Remember me talking about the surreal experience of driving past all those "drug interdiction" cars on I-40 between Detroit-on-the-Mississippi and Nash Vegas?
Well, Cemetery, of Cemetery's Gun Blob, didn't drive past them. Or rather he did, but not very far before the blue lights came on in the rear-view.
Apparently, the cops had brought along that noted Constitutional law expert and Fourth Amendment specialist, Fluffy the Uberhund, to gin up a pretext to shake the car down for dope. (Or, rather, dope money, since he was westbound, although I suppose he could have been running good Kentuckian to points west.)
So, yeah, if your car fits a certain 'profile', you can have it stopped in broad daylight in America by guys in black fatigues and tac-vests with German Shepherd dogs and "Papieren, bitte, y'all."
At least they apparently said "Please" and "Thank You" before and after tearing through his car on the roadside and didn't seem perturbed by all the guns in the vehicle, which is more than you'd get in some states.
I'm just curious to see how much tighter they have to crank the ratchet before the same "if you have nothing to hide" law-and-order types who voted themselves this nifty WoD finally sit up and say, "Now wait just a cotton-pickin' minute..."
ReplyDeleteMarko:
ReplyDeleteAll depends on how many of 'em get stopped. Funny, that.
And yes, I've had my shakedown experience, with a Tri-County Narcotics Enforcement Task Force. With dog. With black BDUs.
Thing is, both parties have decided that The War on (Some) Drugs is a surefire Vote-Getter, lest you be seen as Soft On Crime.
ReplyDeleteWhat's a "large sum of money?" $1,000? $200? $17.50?
ReplyDeleteBetter plan to put all your travel expenses on a credit card. If you have any money at all, they might take it.
Better yet, lock your car upon exit and (politely)demand a warrant. It's worked for me, twice. You do lose some time while they dither, but it also puts them in the position of having to get a warrant or break into your car.
ReplyDeleteThe local LEO train their dogs at my place sometimes, and I know when a dog has alerted. Both times the dog did not alert, but the handler stated that they did. Yet, when push came to shove, they decided NOT to get a judge to rubber stamp a warrant, even though they claimed that they did not need one. Their only other option was to arrest me and take(steal)my keys, or break a window. They declined to do either.
Seriously, they can do this ONLY if you let them. So don't. Remember to be polite, respectful and FIRM in your refusal of a warrantless search. also be sure to stand in view of the dashcam.
It's nice that they still pretend to be within the law. Except, they aren't. In order to preform a Terry Stop (pull you over), the officer must have reasonable suspicion which is defined as "articulable facts that would lead a reasonable officer to conclude that criminal activity is afoot". Just because a vehicle is driving down the highway in the middle of the day is NOT a reasonable reason for a terry stop.
ReplyDeletePlease note, I am NOT a lawyer.
s
Having met Cemetery at the NRA Convention this past spring (Nice Guy, Good People, you'd all like him), I'm just glad that A) His "Gunnie Fetish" makes your Top Break .38 S+W desires seem like you're a Glock Rep, so there was no "Evil Black Plastic WMD's" in his Vehicle, and B) it's a good thing he wasn't stopped in Canton, Ohio.
ReplyDeleteMarko, I agree it's nonsense, but who exactly voted for the War on Drugs? That stuff has been illegal our whole voting lives.
ReplyDeleteReally interesting info on drug dogs:
ReplyDeletehttp://reason.com/archives/2011/02/21/the-mind-of-a-police-dog
This crap was ending in Oregon simply through an initiative petition. One that required a conviction before any civil forfeiture action.
ReplyDeleteCivil forfeiture is a medieval common law action. ANY statute, including a city regulation, can forbid it.
All I can say is I'm glad they didn't stop me going OR coming...LOL And I'd have done the same thing, lock the vehicle and wait for he warrant. I had a LOT of $$ in guns in the back of the truck, and having had a friend get both his car and $12000 of verifiable money confiscated in Louisiana, because he tried "to do the right thing", I made up my mind that I'm NOT going to play that game.
ReplyDeleteQuote
ReplyDelete"Thing is, both parties have decided that The War on (Some) Drugs is a surefire Vote-Getter, lest you be seen as Soft On Crime." Tam
You get it.
Nah, deodands are older than that, Kristopher. They are based on pure animism.
ReplyDeleteI had one of those fishing stops back in '92 in Tatum, Texas. Having cop germs on your formerly clean underwear is revolting.
In the culture my parents grew up in, cops were White trash hired to keep the other White trash and the Negroes in line, and respectable people had nothing to do with them.
Doesn't the present Civil Forfeiture come out of that Regan period Masterpiece "Comprehensive forfeiture act of 1984?"
ReplyDeleteI believe that's a federal law that no local law can override. Especially when the locals are part of the problem since they get a cut.
Justthisguy,
ReplyDeleteYour parents' culture was as revolting as is your pining for it.
Constitutional protections apply to everyone, even marginally-literate crackers.
I didn't think I was pining for it. I think I mostly escaped it, having been raised in Southern Florida with lotsa Yankees. In fact, had I lived in that culture, I think I might have been bullied quite a bit as a kid, being a bit "strange" as I am. Fortunately for me, the public schools I attended as a kid had lots and lotsa Jews in them, both as pupils and teachers, as did the PTAs and school board, so picking on nerdy people was just not tolerated.
ReplyDeleteOf the dozen or so National Merit Finalists in my high school class, I was one of only two Gentiles.
The irony is stunning. From Tam's comment at Cemetery's Blob:
ReplyDelete"...LE agencies are sucking at the combined teats of forfeiture and federal funding..."
Drug interdiction my ass. Money is the drug at issue here, and like any addict LE will do anything to get it.
And not just on the highways.
I believe parts of the Constitution were largely ignored by the Forces of Order everywhere back then. For instance, actually trying to get a search warrant before busting in seems to have been pretty rare before Mapp vs. Ohio.
ReplyDeleteThose guys still ignore parts of the Constitution, maybe different parts, maybe not, maybe on different classes of people, maybe on the same classes.
The job attracts that kind. I have a cousin who is married to a policeman. I said to her, once, that to be a really efficient policeman, you must have not only a criminal mind, but a very strong conscience, and that the conflict between those qualities was one of the reasons so many cops drink too much.
She agreed with me.
Can't lay this shit on individual cops; it is hierarchal and systemic. As mentioned above and as always, following the fucking money and power. Or is it power and money...
ReplyDeleteAnyway, if you have a chance, sit down and share an hour and a couple beers with a retired 30-year LEO. If he knows you and trusts you he will tell you things that will scare the hell out of you...he might even admit that they scare him too.
And if you don't find this little snarky nugget both hilarious and terrifying, you ain't paying attention:
"Papieren, bitte, ya'll..."
The area in question covers from roughly Nashville down to exit 126. Sometimes you’ll see things on down to Jackson, but not quite as often as the east TN end, then you pick up again just outside Memphis around where SR385 crosses 40. They don't give a crap about the drugs, as you can see by the fact that drugs go up the eastbound side and money returns west, and 9/10 of their stops are on the westbound side. Thus making it clear it's all about the cash.
ReplyDeleteWV- factig
"Them's the facts, pig"
Oh, yeah, at least they aren't THIS kind of crooked - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/nyregion/brooklyn-detective-convicted-of-planting-drugs-on-innocent-people.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
ReplyDeleteI'd rather get my money stole than have my freedom and rights stolen.
Nylarthotep:
ReplyDeleteThat federal act is entirely dependent on that bit of old common law. The federal act merely authorized federal agents to sue property using that crap.
Strip forfeiture out and it falls on its face.
The mere threat of getting sued for theft in state courts shut that nonsense down.
"if you have nothing to hide"
ReplyDeleteI am old and experienced enough (but noticed I didn't say "wise") to regret the time in my life when I thought that was a perfectly reasonable statement.
If you drive over the speed limit, you can be stopped for speeding.
ReplyDeleteIf you drive at or under the speed limit, you can be stopped because
it's suspicious to drive at or under the speed limit.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91582619
Without giving away his secrets, here's one thing Ingram looks for:
If the speed limit is 65 mph, most people will drive 75 mph.
But someone wanted by the law will go 65 or less, and avoid eye contact with a cop
who pulls up alongside. Ingram calls them "stress-induced indicators."
NPR. June 17, 2008.
In addition to avoiding eye-contact with a copy, I'm sure that making eye-contact with a cop is also suspicious behavior.
Oakenheart said...
ReplyDelete"I'd rather get my money stole than have my freedom and rights stolen."
That's a logical fallacy known as a false dilemma. The two options are not mutually exclusive.