What to do if you are pulled over

This is very informative.
http://www.ridelust.com/protect-your...t-pulled-over/

Also as we all KNOW but just to back it up one more time... You can only incriminate yourself. SAYING NOTHING can't incriminate you.

Thanks!

Sorry, but I think that video is a joke. If you're stopped for a minor traffic violation and don't have anything illegal in your car, then your best bet is to be friendly and cooperative. I've gotten warnings at least half the times I've been stopped for something minor. Acting like a punk will only make your situation worse and possibly get you arrested.

Sorry, but I think that video is a joke. If you're stopped for a minor traffic violation and don't have anything illegal in your car, then your best bet is to be friendly and cooperative. I've gotten warnings at least half the times I've been stopped for something minor. Acting like a punk will only make your situation worse and possibly get you arrested. Originally Posted by Shackleton

To each their own in the opinion department...

While I do understand what you mean if you have nothing to hide and it is a
minor situation like a traffic stop, but it was a great example of how to
handle the questioning and what to do IF you CHOOSE not to allow the
"nice officer" to question you or search your vehicle for whatever reason.


There are times when you are up against L E , THEY get the attitude problem
and YOU are guilty until proven innocent. I see it all the time in AZ,
especially if you have a tan and dark hair, lol.


Have a good eve.,
Cheyenna

This video perpetuates police abuse.

And reading the article below? Are you kidding me? Police competition? They aren't taking bullets for your customer service.

What a joke.

Well I am very sorry you need to find fault and did not care for it.
I was trying to be helpful.

If I see anything that might help others I like to pass it on.
So sue me. lol


And P'lice abuse DOES happen. Apparently not here from the way you write, but google Joe Arpaio or Maricopa County Sheriff deputies and see what all comes up! I guess I come from another planet than y'all...

Anyway it seems suddenly it is this big deal and people wanna get argumentative about it and I meant well by posting it.

I hope it was helpful to some and if not then PASS IT BY. No need to be rude.

There are times when you are up against L E , THEY get the attitude problem

and YOU are guilty until proven innocent. I see it all the time in AZ,
especially if you have a tan and dark hair, lol.

Originally Posted by Cheyenna

There is something you need to understand.

Arizona's Hispanic population is 1.6 million. Arizona is home to, depending on whose estimate you use, somewhere between 400,000 and 500,000 illegal aliens. Almost all of them are Hispanic.

Depending on whether you assume that the illegal Hispanics are included in the total Hispanic population, or not, you find that somewhere between one out of every four and one out of every five Hispanics in Arizona is illegal.

That gives you the MINIMUM likelihood that any randomly-encountered Hispanic in Arizona is illegal. When you factor in the likely circumstances of a random police stop, the odds will generally go up, significantly.

Moreover, as was demonstrated this past week, some of those illegal Hispanics are not peaceful, law-abiding citizens. The cop in question is potentially taking his life in his hands by doing his job, and he has no way of knowing whether this particular Hispanic of unknown immigration status is "just" looking for work or is moving a large quantity of illegal drugs.

So maybe you should cut the Arizona law enforcement people just a little bit of slack. They're working in a threat environment somewhat different from yours.
[/LEFT] Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Apparently you did not research the actual time line of the MCSO and the wrongful death and brutality cases. I am talking about over the years, not since the law was passed. What I am talking about is brutality, and not the current state of affairs. What about when the victims were already IN JAIL and sometimes shackled and restrained? Please be so kind as to Check FACTS further before you reply from behind a monitor and have not lived in the midst of this circus.

My dad is a retired Sgt. Detective from a smaller AZ county, and my brother is a retired undercover narc. officer... so, I DO know how much they do risk their lives to do their jobs and I KNOW that there are many who are good and just do their jobs but THIS is largely NOT the case in this county....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/arpaio

Scott Norberg was white. He was unarmed but did "take a punch at" an officer... His arrest had nothing to do with his race. Now, it is wrong but not uncommon for anyone to take a punch at an officer... ANYWAY,15 hours later, he was handcuffed by guards, kicked, stomped on, and then strapped into a restraint chair. There, guards held a towel over his head, literally suffocating him. Medical records later revealed that he had been shot with a stun gun at least 14 times and beaten so badly that his larynx cracked.- http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bas...heriff_joe.php

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-...oney-shot/full

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-...illion-victim/

Then there is Brian Crenshaw who was a legally blind and mentally disabled inmate who suffered fatal injuries while being held in Maricopa County Jail for shoplifting- (wow a real "bad guy"!) He died in his cell and evidence was destroyed to hamper investigation.
http://www.arpaio.com/blood-on-hands/2.php

Richard Post
Richard Post was a paraplegic inmate arrested in 1996 for possession of marijuana and criminal trespass. Post was placed in a restraint chair by guards and his neck was broken in the process. The event, caught on video, shows guards smiling and laughing while Post is being injured. Because of his injuries, Post has lost much of the use of his arms.[74] Post settled his claims against the Sheriff's office for $800,000

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/08/26230.htm

More barbaric treatment:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_370543.html

The list goes on and on.

It amazes me that a nice, well meant post has turned into this and I am unsubscribing from this thread now because those who have not lived it and know little of the facts will always want to argue and defend.

Good day.

Cheyanna,

WTF did you think would happen here? Everyone to just say thank you and move on? YOU didn't make the video so stop taking it personally when people choose to comment on the information presented.

It amazes me that a nice, well meant post has turned into this and I am unsubscribing from this thread now because those who have not lived it and know little of the facts will always want to argue and defend.

Good day. Originally Posted by Cheyenna

Yeah, I am sure this was all done out of the goodness of their and your heart. You post on a controversial subject and then don't like the comments?

I think this discussion has gotten a little sidetracked. The video at issue isn't about the new "immigrant law" in Arizona (which I think is a bad law and will probably be repealed soon) or the outlandish notion of private police forces (which made me think of the scene in "Gangs of New York" involving private fire departments). It isn't about that looney sheriff in Phoenix who treats pretrial detainees (who've been convicted of no crime) like his own private slave labor force. Rather, the video presents suggestions on how to act during a police stop. Let's examine those suggestions.

I think the first principle to follow during an encounter with LE is: 1. The ruder the cop is, the nicer you are. I think the fictional driver in the video repeatedly violates this principle. He drives way too long before stopping. He tries to go one up on the cop by initiating the conversation. He only opens his window a slit. He locks the doors to the car. His tone is a little smartassy. But must important, he talks WAY too much. The driver's behavior is provocative, leading to the (rather hammy) reaction by the officer.

I don't think any of us here on this particular board (other than our snooping friends from LE) would disagree that cops lie to make cases that can fuck up our lives. I think we should approach contacts with LE not as a game to be "won" with verbal acuity, but rather as an opportunity to use our wits. After all, isn't the goal to avoid a charge? That's one reason I don't understand the gleefulness of the backseat passenger in the video. I mean, the driver got a ticket that he's going to have to pay. Where's the victory in that?

The other basic problem I have with the video is the Average Joe just won't have the verbal mastery of the actor/driver, especially with John Law in his face. That leads to my second principle to follow during an encounter with LE: 2. Say nothing, do nothing. Cops ask questions during a stop to gather evidence against the suspect. Ever notice how a cop will have their pen poised over their ticket pad while they ask their leading questions? It's so they can write down your damaging admissions on that little line on the bottom of the ticket, like "Driver said he's sorry for speeding." If there's a trial 6 months from now (or even longer in many cities), the officer can refresh his memory and testify you admitted your guilt to him or her.

So I wouldn't suggest blabbing on and on like some smartass yuppie who's had too much Starbucks. If the cop asks you why you were speeding, give the cop a wry smile, nothing more. Trust me, he won't write "Driver made wry smile" on his pad -- he'll write nothing. Sure, answer questions about where you were going and where you live and such because it's no skin off your nose to answer. Be cooperative and hand the cop your license and proof of insurance. Chances are the cop will send you on your way -- without a ticket.

Now if you're carrying a dead body or large sacks of white powder in your back seat, that's a different story. It may be worth the risk to aggressively assert your constitutional rights. What have you got to lose? You're probably going to the Big House anyway.

But I think there are some readers, the anti-guvmit type (recently, they've adopted the fashionable moniker "Tea Party," but their philosophy is basically the same as ole John C. Calhoun in the early 19th Century), who think that every contact with LE should be a confrontation over "aw rats." I say, more power to you! Hew the path of liberty for others! Yee-HAAAW! I'm a criminal defense lawyer and I could use the business defending you, assuming you can get a second mortgage on your double-wide.

Two final thoughts. First, you might download and print this (one for you and one for a buddy):

American Civil Liberties Union Bustcard

I've kept a laminated Bustcard with me since the olden days when I used to commit crimes. It has some very practical advice about what to do during an encounter with LE. Even if you're in the Tea Party you can use it. Light it on fire and shout anti-guvmit slogans at the cop who stopped you.

Finally, the law recently changed regarding traffic stops. For years, the police have used a 1981 U.S. Supreme Court decision (called New York v. Belton) to conduct warrantless searches of vehicles even when the searches were unrelated to the reason for the stop. For example, a cop would stop and arrest a suspect for driving with a suspended license, then search the vehicle's interior (and maybe even the trunk), although there would be no reason to think there was evidence in the vehicle directly related to the crime of DWSL. The rule was, "if arrest, then search."

In 2009, the Supreme Court, in Arizona v. Gant, held that the Fourth Amendment requires LE to demonstrate an actual and continuing threat to their safety posed by an arrestee, or a need to preserve evidence related to the crime of arrest from tampering by the arrestee, in order to justify a warrantless vehicular search incident to an arrest conducted after the vehicle's recent occupants have been arrested and secured. The ruling is still being filtered through the lower courts, but hopefully cops busting people for possession for contraband recovered in vehicles during routine traffic stops will go the way of other LE techniques, like thumb screws and billy clubs.

Not sure what the brouhaha is all about. I watched the video and found it both informative and entertaining.

Sounds like some folks need to take life less seriously.

lol this is exactly how to handle it. you will always be asked do you know what the speed limit is. of course you do your not stupid. but to answer is stupid. you just admitted your guilt.

i love the end of the video where it says dedicated to the men and women of law enforcement. haha freakin hilarious.

peace
atx

I just cry.

If the cop is a woman, I always ask her: Does your husband let you talk to him like this?

If the cop is black, I never pull over. I just call 911 and say that I'm being chased by a black man with a gun.

This video perpetuates police abuse.

And reading the article below? Are you kidding me? Police competition? They aren't taking bullets for your customer service.

What a joke. Originally Posted by Boltfan

How does this perpetuate police violence?

I didn't see the kid in the video punch or shoot the cop in the face. He just asserted his rights as an American. Some folks may want to give up those rights, but lots of other people, including the lawyers that made that video, know better.

Do you think being courteous yet brief is police abuse? Brother, if the cops don't get shot at, puked on, physically assaulted or bled on... I bet it's a good day no matter what a snotty teenager does during a traffic stop.

Fact is the kid left that situation with nothing more than a traffic ticket and the cop drove off just fine too. Which is the point of the video.