Video: Border Patrol tasers pastor at traffic stop
posted at 10:11 am on May 18, 2009 by Allahpundit
The first video’s a month old and a minor viral hit online, the second one — showing the incident described in the first — is brand new. Why would the BP be so impatient with a stopped driver as to get rough after just a few minutes? Well, turns out it wasn’t just a few minutes: According to Fox Phoenix, it was a “standoff” that lasted for more than an hour. As for the taser, the Phoenix New Times weighs pros and cons:
At first glance, the use of the Taser seems to violate a policy adopted by most Valley police agencies. When Tasers were first introduced, police used them against suspects who simply refused to obey orders or resisted arrest not by force, but by sitting down or pulling away from an officer’s grabbing hands. Such use was later prohibited in most agencies when police realized Tasers could potentially be harmful to some suspects.
However, the DPS could probably make the case that Anderson was a threat to officer safety because he had control of his vehicle. Once the agents and officers decided to pull him out of the car (a questionable decision, itself), they must have decided to Tase him right away to prevent the possibility of the vehicle driving off with an officer stuck in the window.
Anderson claims he was repeatedly Tasered even after being dragged from his car, but that’s not shown on his video.
I think it might depend on whether he had the keys in the ignition at the time. If so, the fear that he’d try to take off after they broke the windows is reasonable; if not, not so much.
Update: I meant to mention — this didn’t happen on the border. Anderson was driving east from San Diego to Phoenix. What was the BP doing there?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Next »
I’d say the burden of proof of not allowing questioning would come from, er, the public servant.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Right. We need to second guess every traffic stop unless one turns out to be lucrative in the sense of nabbing a terrorist, illegal alien, criminal. Good policy. Why stop anyone, ever?
zeebeach on May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Ha! Yeah, very possible. Either way, this all comes back to the pup. Strap up the pup.
Zetterson on May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM
heh…
Well, actually I’m “happy a Baptist minister got beaten up” not because of any teh ghey thing…it’s because us Catholics like to see Protestant heathen get their come-uppance for the reformation.
/sarc
JetBoy on May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Lmao, That’s impressive getting a Karate Kid quote on this thread.
MDWNJ on May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM
U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment
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.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Don’t get tased for going through a stop light. Actually, I think you rarely get arrested for that. You get to go to court and plead your case.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Hey I know, let’s stop everybody. Then we’ll all be safe. All crime will go away and we’ll live in a new Garden of Eden.
PS – THIS MAN WAS NOT STOPPED. He was caught in a drag net.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 11:40 AM
IMHO, Laws were broken here and it was by the cops, not to mention very poor behavior including totally unnecessary violence. The cops should be disciplined for abusing a citizen. The Pastor is paying the price of exposing it. If he did have drugs or people in the car it still would not justify the excessive force. We all know the cops were lying about the dog. They were required to let him go on his way unless they had cause. It’s that simple. It’s called the law and they broke it. Nothing else matters here. If they chose to search anyway, because they had a feeling, then they guessed wrong and lost that bet. Now they should pay up. If they guessed right they would be still have broken the law and would lose the case in court.
bagoh20 on May 18, 2009 at 11:41 AM
source: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/04/17/20090417borderbeating0417-ON.html
I figure that if you poke enough anthills, eventually you’re going to get stung.
mctowler on May 18, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Man, some of you folks need to get out of this country and see how the ‘police forces’ in other countries work compared to ours.
He was going through a roadblock. Big deal. Be cooperative and be on your way. What would have happened to him if he had? Would he have been shot in the head and left in the ditch by the side of the road? I don’t think so.
He was stopped, a drug-sniffing dog indicated, and that is all they needed for a further search of his vehicle. If he was polite and cooperative, they would have sent him on his way in short order.
We all want the border protected and the drug supply lines into this country stopped. These are just some of the methods they have to use to do it. If you want these tactics to stop, just throw open the border and disband the BP – but you won’t like the result.
Timothy S. Carlson on May 18, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I listen to and enjoy baptist sermons all the time. But not all baptist sermons are alike. Some are like Rick Warren’s with no substance and simply feel good messages. Less common among Baptist churches these days are expository preaching from the Bible. Those are the ones I like but are a stumbling block for many. They preach that man is sinful, God is holy and that man needs a perfect savior.
What don’t you like about Baptist sermons?
shick on May 18, 2009 at 11:42 AM
What is AP’s point with all these so called police brutality videos?
.
We live in dangerous times. Why not show some videos of the perpetrators mangling innocent victims or injuring or killing cops for some balance?
.
This guy was totally uncooperative. If he was so sure he was innocent, why didn’t he just open his trunk? There are enough terrorists around that I want the cops to be extra zealous.
.
All the coddling of criminals and over criticism of our generally fair police services has reduced the safety of the average citizen.
.
In general, the people who have to worry about the police are the criminals and violators.
.
Additionally, particularly in the case of people who lead police on high speed chases endangering the public at large, deserve a good beat down to provide an extra measure of safety to the public.
FactsofLife on May 18, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I’ve always found the probable cause via K9 to be too arbitrary to be reliable and a great way to infringe on citizen rights.
That said, right now it’s the law. Get the f*** out of the car dude. You were warned.
SouthernDem on May 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Cops don’t have the time to let everyone, all day, act like pricks. They’d get nothing done if they just let everyone jerk them around for an hour.
RBMN on May 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Remember you own advice when they knock on your door.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM
The same place that allows the prop 8 loser protesters to vandalize, threaten and attack supporters on the winning side of the democratically determined issue.
Who’s side were you on then?
ThackerAgency on May 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM
OK, he could perhaps have acted a little wiser, but when we fear the government more than we do the people we now have Tyranny….
DL13 on May 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM
I realize you are afraid of authority figures, but have you ever heard of being polite?
I have been pulled over many times in my life (I like to speed) and rarely have I received a ticket, why because I am polite and answer the questions asked politely. I do not try and show off my superior knowledge of the constitution to the officer. And if I do get a ticket I go to court where I dress nicely. Quite often I see others there in traffic court wearing torn t-shirts and reeking of bong water going “Yea” to the judge. Unless the cop is there, and he usually has better things to do, I walk out with no fine.
LincolntheHun on May 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM
This kid did several things wrong. In the 1st video he stated that he refused to answer questions. Why would he do that? There is no reason – automatically draws suspicion. And rightfully so. Had he cooperated w/the officers they’d probably have let him go. 2nd he refused to allow a search. If he had nothing to hide why would he do that? And last (and worst) is that he resisted the officer not wanting to move his vehicle to the inspection area. Wrong move sonny!
Its very difficult for me to believe this young fellow is a Baptist Pastor. If that were the case he’d know something about Romans 13:1-4. Its a Christians duty to cooperate w/our Police Officers. These guys/gals put themselves between us and hideous criminals every day and they deserve to be treated w/respect & cooperation.
I’m very curious; what the SBC has to say about this? Does anyone know? DD
Darvin Dowdy on May 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Oh, there’s a good standard.
“If they don’t shoot you before asking you a question, you should be grateful!”
Thanks for bringing me around to the proper submissive paradigm.
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Sorry, it’s only for dogs….oh wait, I guess you do qualify.
:-p
ladyingray on May 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Exactly. This guy could be an idiot, but that doesn’t mean the police were right.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM
I wonder if they have a school for the feral cats… Attaccattas
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 11:37 AM
A car is not a house. So 4th does not completly apply. If you are polite to cops life is easy. Hell I have been pulled over with a loaded weapon in the car and because I was not being an ass or acting twitchy, is was no big deal.
Act like an ass and you will get smacked upside the head.
LincolntheHun on May 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM
IF they did, in fact, taze him more than once that definitely seems like overkill, but I think he deserved what he got for being a stubborn smartass. Was he HOPING they’d do something like this so he could get an attractive lawsuit/settlement out of it? Moron.
Livefreeordie on May 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM
I think everyone needs to not take a side on this. There are too many unanswered questions.
jeffn21 on May 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM
I was just joking around. Since I am not a Baptist, have not heard to many Baptist sermons, just my attempt at humor based on the stereotype of Baptist sermons.
MDWNJ on May 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM
You honestly don’t think that the Border Patrol should work in the southern most regions of our border states, near Yuma, on call to respond to DPS highway check points?
Given that Phoenix has become the most dangerous place within the USA to be kidnapped by illegal Mexicans, I would hope that the Border Patrol are guarding southern Arizona.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Dude!
rcl on May 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Yep, I’ve been pulled over for many of the same reasons as well, and I was entirely polite.
However, I’ve never been stopped on a United States road by a roadblock, and detained by authorities when there is no evidence of a crime. I’ll assume you haven’t, either. Every time you and I have been pulled over, it was because we did something wrong. What was it that this pastor did wrong to get stopped by the authorities? Nothing. I wouldn’t be very polite if the same happened to me, either.
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Copy cat!
Akzed on May 18, 2009 at 11:51 AM
And. . . we do have ‘the right to remain silent’. The cops are supposed to TELL YOU THAT if they are going to arrest you. Also, there’s another amendment in that tricky little constitution called the 5th amendment that gives you the right against self incrimination.
Of course, you, like the cops seem to operate on a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mentality. . . which is the antithesis of our system (or used to be).
ThackerAgency on May 18, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Congrats, Thack…You’ve actually managed to bring up “prop 8 protesters” in a thread about a guy getting tazed for refusing a cop’s order. Amazing.
Or is it because I have an opinion on this pastor, that you feel the need to say “hey, JetBoy is gay, so he likes the prop 8 protesters”. Any point I make about anything, and you’ll find a way to bring up gays.
Give yourself a pat on the back. You’re just brilliant.
But again I’ll ask…and do try to stay on topic…What right does a citizen have that allows them to mouth off to a cop, and question him, when simply asked to “get out of the car”?
JetBoy on May 18, 2009 at 11:53 AM
For the cause of searches, it does. Plain sight applies, same as with open windows in a house.
In most states, it’s legal to have a loaded weapon on your person. Therefore, why should it be a big deal? You not only have to be polite to maintain your fourth amendment rights, but also your second amendment ones?
By the way, isn’t the implication that you need to be polite in order to maintain those rights in and of itself a denial of first amendment rights? We’re talking about a government agent here, which invokes the First. This is in contrast to what many people regularly think, that it protects their speech against everyone.
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 11:55 AM
The idiot obviously had it coming. 1) He was a Baptist Pastor. – Right wing extremist. 2) He invoked his constitutional rights against unreasonable search. – Right wing extremist. 3) He had the expectation of fair treatment. -Right wing extremist. 4) He also probably had some questionable bumper stickers on his vehicle such as Choose Life or Jesus Saves. – Right wing extremist. 5) Interstate travel without the proper authorization has been suspended during this time of national emergency. Didn’t the fool know that? – Right wing extremist.
Kuffar on May 18, 2009 at 11:55 AM
This pastor should have known better.
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. – Romans 13:1-5
shick on May 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Hahahaaha +100000
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Actually, come to think of it. It sounds exactly like my college. Drugs and b*tches. That about sums it up.
Zetterson on May 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM
US Supreme Court decided this issue in 1976. Roadblocks do not violate the 4th Amendment.
caselaw
bloviator on May 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM
HISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
ladyingray on May 18, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Dietrich Bonhoeffer learned this lesson.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM
I am a Baptist and I have heard the “stereotypical” sermons of which you speak…those hail & brimstones guys try to scare a person into heaven. LOL
ladyingray on May 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Glad to hear you are polite as well, but I have been pulled over at a road block (looking for drunks) I have been detained (they thought I was a bad guy from South Carolina), and by being calm and polite I never had a problem. Cops like everyone have a job to do and they deal with some really scummy people, you want them to see you as “citizen” and cut you a break, not “ass” or “perp”.
LincolntheHun on May 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Brief questioning.
How was this brief?
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM
My computer screen is really in need of cleaning…where the heck are you?
ladyingray on May 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Submit and all will be well.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Sorry. That’s funny then. (I’m slow) It’s hard for me to distinguish between sincerity and jest in these comments sometimes.
shick on May 18, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Whats with the piano music?
“Music to be beat by”-John Tesh.
portlandon on May 18, 2009 at 12:01 PM
To stay on topic. . . if this were a flaming homosexual, you’d say this was evidence that there is police brutality against homosexuals inherent in the system. You’d protest and demand some resignations of the ‘homophobes’.
My point is that justice should be blind. A cop can’t just say ‘get out of the car’ when you haven’t done anything wrong. That’s fascism. If this guy were black, there’d be outrage. If he were Hispanic, it’d be ‘racial profiling’. If he were Muslim, the outrage would be from CAIR. The fact is that this guy’s rights were violated by the cops who overstepped their authority. It’s just too bad that this man was a straight white christian male.
ThackerAgency on May 18, 2009 at 12:01 PM
That just beat Zetterson’s dog waterboarding. Wiping the Pepsi off my monitor.
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Dogs either scratch, bark, or sit down to indicate probably cause. At that time you are detained and need to obey any lawful instruction given to you. Failure to obey is obstruction and arrestable. You brought it on yourself.
Static on May 18, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Well then it’s obvious that he has no inalienable rights. He is not a protected category so he had it coming.
Kuffar on May 18, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Umm, yeah. And if this pastor would have actually exersized his “right to remain silent” he never would have been tazed.
He did the opposite…mouthing off and spouting about his “rights” and blah blah blah. And you can’t be read your rights when you’re in a locked car with the windows rolled up. The dog reacted to his car. That’s probable cause.
If some guy were in an airport, and the dog reacted to his suitcase, and they said “OK, open up the case”, is it OK for the guy to say “No, that’s my property and you have no right to look inside”?
JetBoy on May 18, 2009 at 12:05 PM
probably / probable *
Static on May 18, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Does he count as an endangered species?
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Who woulda’ thought a dog could like a
catcoug?blatantblue on May 18, 2009 at 12:06 PM
I was raised Catholic, so I just feel terribly guilty about everything. The priest of the church I went to was such a downer in his sermons.
MDWNJ on May 18, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Wow, this is such a liberal statement…
I wonder when O-team is going to ban mouthing off?
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:07 PM
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM
No! Pick your fights, do not fight on his terrain, but on terrain of your own making.
I get out of tickets (win) not because I argue with the police on the constitutionality of the 4th amendment, but because they see me as ‘citizen” and not “irritating ass that is making a bad day worse”.
Arguing with people just tends to make them more stubborn.
Being polite tends to make them more reasonable.
Not rocket science and not capitulation.
LincolntheHun on May 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I was an altar boy at a church my 2nd cousin was pastor of.
The diocese sent him two other priests to help — turned out they were child sex offenders!
Man!
blatantblue on May 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM
You dodged a bullet there.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM
Yes he did. He was hanged for his involvement in the attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler.
To his credit he was of the few vocal opponents to the maletreatment of the jews.
shick on May 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM
The duration of the questioning was obviously prolonged by its obnoxious object. No one likes being pulled over for any reason, but most people take it in stride, cooperate, and are sent on their way.
Akzed on May 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Tempe is my hometown. I feel badly for this Baptist’s experience. But being searched by the DPS between CA/AZ has ALWAYS been the practice since my memory goes back visiting cousins. We’d all stop our cars. The officers would inspect each auto for people and content. Back then, the big deal was not smuggling fresh fruit from CA back into AZ. We had to eat all of our luscious peaches before reaching the patrol point. If an officer asked my father to step out, we always complied.
This Baptist en route home was more anxious to make his political point than to help law enforcement do their job. They asked him what was in his trunk, and his answer didn’t suit them. They knew he was being a pain in their butt, and took out their frustrations on him for being a bit self-righteous.
These are dangerous times. I appreciate the frustrations of our law enforcement coming across someone who won’t comply with requests quoting Constitutional rights. But the citizen DOES have constitutional rights. And going overboard persecuting people making a legal point is really nasty and absolutely wrong of the DPS/Border Patrol. The lower video shows him down on the ground for a long time. I do not doubt that he was re-tazed. That’s a shame.
My angst is with law enforcement taking anonymous tips from liars or from police screwing up the address of the target ‘perp’ and breaking into innocent people’s homes with guns drawn in a misconceived drug bust gone wrong. Given the likelihood of criminals posing as law authorities, what’s a person woken from sleep to think while responding to instinct to preserve life and family? It happens more often than reported; and when reported, the story slurs the victim as being in possession of firearms and ammo: it was the victims fault for being a victim, though completely innocent.
This incident proves that everyone has faults, and that when asked a simple question, give a simple answer before throwing “my rights” in the faces of guys whose rights usually take back seat when confronted by violent criminals. They wanted his respect as much as he wanted theirs. Spitting match. He has plenty of fresh meat material for his next sermon; perhaps membership or contributions will pick up.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Yup. Not really that startling, though.
MadisonConservative on May 18, 2009 at 12:12 PM
I guess he had it coming…
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:12 PM
You know what Allah. I will avoid commenting on your postings since we are just numbers to you. Don’t count this one.
RobCon on May 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM
I was being snarky with liberal=liberal in the classical sense, but yeah, you got my point.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM
The fear of God’s wraith against sinners is a vital part of the Gospel.
shick on May 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM
EEK!
ladyingray on May 18, 2009 at 12:14 PM
When they hit him with the tasers, I know I heard a high B flat, or maybe it was an A sharp.
He needs to work on holding a note though.
44Magnum on May 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM
I don’t if these were federal border control agents. There is “border control” between certain states where you are stopped in order to ensure that you do not bringing certain vegetables and fruits across state lines. The purpose is to stop the spread plant diseases and pests. I believe that these are manned by state officials.
And once you are arrested, whether rightly or wrongly, your only recourse is to the courts. From that point on, you have a legal obligation to cooperate with the arresting officers. That’s the time to start planning your suit for illegal arrest.
Laurence on May 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Dvorak’s New World Symphony theme, easy listening arrangement.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM
The Border Patrol has checkpoints that it periodically sets up well inside the border, on the main highways. One of the best-known to anyone who has to travel I-15 between San Diego and Riverside is the one at the summit just south of Temecula, on the north-bound side (co-located with a truck weigh station). This is at least 60 miles north of the border. BP also sets up on I-8 and I-10, more often in California than in Arizona. The frequency with which the BP actually mans and operates these checkpoints waxes and wanes.
(New Year’s Eve is a popular time — which snarls traffic up for, literally, miles on northbound I-15. I was taking some family visitors home from Legoland on New Year’s Eve a few years ago, and we sat in three lanes of stop-and-go traffic for 17 miles, creeping up on the BP checkpoint. Basically, traffic was stopped all the way back to the Hwy 78 interchange. It took an hour. And no, this was NOT being done in conjunction with a CHP DWI checkpoint. That was further north! Fortunately, our exit came just before the CHP checkpoint.)
On one hand, we can say that this practice IS intended to improve the effectiveness of border security measures. The inland checkpoints are at least a random method of trying to ensure illegals aren’t home free once they get across the border.
On the other hand, if the federal authorities really wanted to actually catch lots of illegals every day, everyone in SOCAL knows where to send them. Don’t waste your time setting up interstate checkpoints, guys. The Home Depot parking lot at the other end of my town is the place to start. The convenience store behind the county bus-system stop, with the dairy farm and fescue turf farm spreading out behind it? Check the gaggle of smoking men to its rear. Oh, and don’t forget the Ag Co-op warehouse and its roomy parking lot, a favorite of aspiring day laborers.
I don’t know how much good the pastor did by challenging the constitutionality of the BP stop. For what it’s worth, it appears to me that the BP’s commission from Congress, and lawful operation by the executive branch, constitute the “due process of law” provided for in the US Constitution.
But no one who lives here can fail to understand the frustration of our idiotic federal policy on border security, which knuckles to counties and cities and lets illegals run free in the interior, while stopping and demanding to search the vehicles of people who, quite obviously, are legal American citizens.
A Navy friend of mine, a black officer, mused ironically when we were stationed in San Diego together that he could understand why the cops were sometimes suspicious of him in southern Virginia and North Carolina — all he had to do was look at the photos of all the suspects in murder and assault cases on TV. He could even understand it in some parts of San Diego. But when he was driving into California from Mexico with his family, in an SUV with a California plate and a DOD sticker, he couldn’t for the life of him figure out why HE needed to be shaken down by the Border Patrol. Neither can I.
J.E. Dyer on May 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Please. It is absolute capitulation. There is no better time to fight than when you are being stopped for no reason and then being subjected to intimidation and physical violence when your refuse to give up your God given rights as a law abiding American citizen.
If we keep waiting to fight there will be nothing left to fight for.
If this guy had been pulled over for cause, then I’d say he got what he deserved. Once you give them a reason, the own you. But he did nothing wrong but drive home on that road.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Would someone please refer to the statute the officer violated, and/or the one that exempts from police questioning people who assert a right to avoid it? Until then, all the Hitler references etc. are proof of poor rhetorical ethics.
Akzed on May 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Wow, that’s disturbing.
MDWNJ on May 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Would you prefer authoritarian or fascist?
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM
This “pastor” is a total nutcase start to finish. A few of my friends found one of his sermons online a while back and we all refer to him as “pissing preacher”. This isn’t they guys first run in with authorities, he likes to be a persecuted fellow and goes well out of his way to make an A$s of himself if he thinks it will get him attention.
http://www.break.com/usercontent/2008/2/PREACHER-SAYS-MEN-NEED-TO-PISS-STANDING-UP-456591.html
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cD2BCBaNaM
enjoy!
darcee on May 18, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I guess you’ve never read the 5th amendment either huh?
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:23 PM
At least they did not waterboard him.
Johan Klaus on May 18, 2009 at 12:24 PM
The following is a minimal Miranda warning, as outlined in the Miranda v Arizona case.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:24 PM
You might want to rethink that silly statement. The prisons are full of people who take no responsibility for their actions. Should they have just ignored the police officers who came for them?
This dirtbag, who is probably the philisophical brother of athensboy and the rest of the troll brigade who troop through here, was looking for trouble. He had an hour to avoid the culmination of a checklist of procedures. He could have gotten off his sled ride to taserville at any point. Instead the ignoramus found out what happens after refusing for an hour to do what a guy with a badge is telling you to do. His refusal to act like an adult, to even act like a pissed off adult which is his right, while doing what the officers asked of him, was the cause of his troubles.
peacenprosperity on May 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM
The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution to give police wide latitude to search cars. So no the spoiled five year old brat of a minister did not have his right’s violated.
thuja on May 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM
I wouldn’t say that but God doesn’t give his children commands and warnings for nothing. It’s mostly for our protection.
Hmm. I should follow his commands and warnings more myself.
shick on May 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Remeber that when they pull you over for no reason and decide they don’t like you very much and start searching your vehicle and when they decide under Obama that they want to extend that to the homes of people on the DHS list.
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Now, why doesn’t that surprise me? I figured this pastor was probably anti-cop to begin with, and being stopped just set him off. Heck, I wouldn’t doubt if he rubbed his tires with a bag of pot, knowing he’d be in that situation. Funny, he did have a camera rolling…just coincidence?
JetBoy on May 18, 2009 at 12:27 PM
J.E. Dyer on May 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Nice read. Thanks for sharing
ThackerAgency on May 18, 2009 at 12:27 PM
On US 70 near White Sands there is a BP check station. ALL vehicles, especially semi’s, are stopped and questioned/checked.
Tom
marinetbryant on May 18, 2009 at 12:28 PM
No, I refuse to put my faith into a purely man-made organization to always be looking out for me.
Athensboy? Even if this guy was Rev. Wright, I don’t get the whole, “Get out of the car because I said so,” argument. The police are not our parents last I knew. This guy could have been a complete moonbat (probably is), but that doesn’t mean the police can somehow bend the rules.
If this guy was looking for a fire, he found it.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:28 PM
PS – it’s not that wide. That’s why they need probable cause (hence, why the lied about the dog)
Investigatory Stops Of Motorists At Sobriety Checkpoints.
The unique situation in which the Supreme Court has approved suspicionless searches in the traditional law enforcement context. See Michigan Dep’t of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (’90). The Sitz Court relied on well-settled law that motorists have a lessened expectation of privacy regarding stops and visual searches of automobiles
on the nation’s roadways. Id. at 450 (explaining the importance of the context of ‘police stops of motorists on public highways’). At these sobriety checkpoints, which motorists may choose to avoid, only the initial brief stop and preliminary questioning may take place without individualized suspicion: ‘more extensive field sobriety testing’ requires justification. Id. at 450-2.
Like the highway sobriety checkpoints, the ‘special needs beyond normal law enforcement’ rationale supports searches on lesser grounds than probable cause only in a very few, carefully tailored regulatory contexts that do not involve apprehension of criminal perpetrators. See, e.g., National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656, 65-66 (’89)
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Yes, He does. He also tells us what is right and wrong. I’d say Bonhoeffer did the right thing in the end, wouldn’t you?
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:29 PM
Sorry, but this is definitely NOT ‘intelligence for your life.’
James on May 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM
If you wish martyrdom or at least some self serving righteous indignation your way is brilliant. When the cops pulls you over for speeding and sees your “Bad cop no Donut” bumper sticker, and then you start to argue with him the finer points of the law, and ignore his instructions enjoy the nightstick!
Hey you have the moral high ground and can claim your moral victory while the bruises fade.
Me I like to win my battles
Perhaps you should read some sun tzu and learn a bit of strategy.
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.
LincolntheHun on May 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM
With all of the HotAir folks you don’t know about CheckPointUSA? How can that be? Here are the videos on LiveLeak, I’m sure they’re on YouTube as well.
http://www.liveleak.com/user/CheckpointUSA
I don’t think it’s the same guy–but it’s the same idea.
1. Why is the BP setting up roadblocks internal to the US?
2. If they’re asking you to state you’re a US citizen, what does that prove?
3. When does a stop become an illegal detention?
4. What evidence is enough to move you to secondary search?
5. We all need to carry video cameras with us to prove our side?
Let me state, the video didn’t show the initial stop so I’m not willing to say I’m for or against this guy. What I have a problem with is checkpoints that to me (a rational person) seem to have little effect on illegal immigration and a huge effect on US citizens trying to go on their way. So they stop 50/500/5000 US citizens to net 1 illegal?
Would it not be better to install a fence and put those internal folks to work on the border? Is that really irrational?
The US is all up in arms about torture of prisoners and excessive abuse. Let’s see naked, loud music, lack of sleep, water boarding. Compare that to being tazered many times, having your head ground into broken glass, and someone stepping on your head.
It would seem that he has a fair case on illegal stop and a strong case on excessive force. Was there really a reason to tazer him? It’s not like he was physically resisting.
SFTech on May 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM
I’m sure he scoped out the police road blocks in advance because we all know how well publicized they are. You are probably right JetBoy. . . he should have gotten shot.
I wish I knew where it says what he did wrong. If they blame it on the dog, then it is OK to brutalize the population. Any excuse will do to exert authority.
Again, there are simple ways of dealing with border issues. Racial profiling would be pretty simple – as would deporting illegals. Tasing random people (Americans) on the side of the road would seem counter productive.
ThackerAgency on May 18, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Well, you certainly wouldn’t have them tase Juanita the 19 yo drug mule coming illegally from Mexico who is certainly going to get a job at ACORN next year, would you?
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Rather than creating ridiculous strawmen why don’t we simply stick to the facts as they are in this case?
TheBigOldDog on May 18, 2009 at 12:33 PM
They have the Authorita!!
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Next »