLY SEARCHED
@@huntercanuck They ripped him out of the car, cuffed him, temporarily took off his glasses without his consent and bullied him, yet he largely kept his cool. The officers were the REAL childish ones!
NOTICE! The license reads "Any sobriety test required by law!" A field sobriety test is NOT required by law in California and is ALWAYS optional to the driver. The driver NEVER has to agree to a field sobriety test which if failed then gives the legal right for officers to administer a legal test which is a breathalyzer of blood draw and that's why you decline a field test ( it's optional to the driver 'not mandatory' ) ... if alcohol content level is questionable...always go with the blood draw
@@sirbader1 umm he is wrong. He is required to stop and show his license. He is required to exit the vehicle he did neither. He is required to submit to a DUI checkpoint and have a license plate. He did neither. Ok dumbass he was wrong in every step of the way. Then he added resisting, failure to comply with a lawful order. And was rightfully arrested
I tried this once and the state trooper slapped me. He then went to the other side of the car and had my buddy roll down his window and slapped him. My buddy said why did you slap me? The trooper said well I knew that as soon as Iet the driver go you would have said, I wish he had tried to slap me. They don't play in Alabama.
This is so unconstitutional!!! Stopping people without suspecting them of a crime but give me your license and let me smell your breathe to see if you are able to drive this car safely. They did not see him driving unsafely so why....just WHY?!!! What a flipping joke!
@@markwilliamson3628 checkpoints should be illegal. It's all about revenue generation, not public safety. Learn to care about your rights on the road. Because cops sure won't.
They should not be illegal. My family's lives may continue because of these checkpoints. I don't trust other peopl on the road, so this is a way my peace of mind is clear
Has a family member of yours been killed by a drunk driver? I lost a family member who died at 21 leaving behind 2 daughters who were just infants at the time. They grew up without a father because a drunk driver crashes into him while my uncle was on his way to work.
As a matter of fact I have lost people very important to me to a drunk driver. An entire family actually. But these stops are unconstitutional and I am entitled to MY opinion. I dislike drunk drivers more than most but that does not mean a person's rights are null and void.
freestylesystemsTV not sure what you mean here mate? I’m fully supporting you, do not comply with the police, only the law, and the law states your allowed to remain silent 👍🏻
I get you're "on my side" -- What I want you to understand is that they don't have evidence that (any) laws actually apply to you, or anyone. Their claim/allegation is, if you're physically in California, or England, or wherever, then the laws of that area apply to you... I'm asking what EVIDENCE do they have to PROVE their claim. How does my physical presence in their "area" PROVE their constitution and laws apply to me and create obligation? They don't have any PROOF that their laws apply to anyone.
If this douche canoe wants to fight against these "unlawful checkpoints", the place to do it is in court; not on the side of the road. Being confrontational with law enforcement never ends well for these melodramatic attention whores.
Well she’s not asking she’s insisting on seeing his drivers license is what she’s saying. It’s pretty clear it’s not a question but a reasonable requirement at a DUI checkpoint
JD C yes she asked him for it. Correct. but checking for a Valid DL is a requirement is my point. He can’t simply say I’m not answering questions. It’s a requirement not a question. All he needs to do is provide what they require of him as he would a traffic stop. These checkpoints are a constant in California and you are required to follow them by California law as you would a traffic stop.
All of this applies according to LaPD except if you’re an illegal. How do I know this because I lived in California over 50 years and was personally rear ended by two illegals at different times and the police did absolutely nothing to either of them. Neither had a legal license, neither had insurance, neither had ownership of the vehicle and finally one of them was a repeat felon who should have been deported or in jail yet was still in the country. One of the reasons I left California was their absolute farce of a state with laws only enforced to intimidate and harass actual American citizens.
The officer says we need your license so we can check and see if you have any war. Then stops her self because she is not suppose to be doing that is she. It’s a dui stop
“Comply or die”…I know quite a few cops who have used this sentence jokingly, but the scary thing is none of them knew each other…so where are they learning that from?..
Janitorial level education for 6 months lightly touching upon the rights of citizens, but just “ wing it”. Law enforcement in this country is about as unprofessional as you can get! That’s a big problem. No skill to be brought to the table for your working life? Career choices, fast food, retail, police, railroad! Come on in! Hahaha!
Thanks to a 1991 case decided by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, sobriety checkpoints are not legal in the Lonestar State. This means that you are not technically required to stop at a DWI checkpoint in Texas.
6yrs later, he's still at the DUI checkpoint and refusing to answer questions
HA!
🤣
Yeah its pretty easy to give up your freedoms or just lose them to authorities refusing to recognize them
Jajajaja jajajaja
@@jasonsgreen You don't have freedom to drive drunk and DUI checkpoints are constitutional.
Female: "Is there a reason why you can not provide me with an ID?"
Man: I don't Answer Questions
Female: "That was not a question"
Dude obviously didn't realize California is a communist state.
She was trying to be nice since he was refusing to obey and could have been arrested immediately for non compliance
If I were a cop, I'd get myself a life sentence the first day on the job ...
I feel sorry for you for agreeing and believing that this is right. This is terrible scary scary, rights don't exist anymore.
@@derekfirt5306 laws exist and are needed in a society. Comply or face consequences it's pretty simple
A person knowing their rights is the scariest thing a cop faces! If driving is a privilege why do we pay for it. They tax us then it's a privilege?
Videos like this makes me extremely happy that the police have one of the highest suicide rate 💜
He was still doing something illegal, if you agree with it or not is your own business. Failure to comply with these requests in a traffic stop (includes DUI checkpoint) is illegal. You cannot plead the fifth to get away with not identifying yourself.
@@lavakissy illegal or not it doesn’t give these “professionals” the right to be dicks and abusive (the cuffs). If your stupid and stab yourself does that give the dr a right to just stitch you up with no pain control?
That cop that did that with the cuffs has done far far far worse I assure you and I also assure you the rest standing around would do nothing to stop him and would lie without a thought to cover it up.
@@lavakissy he absolutely was not doing anything illegal. Neither Florida nor California are stop and identify states. Meaning the police have to have reasonable suspicion you have committed a crime and be able to articulate the crime they are investigating you for. Objectively the 2 sides of argument are He went out of his way to make it harder on himself and the officers, vs the idea that any rights we don't stand up and fight for we will have taken away. You have no responsibility to assist an investigation against you. That is why you can always refuse sobriety tests. However driving is considered a privilege and some states will suspend that privilege up to a year for refusing a test.
@@robray8663 It was not a random stop. It was a DUI checkpoint which have been help up it's legality in the US supreme court which requires you to identify yourself and do the other things they requested in this video such as proving you are not under the influence of any alcohol. If you refuse to do it on the spot the police reserve the right to take a blood test to verify your sobriety levels.
I love how they are saying he will be convicted of a DUI and to tell the FAA. They don't have any evidence that he is under the influence of anything.
If he was black and wearing dreads he would be face down in the road with knee on the back of his head. Can anyone imagine a black guy saying, “I don’t answer questions”? The last thing you want is a pissing contest with these clowns, then it becomes an emotional contest between the mob cops as to who is the toughest. My advice, always is, lie your head off. Tell them your dad was a cop, tell them you’re a Mormon and have never had a drink in your life, tell them you appreciate the fine work they do getting drunks off the road, tell them you just came from a memorial service for you mother, tell them you have to get home to relieve the baby sitter for your four kids, tell them you always answer questions, when they relate to something you actually did.
That’s A TRUE NARCISSISTIC PIG. WHO HAS NO EMPATHY NOR REMORSE FOR HIS WRONG DOINGS. UN AMERICAN.
If a pilot refuses a DUI test the FAA automatically suspends the pilot's license.
The ridiculousness of the cop saying ‘they are lawful orders. You MUST answer these simple questions.”
If he was on drugs, or IF he was drinking, the questions are ordering you to incriminate himself. In direct violation of the 5th amendment.
How, just absolutely HOW can a cop be that dumb and be allowed to carry a gun?
A cop can ask you to incriminate yourself, it is your own responsibility to plead the fifth. But the cops are actually right. They were enforcing the laws of the United States as well as the state of California. A DUI stop is legal as long as it is not discriminatory (stops based on race, gender, etc...) and you have to provide a valid drivers license and identification and other documents relating to the vehicle in a traffic stop failure to comply is illegal and you can be charged for it. You can of course refuse but then you must accept that they will break that fucking window and drag you out. That is the price of living in a society
@@lavakissy DUI checkpoints are illegal in the state I live in. You can have Cali. F**k that place.
“ just comply with lawful Orders” yeah sure. Is this the USA or not! Lol
Answering any question at a alcohol check point incriminates your self and justifies further detention. For example where were you tonight? (mind you it is a crime to lie to an officer, not a crime to take the 5th) You answer I went out to dinner. Now you have just admitted that you went to an establishment that might serve alcohol. O: Do they serve alcohol there. Citizen: Yes, I think so. (you have now confirmed you were at an establishment that served alcohol) O: Did you consume alcohol at this restaurant? C: No. O: well I smell alcohol on you. Or if C says I had one beer. Then you have now admitted consuming alcohol then driving. Officer: Sure it was just one? But you get the idea that answering questions will not help yourself.
@@lavakissy yeah.. such a “free” society we live in. What a disgrace
The 4th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,
The right to be secure in your papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated
Miranda tells us that we always have a right to remain silent. And there is never any obligation to help police with an investigation.
The man should have said I don't understand my rights and I want an attorney and I am exercising my 5th amendment rights to not answer questions.
Drug war that's no longer a right
DUI checkpoints are not unreasonable searches or seizures.
Guilty until proven innocent.
No guilty of breaking the law. Refusal to ID. Refusal to exit the vehicle. Both crimes
@@emeralddragon2010 It's amazing to me that people think these are justifiably considered crimes.
@@bertroost1675 what do u mean
@@emeralddragon2010 That they are really thought of as "crimes", they should be, at the most, considered infractions. Nobody should be thinking, oh my gosh the man is a criminal! He didn't provide ID or exit!! Ridiculous.
@@bertroost1675 it's not ridiculous. Without those laws they refused to give ID anytime they were pulled over
THIS is EXACTLY why people want to defund these tyrants.
Yet they followed the law to the letter not the geek loser ❄️. He should have been locked up so he could have gotten more sex
IKR this is what those thin blue line cheek spreading cuckservative cowards want to keep in power?
If I were a cop, I'd get myself a life sentence the first day on the job ...
Shut up snowflake!
Not sure if defunding is the solution, but stripping them of their powers is!
5th amendment directly states that WE citizens do not need to answer questions
First you have to invoke it specifically and he didn't. Second he still has to show his license, get out etc.
@@emeralddragon2010
Yes you must say I'm now going to use my 5th amendment right.
If you don't you'll lose the case in court
@@emeralddragon2010 what is the etc?
@@gregkasza1925 not sure what I said..oh... Obey any lawful order
@@emeralddragon2010
He also needs to have properly displayed a license plate per every state has that law requiring to do so.
Meanwhile all the real drunks are thanking him as they’re driving straight through!
Or if this azzhole would just comply the cops could find the drunks.
@@stephenschmengle9190 fuck complying
Reason so many cops are asshole now ... everyone is pussy or complys... so the 1 or 2 that fight back are all by themselves makes it alot easier to control and do bullshit when ur singled out... the system is smart but it definitely banks on the ignorance of the 85% that's deaf dumb and blind
@@barringtonstevens8791 What do you have to lose by complying your just making the cops job harder, the people behind you get delayed because of you. they are just asking simple questions, these DUI stops save lives, meanwhile, you are here whining that you have to answer simple questions. Let's just assume that the guy was drunk, and he didn't answer any questions, he would have gotten away and maybe even killed someone because of your stupid logic. JUST ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTIONS AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIVES!
@@stephenschmengle9190 yeah these guys just want to wreck the community by doing this bs, just answer the questions and let the cops do their jobs.
This is all it takes for the cops. My brother-in-law got pulled over and the cop said he smelled alcohol. Funny, he has never drank in his life!!
CRAP HERESAY...SALAD DRESSING WITH VINEGAR CAN CAUSE THIS...DUH
It is just a lie they use because you can't proof the opposite.
I got it too. 42 years of no drinking but these pricks forgive two fly fucks about anything other than a pay check. 🖕👮🏻♂️
Alcohol has no smell
I was behind this asshole I was on the way to the hospital to be with my family member , well I got to the hospital and she had passed away 15 min prior
"Step out of the vehicle! Step out of the vehicle! Step out of the vehicle!" I like how they always make their attacks seem like you're volunteering to be assaulted.
I hate how it becomes a narcissistic battle with the cops. This gentleman is obviously not intoxicated. As soon as the officers don't smell booze and determine the person is not intoxicated they should be free to go. The whole reason for the checkpoint is to determine if a person is intoxicated. This is the reason people don't trust the police.
It doesn't even matter if he is intoxicated or not. They have to subject all people to checks. 'Obviously not being intoxicated', if that is even a thing, is not a license to not cooperate with cops. All this talk about 4th and 5th amendment is complete crazy talk. You can only drive a car if you follow certain regulations. If you can't, you can't drive. If you refuse to answer questions or submit to inspections, you won't go to jail because of the 4th and 5th, but you can't drive. Complete misunderstanding of the law. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege that needs to be earned, in part by cooperating with the cops.
@@Prometheus4096, you are completely wrong as that is not how Due Process works for. Cops need cause to stop you, and be able to articulate what code violation they suspect you've committed. Without this would be a violation of the 4A. Further, no one is required to cooperate with the cops, 5A.
@@Prometheus4096 What absolute nonsense. Even on the roads, cops still have to respect people's rights.
@@comatoseps1382 Yes, but people don't have the right to not subject themselves to DUI checks. Simply not a right.
@@Prometheus4096 They should have the right, as clearly falls under the scope of the 4th Amendment, but for better or for worse, courts have carved out an exception for DUI stops.
Police were never meant to have this kind of power.
Holy MF LAWSUIT, Batman. Guilty until proven innocent. You ABSOLUTELY can't be arrested for refusing to answer questions at ANY type of stop.
Holy you don't know the law batman. No lawsuit as he resisted lawful orders. Learn the law then spee.your woke garbage. Funny how all the people who back this sorry excuse for a citizen are the same ones who think this clown of a president is doing a good job
You can. Just not legally.
Ever heard of "Failure to comply" or "Failure to identify" ? Yep. Little P***y acted up and was spanked for it. Most likely he eventually registered his car and/or transferred his DL to California and the charges were ultimately dismissed. It's just nice to hear him whine and cry. Hysterical. Pure Comedy Gold.
Driving is a privilege and not a right. One of the conditions of the privilege of driving which is granted by the license to drive is to provide proof of license, registration and insurance soon request by law enforcement. Failure to do so is a motor vehicle violation.
@@charlesphilhower1452 Yes Sir, 100% accurate.
Bad stops can occur in any state, but...this is basically reason number thirty-seven NOT to live in California.
Sorry what are the cops doing wrong
@@nathantemple5173 They are not speaking the truth. He is not required to speak to them and he is told that it is the law that requires him to comply. You can find cops who do this in every state.
Of the many thousands of reasons not to live in that place. The weather can be nice.
Road blocks are 100% unconstitutional
He stopped, he has his window down and he gave them his license. He has complied! They can't make him answer questions, that is not a lawful order!
They got him on a fashion misdemeanor. Look at that jacket. Lmao
@@tdz69
🤣🤣🤣👌
5th Amendment
I never saw him provide his drivers license. Why he is being asked to step out or forced to is not necessary nor should be required. His window is down far enough for an officer to bend down and smell for alcohol. Anyone drinking beyond legal limit driving with windows up and sitting with his window down 3 inches like his is will breath out alcohol odor easily distinguished to anyone not drinking. If they don't detect odor of alcohol and he has no other indicators of drinking such as slurred speech there isn't any reason to request him to exit vehicle.
Actually he didn’t need to hand them the drivers license, he only need present his license visually, her snatching his drivers license, is theft. Done without consent.
I feel violated by those police just watching this
Don't like complying with the law? There is a plane leaving this country all the time. Choose one
@@emeralddragon2010 what law? Checkpoints don’t trump the constitution. They had no lawful reason for demanding him to get out of the car and get ID
@@nintendokings can I ask you something seriously? How can you be so fucking ignorant? I'm being serious. Dhi checkpoints are legal. SCOTUS has ruled on that. An occupant of a vehicle must get out of the car when ordered to do so by a police officer. SCOTUS has also ruled on that. So since that does in fact make it LAW, and I have repeatedly told people this AND posted the links to the CASE LAW, it brings me back to my original question of how you can be so ignorant? My apologies if you are special needs
@@emeralddragon2010 Where did I say checkpoints are illegal? I didn’t. Demanding ID without probable cause: that’s the problem. But you’re acting like a right cunt so I guess you don’t properly read and argue in good faith…
watch out, you have a bootlicker comment
Amazing how many untruths were spoken and laws were broken here by the police. I actually lost count. I hope this dude sues the hell out of these cops.
1 - 4th Amendment right Violated: Check 2 - No probable cause or reasonable suspicion: Check 3 - Fat fucking lawsuite against the police department: Check 4 - Go after every law enforcements badge involved, I would hope so. Good luck to ya sir and I hope you win.
***** Actually he will quite good luck with it because there are multiple Civil Rights violations under color of law... Several Unlawful orders.. Supreme Court has ruled that you can not change the scope of DUI check point into a License or vehicle safety check... End of story.. Your never legally required to comply with Illegal orders.
rainmechanic And actually- he can sue them in a civil court as well as going after their Bonds. If he can do that- they will never work in law enforcement again- which is what needs to happen. They are a danger to the public and should never be allowed near another firearm.
"is there any reason why you cannot provide a drivers license".
Her next sentence "that was not a question"
i was laughing at her "that is not a question" response about her previous "question"
The selection process for police generally doesn't include the smartest people in the room. They want lackeys that will follow orders without question.
what a bozo
She’s said that was not THE question
Dummy, she said, "That was not THE question" because his response was not responsive to the question she asked.
It's been almost 5 yrs now...is he out of the checkpoint yet?
Yep. Was arrested. All charges dismissed.
I don't answer questions. (Seriously, though, that punk was probably put in a sling and shot into the sun. It's what happens to these god-bothering sovereigns.)
@@FalloutJack you seem a little unconcerned for their well being.
@@rickhilliard2545 True.
@@FalloutJack Why?
These type of checkpoints are deemed illegal in TX
Don't care for them moving to tx or florida, but I do understand why so many californians are fleeing from there.
Deemed illegal in federal Court
They are illegal as it violates 4th amendment
@@jakey20022 Not true
@@tommywalker2374 Not true
They hate when you don’t let them violate you. They give the wrong badges to the wrong people
The worst is that they removed his glasses without his consent!
The idiot in the car was violating the law not the cops. Removing his glasses wasn't legal but they were probably trying to help him look less stupid
If I were a cop, I'd get myself a life sentence the first day on the job ...
Howdy there Willie,
I agree 💯👍👍
Though from some of the comments on here, I believe some people like to be violated, so it seems. I think if they didn't know better, if asked to drop their britches and bend over, some actually would.
My apologies, I don't like using profanity or profane examples.
Much appreciated,
C.I.M.
lapd Did a great job..
i hope he sues them into bankruptcy. that stop is illegal.
The cops keep saying..."this is a dui checkpoint". If so....why do they need to run his license and plates? Why are they shining lights into the vehicle? what are they looking for? They are not in any way checking for sobriety.
DUI checkpoints are just an excuse to shakedown and perform what otherwise would be illegal to do.
Jimmy B This is what I was wondering too. How does a drivers license check determine if you've been drinking or not.
Jimmy B They are looking for open containers. If they are out in the open and not hidden under the seat that would legally be able to get him out of the car by force. And we all know more and more police officers love to use force and then delete any evidence that it happened or try to do it away from the dash cam
Septantrionalis i dont think that the fuzz are doing anymore than "Shopping Around" Cyber-Town!~~~Can u say " We're looking to find something on this young stud -muscle to hang his sh** with?"..Hmmmm?.
Exactly.. It's nothing but a scam they got people to buy into because safety
The "Peace Keepers" here,in this partic ular positioning are FAST,EFFICIENT AND F'ing EXCELLENT'E' as well." GOD Bless our Fuzz! ".........
6 years later, I don't answer questions and the L.A.P.D is still wants him to step out of the vehicle.
Lol
Guilty until proven innocent in California.
No, that is all of America
Like this EVERYWHERE. We now live in Nazi Germany
She almost said “warrant”... then she caught herself.
“I’m not asking a question! Do you have a drivers license?”
Red Ranger I’m not an English major but that looks like a Question.
@G T, and you seem to be under the impression these cops have some sort of authority/jurisdiction I didn't adhere to.
@G T Interesting so a political ideology is determined by an opinion about the constitution? lol. "They are out there trying to keep drunks from killing us ," stopping every single car with no RS of any crime sir I don't care what you claim its for it is not legal under the law. The supreme court errored which is possible you realize? when they found it ok to stop people doing nothing wrong for the reason of checking their id and level of sobriety. The Constitution was not meant to be changed except by ways laid out in its own document. The court by admitting it was not within the rights of the Constitution to hold checkpoints, directly violated the very document they are tasked with upholding and among other things they committed treason in my opinion. The document was not made to be vague or out of date as the years go by. It is clear and direct in its rules and rights given. No govt person no matter what the excuse no matter what the excuse, NO MATTER WHAT THE EXCUSE, has the right to stop any person for the reason of checking anything at any time. This is not confusing the court admitted in its ruling it was in fact a violation of the 4th amendment, yet made some excuse as to why they felt they were able to rule against the direct statement against them in the Bill of Rights. FREE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE CHOICES ABOUT WHAT THEY DO. FREE PEOPLE WILL MAKE BAD CHOICES IT IS INHERENT IN THE WORDS. BY CLAIMING THE GOVT HAS THE RIGHT TO CHECK AND SEE IF EVERYONE MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE BEFORE GETTING INTO A VEHICLE. This will in fact cause some who are not checked and made a bad choice, get hurt and hurt others. This is the chance we all take by demanding to be free. If you do not approve of the risk posed by freedom then I suggest you move to a country where they can keep you safe your entire life because they check you every day and at all times that you are making the right choices. We choose to be free and understand it comes with risks and we may be hurt or even killed by others who are not responsible in their actions. Its a small price to pay for freedom.
@G T bootlicker, the only child in this thread is you. Grow up and learn your rights.
Because it doesn't legally qualify as "questioning".
It's a lawful order issued in the form of a question. It's a polite colloqualism but I understand the confusion.
5th Amendment isn't nearly as broad as people think.
As long as a person follows directions and is cooperative then saying nothing is fine as the spirit of the 5th should be respected the same as the technicalities of it. 👍
If everyone did what this guy did the checkpoints would come to a grinding halt
And that would be a good thing.
That's the idea
Too many boot lickers out there for that to happen.
And if one of your loved ones is killed by a drunk driver that could have been prevented by a checkpoint would you have a different opinion of them? The point is to keep impaired drivers off the road. I don’t see a problem with that.
@@chrism1420 this reason its sooo hard to understand for a lot of them
Good Grief! He is sitting there having an on point conversation without slurring, or acting wobbly, his eyes are not bloodshot, this is strictly retaliation for the refusal of a rights violation!
Cops always say... do this, do that and you can be on your way.
As soon as you comply... they want something else.
Escalate, escalate, escalate.
They tell you that you can be on your way to keep you CALM and not think they are doing EVERYTHING in their Power to ARREST you. Even if you didn't do anything
@@birddog7248 they keep telling you to be calm as in blaming it on yourself the guy was cuffed too tightly and this is a game that they play
Comply!!! Legal or not just comply!!
Priest:"Do you want to marry this woman."
This guy:" I don´t answer questions."
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That would be an automatic no
Being he is probably an incel I doubt he has this to worry about lol
Too Funny
@@huntercanuck kys people like you need to educate yourself and then you would understand why people are hatful towards police dip shit 🤦
If I were a cop, I'd get myself a life sentence the first day on the job ...
Then maybe you shouldn't be a cop...
funny way to say i have the emotional maturity of a toddler
A man who still has real balls, even if he may not think that he does. Good for him! We have lost most of our
freedoms as individuals in this great country where we are to be CORPORATE PUPPETS that waddle into work
as colony ants for Walmart, Amazon, Bank of America, etc. We lost our individual identities a long time ago
as we are all supposed to be subservient little bees in the have. Love this guy....not many like him have survived
the corporate cultural revolution.
You're an idiot.
he is a grade A prick
Female Officer: I’m not asking a question. Do you have a valid California drivers license 🥴
Yeah because being a cop is a super easy job… Right?!
@@ricooreily1597 Please explain how you came up with that comment.? Point out where in my comment where I said it was or wasn’t an easy job. I’ll wait….
Shit head refuse to answer questions but asks if he can have water , I would have given him piss to drink .
@@jakewelsh1002 you’ll be waiting as long as the cops were waiting for this dude to answer the questions
She's the lieutenant on top of that
Nothing worse then a cop that doesn’t know the law
“Am I under arrest at this point?” Police: “we don’t answer questions.”
Lol that would be hilarious, luckily they are required by law to answer those questions
Yeah, uh uh! Nope.
22:04 wait a minute… failure to obey is what he’s being arrested for? ARE YOU FLIPPING KIDDING ME!!!! Cuz they know damn well they can’t get him on anything else!!!
The cops never said they smelled alcohol at any time
They don’t have to
That part 🤔
its a DUI checkpoint they ask everybody
Cop told him is a licence checkpoint and they ask him from the get go and he has the balls to say THEY NEVER ASK MY LICENCES... dumb b... he his don't get while they waste time with him a dangerous driver could slip trought and kill some one later on.... thanks dip s...
But they did smell weed, took his glasses off so he could fail test, lied about if he gave them id and got out, everything would be fine. He wasn't stupid, it never goes fine when they ask u to get out, or catch a attitude. And the woman cop was rude and condescending. Also putting the cuffs on tight and only loosen them if he takes test is wrong.
I'm English, I had no idea what "2814.2 of the California Vehicle Code" (as said by the Police Officers at 18:41) referred to. When I looked it up, it seems to me the gentleman in this video behaved perfectly correctly and was under no obligation to comply with any of the "orders" the police gave. (The below is from a lawyer's website)
2814.2.
California Vehicle Code 2814.2 VC requires you to stop your vehicle at any DUI checkpoint which is being conducted by the police; and has posted signs and displays informing motorists to stop.
Once you have stopped, you also have to submit to a DUI inspection. This typically involves rolling down your window and answering the police’s questions, such as “Have you been drinking?” and “Can I see your license?”
If you appear sober, the police will permit you to continue driving. Though if the police smell alcohol or marijuana or believe that you are impaired, you may be asked to exit the vehicle to perform field sobriety tests. These include:
the horizontal gaze nystagmus eye test
the walk and turn test
the one-legged stand test
You may also be asked to submit to a preliminary alcohol screening (PAS).
*Note that all these tests are optional.*
If the police decide to arrest you for driving under the influence, your car may be impounded.
Never answer questions! Always record the police.These dui check points are NOT lawful! Charges of assault & battery ,kidnapping, etc. should be filed against each one of them. THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW OF THE LAND!
@@jackieskladd3138 At 3:59 the police officer says _"Right now you're being legal"_ and within seconds he's warning the driver they're going to "break the window".
These DUI stops are against the constitution of practically all free countries. They're telling drivers _"You're guilty until proven innocent."_
Checkpoints are straight out of the Gestapo playbook. There's nothing "lawful" about stopping someone for no reason or no reasonable suspicion of someone committing a crime.
Haha no the Gestapo probably would have beat his ass to death.
They're allowed by the LAW, and LAWS are made by lawmakers PUT IN PLACE by the MAJORITY of the citizens.
Here in Texas checkpoints have been deemed unconstitutional.
That’s bullshit, they keep dickheads off the road.
@@starmc26 how stupid you have to be to believe that.
This is what we allowed to happen because we've been too complacent
I was blind!
“You must comply!” So basically you have no freedom unless they give you permission to have freedom
@@sethschiller832 Meanwhile 20 drunk driver drive passed 🤣
Soy boy on his way to an all-male slumber party
Seth Schiller so you’re the guy that comments on spelling and grammar on RUclips when you know exactly what they mean? Are you certain English is their primary language. Are you bilingual?
That is the entire purpose of the state. We can't refuse to pay property taxes, or lawful summons to appear in court. We can't murder, or defraud. We can't operate a vehicle without license, insurance and registration.
@@sethschiller832 it is " I am" not " iam... You must have proof read that. Maybe stop drinking in class. Also, learn the use of punctuation. It has been developed for a very good reason.
There is NO such thing as a "Legal Checkpoint." They are assuming you are drinking and driving, but they have no actual proof, so therefore, you do no have to provide anything to them, and them threatening him is garbage and a huge unnecessary lawsuit will come out of this if they proceed with what they are doing with this man.
SCOTUS has ruled they are legal. Only sovcit would think laws don't apply to them unless it is a law they like.
And yet he exited his car and spent the night in jail. They not only have the right but they have the responsibility and authority. Too bad that some people just never grow up and realize that with our freedoms come responsibilities. One does not work without the other.
@@johneblen9172you have no idea what freedom is. You’d be the first one to load their neighbors onto the cattle cars.
Wrong. They don't assume every person going through a checkpoint is drunk lol Only assume when there is a valid reason.. and at that point they can obtain proof. It's really really simple.
@@JohnLittleJr, SCOTUS "rulings" are the OPINIONS of 9 lawyers. Their ruling documents are even called OPINION. I've been asking for the evidence that PROVES the constitution applies to me and all anyone has been able to give are the opinions of lawyers. Are opinions facts, or are they opinions?
The fact the supervisor doesn't realize this guy was sent to the duo checkpoint from UCLA or is just a lawyer trying to get rid of theses checkpoints detention spots is mind blowing. She's well educated ,and knows what she is doing is unlawful.
8 years later nothing has changed…
Failure to comply is not an admission guilt
"Failure to comply" presumes there's some requirement to comply. Yet no one has provided any evidence their constitution and laws actually apply to anyone.
Did you have to report to the FAA?
Faulure to comply is simply failure to comply.
“Is there any reason you cannot provide a California driver’s license”. That definitely sounds like a question to me.
"I don't *have* a California driver's license" seems like a valid reason to me.
We need to continue to fight these illegal check points.
If you just stop paying taxes that fund them you wouldn't have to fight. I haven't paid into that fund in over 25 years.
@@freestylesystemsTV Nice way of saying you're a jobless slob, lol
@@freestylesystemsTV This statement is untrue. You just wanted to boast that you didn't pay taxes?
@@comatoseps1382, what statement is untrue? And yes, I did want it that known I don't pay into that fund, as it gives me in opportunity to educate people on why they shouldn't either, and how I've done it. What exactly is it you have a problem with?
Well if they catch one drunk they migth have saved a life
Another esteemed graduate of RUclips Law School.
Probably learn more off here than the academy...most cops do not know the law what so ever. Many people on here with channels know much more.
Adam Medeiros So why do these people keep getting arrested?
Jay MacDonnell DUI checkpoints are a huge grey area when it comes to the constitution. They make you answer questions when you really don’t have to they stop your vehicle without any reason of traffic violation which both violates our rights in the constitution. Police arrest people all the time unlawfully and sometimes just out of anger. Just because you get arrested doesn’t mean it’s a lawful arrest. Everyone has there day in court.
@@adammedeiros6265 Comply with the officer and your window remains intact. Simple.
Jay MacDonnell you see it’s people like you that don’t realize how important our rights are in this country. Police are taking away those rights everyday. Yes sometimes comply with the officer but not if he’s disregarding the oath to the constitution that he took in the beginning of his career.
I will say.... this drivers tantrum only brings more attention to him and is most likely gonna get bad results by not cooperating. I have lost a member of my family to a drunk driver. She was 17 & excited about starting to date. On her first date ever. This driver may feel differently if he lost someone to drunk driving. I appreciate the officer's efforts.
Sorry for your loss honey 😔
I smell pig shit from your story ,oink oink.
Problem is you don't see the other side of this
@@dreamdream011 ? Hahaha
For get the drunks,. What about the texts while driving?
Ooo sh#t.. gota go, 😟
OMG, what was so hard to show your license and lower your window to show that your not drinking...
My Rambling Reviews you don’t have to...
@Chris Tover
Not trying to intimidate him at all....they r trying to catch drunk drivers, if you're intimidated by that seek some therapy.
Would you allow them to search your car too?
I love how the woman cop comes in and is like "hey just to lyk we are about to break your window and violate your constitutional rights because you won't comply to an unlawful traffic stop." DUI checkpoints are unconstitutional and if it was about safety from DUIs they would see that he isn't drunk, doesn't smell of alcohol, and should be allowed to travel freely. Power trip to the fullest
Unlawful? Have you never heard of a road block. Typically it's outside of a venue where lots of people drinking. You must not know anyone killed by a drunk driver. I'd rather the police make sure no one is leaving fucked up... Like you
Typically doesn't mean all does it? I love how you assume that someone you disagree with is a drunk driver simply because they disagreed with you. The DUI checkpoints and roadblocks are forms of entrapment, has nothing to do with safety, like I said already if it was about safety they would've recognized that this guy in particular was doing nothing to indicate that he was intoxicated, instead they decided to escalate the situation.
@@TheSlayer432 You don't know the meaning of entrapment, obviously. Almost all states have you sign to comply with dui checkpoint before you can have the PRIVILEGE to drive. If you don't comply that PRIVILEGE can be revoked. I'm sure he don't have to answer a bunch of questions to incriminate himself but providing proof of insurance and registration were agreed to to get his license.
He don't even have a tag and he's from out of state and he's not respectful at all. I got pulled over for no tag once. I had to get out. They ran my identity, ran the vin on the car, checked my bill of sale and let me go. That simple. You'd be amazed how far a little respect goes. That's too everyone, not just police
@Craig Dendy The man has the right to travel and not contract with any state. They are wrong for doing this to him and can be sued in Federal Court.
These are bad people. Criminals with badges. They know they can't be held accountable.
21:10 WOW!!!! These officers are out of control!!!! It makes me sick that they are allowed to get away with this BS!!!!!
"I'm not asking you a question. Do you have a valid driver's license at this time?" Lmaoooo what???
There’s a wasted 30 minutes of my life that I will never get back.
J T.. No shit, thank god for ffwd.
Same
Yep. I had absolutely zero pathos for the main character in the story but continued watching, but it ended with no conclusion.
Thanks for that. 20mins in with fast-forwarding.. Stopping now ✌
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What a brave citizen. Only the fashion police had the right to mess with him.
NAZZIS pigs
What a stupid citizen. The police have the right to make sure drunk folks aren't out risking innocent peoples lives. Acting like this is how trouble happens. Just follow the law, show your shit & be on your way.
"That was not a question. I said ""is there any reason why you cannot provide......"" - Im sure primary school English taught me that she just asked a question LMAO
Sillybear exactly
This is how they get you. They try to confuse you so that you c
I’m sure her point was the asking for a license was more a direct command than a question. He’s driving a vehicle and at a DUI checkpoint. I don’t understand why he doesn’t understand why he doesn’t need to prove he is licensed to drive a vehicle and that the vehicle is registered.
These checkpoints are California state law.
@@FluffheadsArmy So where Nazi check points, worked out well, why are people being stopped when they exhibit no violations, random searches are a violation of the basic concepts, we are fading fast...
@@FluffheadsArmy check points are legal. However, your constitutional rights still exist. You still have the right to remain silent and you are not obligated to to surrender your right against illegal search.
Also....They are legally right to ask this and get information....they are not in wrong... every state is allowed their own laws....
If you actually read the whole code and definitions...you're wrong and the officers are wrong. Go read it for yourself, look up the actual definitions. But sheep like you never will
The U.S. Supreme Court in Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868) declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right and therefore a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them. In United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), the Supreme Court reiterated its position that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement. However, Wheeler had a significant impact in other ways. For many years, the roots of the Constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause had only vaguely been determined.[5] In 1823, the circuit court in Corfield had provided a list of the rights (some fundamental, some not) which the clause could cover.[6][7] The Wheeler court dramatically changed this. It was the first to locate the right to travel in the privileges and immunities clause, providing the right with a specific guarantee of constitutional protection.[8] By reasoning that the clause derived from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, the decision suggested a narrower set of rights than those enumerated in Corfield, but also more clearly defined those rights as absolutely fundamental.[9] The Supreme Court began rejecting Wheeler's reasoning within a few years. Finally, in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Supreme Court overruled Chief Justice White's conclusion that the federal government could protect the right to travel only against state infringement.[2][3][10] The Supreme Court has specifically ruled that Crandall does not imply a right to use any particular mode of travel, such as driving an automobile. In Hendrick v. Maryland (1915), the appellant asked the Court to void Maryland's motor vehicle statute as a violation of the freedom of movement. The Court found "no solid foundation" for the appellant's argument and unanimously held that "in the absence of national legislation covering the subject, a state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles - those moving in interstate commerce as well as others."[11] The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states: (1) the right to enter one state and leave another (an inherent right with historical support from the Articles of Confederation), (2) the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the "Privileges and Immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2), and (3) (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause; citing the majority opinion in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Stevens said, "the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel."). Here you go live stock!!!!!!!
S
Lester Smart lol, I’m glad you did the research, that would have taken me days!
@@lestersmart8452 I don't think that says what you're trying to make it say...go read some more, like definitions. That's not even getting into the aspect of the govts being a corporation. Enforcement of transportation code lacks due process. They are rules not laws. Look up Eddie Craig here on RUclips
He was there for a long ass while then all of a sudden “why does your call smell like marijuana?” I would’ve slapped that man
I’m not asking you a question..”Do you have a valid California Drivers License ???”😂oh brother
I am not asking you a question....do you have valid license?
Lmaooooo
Right. It isnt a question, it is a demand in the form of a question. A question is optional, a demand is not.
Yeah most cops are college dropout idiots..
Exactly. Everytime they say OK, its a question. STOP saying OK.
Yeah I caught that 😂😁🤦🏾♂️
You don't know what out of control cops look like.
And you don't know when your rights are being taken away.
@@danieltrickey9285 you know when the rights of assholes like this are taken away? When he attempts to use his "rights" to navigate around being drugged while driving and destroys every other single person's right to be safe I the street. Dipshit.
Out of control? I did not see that in this vid. There are many other vids on RUclips that are showing that, but not in this vid.
Dig Mar so threatening isn’t tyranny?
@@mcwaff8661 Yes, now people say you can't get drunk in public, not even ordering a cab .... like driving DUI is a better aalternative, look at RUclips searching for cops arrested after a DUI check, and how many started being violent or treathening to other cops that did Identify themselves prior to that .... but here in this vid .... anything threathening happened I only saw one patronising person .... trying to be a tyranny.
We are the police. We are the true Sovereign citizens by our own definition.
We are the police.
We are the policy enforcers and revenue generators of America. It is our job to extract funds from the hard working American citizen so our politicians can live their lavish lifestyles.
You are a stupid ass..
Exsctly.it amazes me how many bloobtube pushes condoning thid nonsense.im in vs..death to tyrantd on the flag..and the blue crime familys are thr tyrants.burn in hell all of u that condon this shyte
lol you might wanna lay off the boof, my dude
@@glennclark7472 Is there an english translation for this gibberish bullshit?
Without which, politicians would be declawed kittens!
put me on a jury...100 million dollar award. no pensions for entire police department. 10 years in prison no parole for all involved
This is an old classic case of guilty until proven innocent… completely disgusting.
If you're not drunk you have nothing to hide
@@EssexAggiegrad2011 that’s true. If you’re not drunk, you do have nothing to hide. However, it sounds like you like getting your rights violated. Other people take pride in their rights and don’t freely throw them away. Have a good weekend!
@@captainhotbunz659 LOL
In Canada we have impaired driving spot checks, you are asked of you had anything to drink and say no and the cop doesn't smell anything you are on your way. Never been asked for drivers license or anything else.
That was before Trudeau.
Hope you weren't bragging SMH but to be honest we are all fucked.. find god.
@@Mojo59079 Every Canadian that voted for that cuban needs their teeth kicked out with no dental insurance.
They can now demand a breathalyzer test randomly and don’t need suspicion.
@@Mojo59079 Comrade Trudeau
Come out of the car,we won't hurt you. The Supreme court ruled in 1969 that cops can lie to you.
Whether you like this guy or not is not the point. Point is all charges were dismissed.
He was right to defend his rights, period.
Still took the ride
Charges get dismissed for a myriad of reasons MOST of which have nothing to do with the validity of the stop or the probable cause to arrest. The standard of proof to convict in Court is much higher than the standard of proof required to make a valid arrest so just saying that the charges being dismissed does not tell us what the rational of the Court was.
@@realsecman There was no violation of the Constitution or law. DUI/License Check points have been ruled CONSTITUTIONAL by the US Supreme Court, they further have ruled that the Police can order you out of your vehicle. Failure to produce a license or comply with lawful orders then becomes an arrestable offense. the Police are the ones understanding the Constitution and the law, not the you tube idiot operating the vehicle.
@@realsecman The Courts, Appellate and Supreme have generally said that The people have a reduced expectation in Public. The Standard of proof required for an Arrest, with or without a warrant, or a search, with or without a warrant, is Probable Cause, PC. PC is considered when an Officer has enough basically to accuse a specific person of a violation of law and either make an arrest or in some instances a search. PC is not proof positive but basically more likely than not that an offense may have been committed and said person may have committed it. PC is basically 51 percent, not proof positive, (beyond a reasonable doubt) which is the Standard for conviction of said offense. So for PC a police officer doesn't have to be right only reasonable. To stop a person on the street,(temporary detainment), an Officer needs reasonable SUSPICION , RS, that criminal behavior may have or is about to happen. To stop a vehicle the Officer needs RS of the violation of any law, criminal or traffic, or ordinance, RS is a standard of proof that is even less than 50 pct only that the Officer , based on his subjective opinion, reasonably believes based on a totality of the circumstances, that the offender committed, is committing or is about to commit (a crime if on foot) or (any offense if operating a vehicle).
Now most will agree as the law and the courts have said that if you operate a vehicle you need a license issued by a State and if you are lawfully stopped you shall produce said license. Now to the DUI/License check points, (CP)). The Supreme Court in 1990 has said that the very minor intrusion of a CP although not supported by any standard of proof, is reasonable because getting drunk drivers off our roads far out weighs the minor stop. Generally the Police will ask a few questions and may also have you produce your license. You may legally assert to remain silent by STATING SAME, not just sitting there however refusing to show your license is NOT remaining silent but now gives the Officer PC to arrest for either unlicensed, failure to produce and in most States an obstruction type charge.
Charges are dismissed for many reasons and most have NOTHING TO DO with the validity of an arrest. He says they were dismissed but doesn't say why. That is the prosecutors discretion not the Officers. Arrest requires only PROBABLE CAUSE, Conviction requires PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
My window would have been broken and i would have been pulled out the car 🚗 at the 3:00 minute mark
And imagine what would have happened if you had reached back into the back of your car like he did?!
Kelly Corlett ive been pulled over so many times . I dont even smoke and had to sit one time for a k9 unit to come and sniff my car lmao 😂
Mr.Rufus Rufus bless you! I’m in England it’s definitely not as bad here. My husband got pulled over on December 1st at first he was drunk then he had been smoking weed then his car smelled of weed and when they had nothing they said you must be going to that house (pointing to random house) to buy drugs! He said no I was driving along the road and if you remember you pulled ME over here I had no intention of stopping here! They tried I’ll give them that haha
Kelly Corlett lmao 😂 wow 😮 , but as we all know not every cop is ignorant just a few ! We need them but some are crazy
Mr.Rufus Rufus If he was black talking that nonsense he would’ve been dragged out of the car and beaten or shot the very second he said “I don’t answer questions.” Have you EVER seen ANY video where someone Black can behave like that and not be gang swarmed and arrested? Unbelievable!
This Is Why People HATE PIGS!
“Why does your car smell like weed?”
“Cuz you smoked It officer”
😂😂😂
Ha ha
30:20 "you want to tell me about these two joints in your wallet?"
@@robert5c, yeah they also said I didn't have plates on my car and the VIN was covered, yet there's no evidence to support any of those claims. They had their own camera and could/should/would have turned to it show their claims. Why didn't they? You should stop blindly believing what you're told.
He was trying to gain probable cause asking him that question.
LMFAOO!!!!!!!
With his 20 minutes distractions..100 other drunk driver pass the check point.
Based on you comment, you think 300 drunk people per hour "got away with DUI"??? Just how stupid are you?
@@freestylesystemsTV Way less stupid than you.
@@ralphgambino1737, not if you blindly believe these cops have some soft of authority/jurisdiction.
Lol
Ya, this asshole is an arrogant piece of shit who just told me he’s lost loved ones in drunk driving accidents. He’s a selfish entitled prick
It's kinda sad when they basically say "most people don't know their rights and just comply with our orders, I don't know how to handle people who know their rights"
privilege to drive/
"You must comply". Welcome to the new USSA
updown4455 well... they are cops.. they uphold the law soooo when it comes to simple things like producing your D.L and performing a sobriety test , It's a small price to pay for public safety . Unfortunately the law is the law. No point going against the grain.
Its everything they told us the Soviets were
This has always been the case at checkpoints, gets dui’s off the road.....ok with me.
@@4evabluegirl I don't give a fuck, I have my right to travel without being bothered without probable cause. Fuck them if they don't like my rights! Fuck the police
They don’t stop all vehicles. This is a violation of civil rights
Whats even more troubling is that police seem to have no awareness that people can be terrified of them !
Why do you think they're unaware of that? That's exactly what they want people to be.
This is absolutely wonderful. Video taping the police in action is helping both the police and all of us. Please keep these cameras rolling.
Yes I love it when these retards get tased
OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE IS A PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF WHATEVER STATE YOU ARE IN. COMPLY OR GET THE FUCK OFF THE ROADS. Asshole.
@@MrTommyboy68, thanks for your opinion. Now, do you have any actual evidence that proves their constitution/laws/codes actually apply to anyone?
@@MrTommyboy68 I but you're a Trump supporter fuckhead
Cops handled this perfectly. Maybe the driver needed a time out or a safe place.
She stumbled and almost said we need to run your license and see if you have a warrant
Lol
I wondered if anyone else caught that
Im glad im not the only one who caught that
If its a dui check point. Ask him to blow the alcohol test. Then if its clear on your way. No need to ask for license teg and all the other bullshit.
@@matthewjdouglas6471 fucking sheep
Free to travel unmolested? Ya right
Only if you have a diplomatic license plate.
Yeah but what’s the RAS
Supreme court ruled that the danger of drunk driving outweighs the 1-2 mins of being stopped at one of these checkpoints.
Some hills are worth dieing on, some are not. You decide.
Protecting the remnants if(sp?) our rights is still fun if only because it annoys cops and police state boot lickers.
great spelling
You spelled DYING wrong.
Once you allow them to violate your rights even once, that's the beginning of the end!
So stop and think for a moment. If the majority of civilians practiced and implimented the rights bestowed upon us. There would be no hill to die on. Police would not be militarized. We'd most likely see less violence from police.
Congrats to you for enduring this & having the balls to see it through .. being Arrested, Jailed, then eventually Charges = Dismissed
What a completean child amh
news flash, his charges were not dismissed.....he complied in the end
@huntercanuck not sure what word you were trying to say but your one of those just comply idiots even if it's an uncomstitutional bullshit checkpoint.
Also he is being ILLEGALLY SEARCHED
@@huntercanuck They ripped him out of the car, cuffed him, temporarily took off his glasses without his consent and bullied him, yet he largely kept his cool. The officers were the REAL childish ones!
@@pro_diesel I diot it's ur right to refuse genius
It’s September and he’s still not answering any questions
😂😂😂😂
Lmao
Lol
Almost November now... Still no answers!!!
Love to watch him try that BS during an IRS audit. Hey, maybe that's a good idea. Let's all report him to the IRS and get them to do an audit.
Fourth amendment violation is not legal officer
NOTICE! The license reads "Any sobriety test required by law!" A field sobriety test is NOT required by law in California and is ALWAYS optional to the driver. The driver NEVER has to agree to a field sobriety test which if failed then gives the legal right for officers to administer a legal test which is a breathalyzer of blood draw and that's why you decline a field test ( it's optional to the driver 'not mandatory' ) ... if alcohol content level is questionable...always go with the blood draw
Hi officer I'm drunk so I'm declining the sobriety test. Ok sir have a nice night. Where do you get your facts? You are completely wrong.
@@emeralddragon2010 I like how you say hes wrong and then dont say how or why. Heres ther thing, hes not wrong, dummy.
@@sirbader1 umm he is wrong. He is required to stop and show his license. He is required to exit the vehicle he did neither. He is required to submit to a DUI checkpoint and have a license plate. He did neither. Ok dumbass he was wrong in every step of the way. Then he added resisting, failure to comply with a lawful order. And was rightfully arrested
@@emeralddragon2010 he was specifically speaking about roadside tests, you fuggin goon. Smoke rocks elsewhere.
@@sirbader1 no actually he wasn't moron stop showing your ignorance
I tried this once and the state trooper slapped me. He then went to the other side of the car and had my buddy roll down his window and slapped him. My buddy said why did you slap me? The trooper said well I knew that as soon as Iet the driver go you would have said, I wish he had tried to slap me. They don't play in Alabama.
Lol Awesome Brother Roll Tide
We just win CHAMPIONSHIPS ROLL TIDE!!!
Alabama, where mom and pop are brother and sister
@@rugglesmcbutt3188 and father said to son ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,get off your sister we have company coming
This is so unconstitutional!!! Stopping people without suspecting them of a crime but give me your license and let me smell your breathe to see if you are able to drive this car safely. They did not see him driving unsafely so why....just WHY?!!! What a flipping joke!
Its......a.....checkpoint......what about that do you not understand?
@@markwilliamson3628 checkpoints should be illegal. It's all about revenue generation, not public safety. Learn to care about your rights on the road. Because cops sure won't.
They should not be illegal. My family's lives may continue because of these checkpoints. I don't trust other peopl on the road, so this is a way my peace of mind is clear
Has a family member of yours been killed by a drunk driver? I lost a family member who died at 21 leaving behind 2 daughters who were just infants at the time. They grew up without a father because a drunk driver crashes into him while my uncle was on his way to work.
As a matter of fact I have lost people very important to me to a drunk driver. An entire family actually. But these stops are unconstitutional and I am entitled to MY opinion. I dislike drunk drivers more than most but that does not mean a person's rights are null and void.
Cop whistled at him like a dog. What a prick.
Legend has it he is still not answering any questions
The first give away that he must have been impaired was the jacket
That jacket alone was a felony. And when he replied to my post, I told him so. Lol
Lol
Of course he was impaired you dont resist unless you have something to hide
Mark Griego found the fashion police.
It was a crime against fashion !
Comply with the law not the police.
And what evidence do you reply on to PROVE the laws actually apply to me, or anyone?
freestylesystemsTV not sure what you mean here mate? I’m fully supporting you, do not comply with the police, only the law, and the law states your allowed to remain silent 👍🏻
I get you're "on my side" -- What I want you to understand is that they don't have evidence that (any) laws actually apply to you, or anyone. Their claim/allegation is, if you're physically in California, or England, or wherever, then the laws of that area apply to you... I'm asking what EVIDENCE do they have to PROVE their claim. How does my physical presence in their "area" PROVE their constitution and laws apply to me and create obligation? They don't have any PROOF that their laws apply to anyone.
freestylesystemsTV what are you talking about, I have no clue, why are you asking me this?
What the fuck are these comments about, mongos
100% retaliation! This is a clear case of "bruised ego syndrome!"
How ridiculous. Just show your license & move on.
Fuck these terrorist cops.
@@ChadBasedRedpill That what this pussy thought, and you see how he whined like a bitch once he got out. Just like you would.
If this douche canoe wants to fight against these "unlawful checkpoints", the place to do it is in court; not on the side of the road. Being confrontational with law enforcement never ends well for these melodramatic attention whores.
sheeple
He has the right to not show it.
Cop said
“I’m not asking you a question I said is there any reason you can’t produce a valid drivers license???”
😂😂😂😂😂
RIGHT
Well she’s not asking she’s insisting on seeing his drivers license is what she’s saying. It’s pretty clear it’s not a question but a reasonable requirement at a DUI checkpoint
A unique name
No, it’s a question.
I even put the question mark at the end of the question. That should have given you a clue.
JD C
yes she asked him for it. Correct.
but checking for a Valid DL is a requirement is my point. He can’t simply say I’m not answering questions. It’s a requirement not a question. All he needs to do is provide what they require of him as he would a traffic stop. These checkpoints are a constant in California and you are required to follow them by California law as you would a traffic stop.
Exactly, stupid cops
All of this applies according to LaPD except if you’re an illegal. How do I know this because I lived in California over 50 years and was personally rear ended by two illegals at different times and the police did absolutely nothing to either of them. Neither had a legal license, neither had insurance, neither had ownership of the vehicle and finally one of them was a repeat felon who should have been deported or in jail yet was still in the country. One of the reasons I left California was their absolute farce of a state with laws only enforced to intimidate and harass actual American citizens.
The officer says we need your license so we can check and see if you have any war. Then stops her self because she is not suppose to be doing that is she. It’s a dui stop
“Comply or die”…I know quite a few cops who have used this sentence jokingly, but the scary thing is none of them knew each other…so where are they learning that from?..
The training academy where they cheat on their exams.
Janitorial level education for 6 months lightly touching upon the rights of citizens, but just “ wing it”. Law enforcement in this country is about as unprofessional as you can get! That’s a big problem. No skill to be brought to the table for your working life? Career choices, fast food, retail, police, railroad! Come on in! Hahaha!
This nerdy 'tough guy's held up other people for over 30 minutes, when he should have been dragged out after 10 minutes! Too many nerdy scumbags!
The one STUPID question they asked him for a valid California Driver's license. What if the man is from out of state.
Thanks to a 1991 case decided by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, sobriety checkpoints are not legal in the Lonestar State. This means that you are not technically required to stop at a DWI checkpoint in Texas.
The 4th amendment of the constitution says sobriety checkpoints are a violation.
Read further and U.S supreme court said you must. Just saying... Not looking for trouble.
Name the case -
@@eyesopen5386 no it doesn’t -
@@JonosTrainVideos Lol. Ok.
When you comply with tests your giving the police evidence against you in court
That’s very true.
Facts
Very correct
@@ExUmbra117 my girlfreind was killed by a drink. Driver as far as Im concern the courts arent tough enough on drink drivers
Only if your guilty