PDA

View Full Version : I was stopped at a PA State Police checkpoint today.



aka:PBS
06-25-2011, 05:33 PM
Eddie Haskell (300 posts) Sat Jun-25-11 04:56 PM
Original message
I was stopped at a PA State Police checkpoint today.
Advertisements [?]
It was 10:14 a.m. and I was getting off an interstate on an exit to nowhere. They were stopping everyone and asking for photo ID. I thought this kind of harassment was illegal. Does anyone know what I'm required to supply? Do I have to answer questions about my destination or what I'm planning to do?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1362730&mesg_id=1362730

Must be a troll......:D

ColonialMarine0431
06-25-2011, 06:16 PM
Liberal_in_LA (1000+ posts) Sat Jun-25-11 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Happens to black folks all the time

Maybe because although blacks are a minority they commit the majority of crimes. Duh!

Adam Wood
06-25-2011, 10:46 PM
And then this state trooper jumped out of the bushes....

Dan D. Doty
06-25-2011, 11:57 PM
I guess that Eddie didn't concider that maybe the cops were looking for a bad guy on the run, or that this was a check point looking for drunk drivers ( I've seen drunks start at 7pm Friday night and still be drinking and driving 9 the next morning; drunks just don't know when to stop and go home :rolleyes:).

But maybe guys like Eddie here, think they above and beyond the law.

djones520
06-26-2011, 12:02 AM
Stopped, while driving, by police looking for photo id. Hmmm... like a drivers liscence maybe?

txradioguy
06-26-2011, 04:46 AM
And then this state trooper jumped out of the bushes....


Did he have a brick?

lacarnut
06-26-2011, 07:49 AM
I have been stopped many times...they are checking for current driver's lic., inspection stickers and plates. I think that is a good idea.

Novaheart
06-26-2011, 11:23 AM
I think the Founding Fathers would explode at the very notion of checkpoints in peacetime.

We have been witnessing the creep of the police state for a long time now, and both Republicans and Democrats in positions of power have been signing off on it in the name of safety.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Your car is your effects. Your license is your papers. Your body is your person.

The state believes it has done a workaround in this regard by not requiring a person to drive or to have a license to drive unless he is driving. The shibboleth is that this is somehow voluntary. It's actually coercion. Besides, we now have non-driving ID's and cops who demand to see them of people walking down the street. While we don't mind when the cops are harassing people we consider to be the usual suspects, our objectivity is compromised when we don't apply a rigid standard to "probable cause".
The state claiming that it owns your drivers license is nothing more than a workaround, as it the notion that you somehow surrendered your Fourth Amendment rights by driving a car. The Founding Fathers had conveyances, and they had documents on their persons which could be used to identify them. They expressly forbid the government from behaving in the way we now reluctantly accept because we think it's helping to nab the bad people.

The Anti-Federalist who called himself "Centinel" wrote a series of letters that appeared in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer in late 1787 and early 1788. He referred to standing armies in his second letter as "that grand engine of oppression."

The "Federal Farmer" wrote a series of letters that were published in the Poughkeepsie Country Journal in late 1787 and early 1788. In his third letter, he lamented that under the new Constitution Congress "will have unlimited power to raise armies, and to engage officers and men for any number of years." He then voiced his objection to standing armies:

I see so many men in American fond of a standing army, and especially among those who probably will have a large share in administering the federal system; it is very evident to me, that we shall have a large standing army as soon as the monies to support them can be possibly found. An army is not a very agreeable place of employment for the young gentlemen of many families.

I sincerely believe that by any definition, our various police forces in the US constitute the "army" this man is warning of. We deceive ourselves with semantics, but the US Military is not the threat this man is talking about, it's the 300,000 strong army of American police agencies at the federal , state, and local level.

I have no idea what the solution is. Without our police forces, many places in the US would become unlivable. At the same time, it seems like they demand and expect the right to trample the rights of citizens in the name of safety either for society or themselves.

NJCardFan
06-26-2011, 02:31 PM
I have been stopped many times...they are checking for current driver's lic., inspection stickers and plates. I think that is a good idea.

Actually, it's idiocy. There are greater crimes to combat than driving while revoked, no insurance, or registration. If that particular police department can show me that there is no drug or gang activity or any other type of crime, then IMO doing this is a complete waste of time.

noonwitch
06-27-2011, 01:16 PM
We don't really have checkpoints around here, if I see one, I assume that the cops are looking for someone dangerous.


But really, isn't the first question out of a traffic cop's mouth "May I see your license and registration please" when he pulls you over? Who doesn't expect a cop to request id?

Novaheart
06-27-2011, 01:20 PM
We don't really have checkpoints around here, if I see one, I assume that the cops are looking for someone dangerous.


But really, isn't the first question out of a traffic cop's mouth "May I see your license and registration please" when he pulls you over? Who doesn't expect a cop to request id?

A traffic cop isn't supposed to pull you over unless he has probable cause to believe you have committed a crime. Well, that was before Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz. How the Supreme Court saw an exception there, I do not know. There is no significant difference between a checkpoint and a house to house search.

FDK
06-28-2011, 02:44 PM
IMO, checkpoints of any kind are a Fourth Amendment violation.

If they're looking for someone then they probably have some sort of description of that person and if you don't fit that description then they don't need to see your ID.

Probable cause....

lacarnut
06-28-2011, 03:37 PM
Actually, it's idiocy. There are greater crimes to combat than driving while revoked, no insurance, or registration. If that particular police department can show me that there is no drug or gang activity or any other type of crime, then IMO doing this is a complete waste of time.

Driving is a privilege not a right. So getting unsafe cars and drivers off the road is appreciated by most drivers.

Starbuck
06-28-2011, 05:12 PM
I am always amazed at the number of wanted bad guys they find during routine checks. Saw one where a car was stopped for having a broken windshield and out pops a wanted felon and a car loaded with drugs.

Do not forget that Timothy McVeigh was stopped for a license tag violation. Nothing more. Then the cop noticed McVeigh was packing heat, and got suspicious.

My 2 cents:
Keep putting those road blocks up. Stop everyone for everything. Let the good ones go and keep the bad ones........My wife has been pulled over at least 3 times for minor violations, myself once, and we've gone through about 6 check points over the last 10 years. No tickets, no problems...........I'm not the person they are looking for, but they cannot know that unless they look and ask questions. More power to them.

Rockntractor
06-28-2011, 05:19 PM
They stopped having the roadblocks here because they were getting too many illegal aliens.
It was all about revenue collection and jailing illegals netted no profit.

FDK
06-28-2011, 07:39 PM
Here in Washington State our Supreme Court ruled that DUI checkpoints violate the state constitution. But our dumbass governess (who used to be the state attorney general BTW) tried to reinstate them anyhow. Fortunately she's not running next time because she "wants to spend time with her family." (Would get her ass kicked since she's done such a crappy job.)