Police Refuse to Accept they were Wrong:
Police must get ID, even if stop was unwarranted
CommentsCop: you’re speeding!Driver: whats the speed limit here?Cop: I don’t know.The cop doesn’t know the speed on the road but he knows he was speeding 🤦🤣He didn’t know what the speed limit was but he was sure that he was going 10% faster than what he didn’t know. Huh?Claiming he was going 10% over the posted speed limit is pretty specific when the officer didn’t know what the posted speed limit was.10% over the speed limit? For 2-2.5 mph over the speed limit? Wow!
Another officer, a Sgt no less, who believes he can stop anyone he wants to anytime he wants to just to check their ID!! This is crazy! Auditors are def making a difference by educating citizens about their rights, but sometimes it seems like the officers are getting WORSE!
The driver was not guessing his speed as the cop inferred. He had it in the screen in front of him. They can pace someone for speeding but the driver is right, they cannot gauge it from sitting still. Cop was mad because he was proven wrong and then the guy knew his rights. Egos in policing is dangerous and deadly!“I’ll LET you go.” Mighty fine of him to let him go esp. since he committed no crime. Tyrants!I really believe the cops are gaming the public with you must show ID even if there is no violation. That many cops can’t be that misinformed. What I think is happening is its a nation wide campaign to keep saying it until the public believes it and then slide it in there and make it an actual law.The problem is that cops are never wrong, they don’t know how to acknowledge any mistake, infact the opposite happens when they are wrong and get called on it they usually escalate and start manufacturing a crime to justify their wrong doings… Sick….😀 Dude told the cop “You need to be recalibrated”.🤣🤣🤣. Love it! Great job.@Tempus Fugit That’s a very idealistic point of view. But I’m sorry to inform you that in the real world, the citizen doesn’t often win an argument he insists in having on the side of the road. No I’m no boot licker and I’m no push over. I assure you I’ve made my displeasure and my resistance known in more than one occasion. In the case of this video, the guy lucked out that the cop was pulling the speeding charge out of his ass because he realized he was wrong about the phone and he happened to have gotten caught on the fact that he didn’t know what the speed limit was. AND the supervisor that responded happened to be a reasonable guy and want looking to just jack with a citizen. He made a half-assed attempt to claim they can just stop random drivers to check their drivers license. When it was obvious he wasn’t getting away with it, the supervisor let him go. But I assure you, had the supervisor had his ego as invested as the officer did, that driver would have either coughed up his DL or he would have been a guest of the county for a while. Right wrong or indifferent, it’s up to the cops how that encounter ends. Luckily, he argued his point and the supervisor decided it wasn’t worth it to take it all the way because his guy was wrong. But make no mistake, had he decided to back his officer, he would have been ordered out of the vehicle. Had he refused, he would have been taken out of the vehicle. Just that noncompliance could lead many judges to decide that he was resisting and obstructing by refusing a lawful order to exit. Who knows what he would decide on the citations. But, I’d be willing to bet a judge would find that it was a lawful stop initially because cops are allowed to make a mistake like thinking he was holding his phone. And from there, the officer doesn’t need any justification to ask the driver to exit the vehicle. His refusal to do so buts himself a ride to county. Is that fair? Nope. But it’s not up to you or the driver to declare it an unlawful stop or to decide when it became decided that he had made an error about the phone. His resistance in such an excessive manner could be seen by the judge as reasonable suspicion to continue investigating. It all depends on how the judge interprets his actions and the actions of the officer. But it seems like you’re if the mindset that any time a citizen believes he hadn’t committed the infraction he was stopped for that he can then lawfully defy lawful orders based on his belief that they’re unlawful due to his belief that he didn’t commit the infraction. Doesn’t work that way. If it did, everybody would just say “no I wasn’t speeding. Wasn’t me. “. And then the cop has to say “ok maybe it wasn’t you. I guess there’s nothing else I can do since you say you didn’t do it. Have a nice day”. As much as that would be awesome, it’s just not realistic and would make it impossible for cops to do anything. Bottom line, the guy rolled the dice and hit so was able to leave. He just as easily could have crapped out and had his day turn south real quick. You’re free to roll those dice too, of course. But if you think you’re going to win every time in a situation like that, you’re crazy. Not saying the cop was in the right or would have been to arrest him. He was just following policy which I guarantee states that he woulda had done explaining to do if he’d made a stop and didn’t even get the guys DL. Don’t like that policy? Fine. Petition your elected officials to try n get it changed. Aside from that, the cop is going to insist on that DL every timeMy opinion is the supervisor knew this stop could go sideways and get crazy. The time and effort in making this man show id will be more problematic then its worth and this driver was committed to standing his ground. Cop was professional and explained his opinion well but needs to stop the crack addiction. ( ID ) that is.Cops saying “I’m not gonna argue with you,” is cop speak for: I know I’m wrong, but I’m a cop and I’ll do what the fuck I want, and if you want to pursue it, I have qualified immunity so I’ll be just fine.I would have pointed out that there was no way he would know if you were speeding if he didn’t know what the speed limit was in the first place.The supervisor didn’t know the law either, as he said that it was legal to ask to see the drivers license, but at least he let the man drive off after having lost a much too long time for nothing due to a lying LEO not knowing the law (as usual)Looking at this cop should communicate what’s driving him is far more than fabricating a traffic violation to check for warrants.So the supervisor thinks we live in 1030’s Nazi Germany? That’s basically what he’s saying when he said they can stop anyone to verify driver’s license’s. Sorry buddy but you’re flat out incorrect at the highest level!This was an honest mistake by the supervisor. He accidentally thought he was in Nazi Germany and could demand papers at any time.
THIS IS THE DEAL .
“I placed him in handcuffs”
“What was the safety concern?”
“He was resisting”
“What was he resisting?”
“Being placed in handcuffs” FBLG💩👮♂ & F👢L
At the end of the day ; coppa needs to make a ticket , to reach his quota – IMO . DISGRACEFUL.The really scary part is the “supervisor” thinks they can pull anybody over for ZERO reasons ! American Police thinking on full displayThe officer said I can’t dispute your truth, which means he has nothing and he should just let you go, that’s exactly what that meansperfect handling of a common police harassment