“RESISTANCE IS FUTILE …”
By FITSNews || Dekalb, Illinois resident Ryan Scott attempted to assert his constitutional rights at a police checkpoint in his home state recently … prompting one of the law enforcement officers conducting the stop to lose his composure. At one point, the irate officer jerks open Scott’s car door and begins screaming in his face.
“Get out now! Driving is a privilege, not a right!” the officer shouted at Scott. “I’m telling you to get out right now!”
Scott was never compelled to leave his vehicle, but he was required to provide his driver’s license and registration against his wishes.
Scott filmed the entire traffic stop – which occurred on “Thank-a-Cop” day, ironically – using a cell phone mounted to his dashboard.
Take a look (the stop begins at the 3:30 mark of the video) …
(Click to play)
“Driving is a privilege, not a right! That’s what you’re required to do in Illinois! You know that!” the officer screamed at Scott, demanding to know whether the address on his license was current.
When Scott attempted to invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to answer, the officer asked him if he knew what that meant.
“I have the right to remain silent,” Scott responded.
“Really? Are you sure?” the officer asked.
“This kind of misconduct and behavior is not acceptable,” Scott wrote in posting his video to YouTube. “This is what happens when you exercise your Constitutional Rights as a law abiding American citizen.”
Don’t get us wrong … we think the video clearly shows Scott testing the patience of the officers who stopped him. But that doesn’t give them the right to verbally assault him.
Of course the real issue here is whether these traffic stops are constitutional …
In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Michigan Supreme Court decision outlawing sobriety checkpoints – concluding that these stops were “consistent” with the Fourth Amendment.
“In sum, the balance of the State’s interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program,” former chief justice William Rehnquist concluded for the majority. “We therefore hold that it is consistent with the Fourth Amendment.”
Not all justices agreed. Writing for the minority, justice William Brennan wrote that drunk driving provided “an insufficient justification for abandoning the requirement of individualized suspicion (i.e. probable cause).”
We agree with Brennan …
Ten states (Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming) have outlawed police checkpoints as being inconsistent with their state constitutions. South Carolina has not. In fact one of its jurisdictions – Spartanburg County – conducts an annual shakedown of taxpayers via police checkpoint.
Beyond the Fourth and Fifth Amendment issues, Scott’s traffic stop “goes to show the importance of filming police encounters” according to Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg .
Filming? Try streaming …
It also goes to show the importance of cops being wired as well …
@fitsnews punk went there just to antagonize and provoke a reaction. Cop shoulda tased him. Smart ass puke
— Tim Sweeney (@KelticSC) September 23, 2014
Just trying to their job. Dude was a jackass! 20 years ago he would have required a trip to the ER. Oh the good old days!
yeah.. when men were men, and sheep were nervous.
Jackass Dude also irritated the drivers behind him by unnecessarily prolonging what is usually a very brief interruption in their day.
We are jackasses so you don’t have to be. (TM)
Ah the good ole days of begin able to beat your women and hang your neighbors without fear of retribution. Do you also miss the days of marrying your 12 year old cousins?
Seig Heil!! You are one total Anti American moron!
What do you do for fun fascist boy, go and piss on the graves of those who died in defense of our country? You are one sick puppy!
Whoa! Unfortunately, this isn’t a rare case. Check out Photography is Not a Crime (http://photographyisnotacrime.com).
Officer should have taz-ed the bored suburbanite punk, look for something to relieve his self-produced boredom.
Hey FITS, you are always soiling yourself, demanding child-murdering Jihadists get due process….why don’t you go over to Iran and try to bait their “police?” at a checkpoint. We’d love to see that on FITS. Hits we be bigger than a nude-skank parade…..
Or are you figuring those good ol’ terrorists you shill for may think you look better w/o a head???….Dumb@$$, spoiled and un-interesting. It’s you cul-d-sac liberals who give America a bad name.
I take it you were too old for Schoolhouse Rock??
So, you’re point is we should be more like Iran? Moron.
They behead in Iran, Dumb@$$…and kill any idiot, like you, who complains about it…Do a little homework before opening your mouth. You look stupid now.
Stoned and/or drunk when you drive. That is Sic Willie’s mantra.
Cops don’t care about the law, they care about showing you who’s boss.
“We’re just trying to make sure everyone’s driving saf-”
“AM I BEING DETAINED?!”
Just because you -can- be a douchebag doesn’t mean you -should- be a douchebag.
Agreed. He was clearly looking to catch some video and instigate something. Did the officer react professionally? Nope. But I’m not positive this little punk deserved professional treatment.
That said, a quick westlaw search of Illinois law reveals that this officer did stay within the limits of the applicable statutes.
Don’t like your state’s rules? Find new “rulemakers.” Of course I am now the kettle and staring at the pot–and pointing my finger.
What a stupid comment. Are you some silly 3rd grader. I think your nanny’s calling, better go, silly punk.
If you want to make being an asshole an offense, you’ll need bigger jails.
You just removed my whole reason for existence! *sob*
Yea, it’s not like he was being pulled over for a seatbelt violation in Columbia or anything.
Throwing away the Constitution, a piece here, a piece there, WTF? I consider myself pro-law enforcement and some what conservative, but there is no justification for these money grabbing shakedowns and they are proven to reduce effectiveness in crime fighting. Being on the road and actually being able to respond to a real crime in progress doesn’t pay the bills though does it?
You want to see some outright unconstitutional drama, get your hands into the unpublished SC Supreme Ct opinions/decisions made, in part, by the black robe crash and flee queen herself. There are some that will raise your eyebrows. They should all be made fully accessible over the web. But I am willing to bet, Toal would fight to stop that – claiming its not necessary and its too expensive when its not. The court needs to operate in the full on open with all cases before it.
The state has too much authority when the patience of the authority figure who is paid to do a job is tested by doing it.
Authority is there to provide a service without violating a citizen’s rights.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court felt sorry for the state and the conflict between providing that service, and the right of the citizen to be protected from abuse, no matter how small.
The Supreme Court, as authority, easily adopts the point of view of authority over the civilian and his rights.
This “punk” is arrogantly demanding exactly the concentrated essence of what we in the United States refer to as “freedom” – with an attitude. Does “attitude” deprive a person of his rights?
There are limits to what service we can expect authority figures to provide, but there should be no limit to their patience in protecting our freedoms. Dying for freedom is surely a deeper commitment than providing an environment where those freedoms can be reasonably exercised.
Most authority figures see themselves, and their immediate annoyance as more important than the constitution, and the person in front of them that embodies it. They like to think that “respect” is the only thing between them and an early grave, and use every insinuation at their disposal to make you think you don’t matter.
When you order a cheese burger, you don’t expect to be verbally abused because it’s a busy night and the attendant doesn’t feel like dealing with your “special request for pickles.”
If you’re squirting ketchup in his face, that’s one thing, but if you actually *ask* for extra pickles, from an establishment that is advertising “have it your way,” then it’s not the customer who is being a punk, it’s the person paid to provide the service you’re asking for.
That, was well done. Kudos to you.
It probably wouldn’t be time wasted to consider what would have happened around 4:29 if the “punk” was black.
These idiots really should download a free video editor and trim the footage down to the portion that people actually give a shit about.
This guy is a jerk and a perfect example of what is wrong with the younger generation. Probably some young unemployed jerk-off looking to have a home video make him rich. I almost willing to bet he has two or three boxes of “participation trophies” from when he was a child. Oh how I wish the officer had tased his sorry butt.
This cop is a jerk and a perfect example of what is wrong with the older generation. Probably some old pensioned jerk-off looking to have power over others to make him feel big. I almost willing to bet he has two or three boxes of “perp trophies” from when he’s illegally abused innocent citizens. Oh how I wish the driver had sued his sorry butt.
What would he sue the cop for? Let me guess … ummmm … a 1983 civil rights action for handing him back his drivers licenses upside down?
I agree, suing the cop makes exactly the same amount of sense and tasing someone for exercising their constitutional rights. That was the whole point of my post. I’m glad we agree. Apology accepted.
Or assault, they way he opened the car door like that and got in Mr Scott’s face like that. If someone did that to the cop, you can be damn sure he’d be arrested.
You’re wrong. The kid is a friend of a friend. He is responsible, respectful, honorable, and generally a very pleasant human being. He just objects to people trampling his rights regardless of what costume they’re wearing or what flare they have on said costume. He doesn’t want to lick anybody’s boots or kiss anybody’s rings. And especially under false pretenses of “safety.”
I want to know if SC cops are trained to double tap beginning in the torso and walking up to a head shot until the suspect is down. Saving taxpayer money? Bovine sewage. Unarmed citizens are the ones who need bullet proof vests these days.
Just what do you do if pulled over?
Some people just can’t help themselves. Life is generally pretty easy if you let it be.
Because Jesus And Shut Up Is Why
You miss Mike’s point, if you simply obey, even if you have the right not to, then you are lacking discipline and life will be hard.
So obey your masters and they will be kind.
A fine illustration of “white privilege”.
Freedom of movement, mobility rights or the right to travel is a human right concept that the constitutions of numerous states respect. It asserts that a citizen of a state in which that citizen is present has the liberty to travel, reside in, and/or work in any part of the state where one pleases within the limits of respect for the liberty and rights of others.
This is where the old saying of a’ little knowledge, is a dangerous thing.’ applies. Driving is a privilege, not a right. He could smart mouth himself into jail by obstructing justice or interfering with police in the performance of their duties. And for all the people who are such law enforcement experts out there, try doing the job, then judging those who do.
Let the fascist mayor of DeKalb know what real Americans think of neo fascists who trash our constitutional heritage:
This fat bald slob mayor is a Democrat, by the way, and his apparatchiks refuse to divulge the name of this anti American cop, who need be fired = and will be fired.
This was a very poorly written headline. It was an unconstitutional East German styled roadblock.
He should have refused to give anything and went to jail. The cop was clearly in the wrong here. What I find odd is the department says they can’t identify the cop, but says it will review it. They know whoever that cop is and its not like it would be hard to identify the guy. I smell cover up as usual. The guy should file a complaint with the state public safety board and one at the local level. It might not mean much, but at least there is paperwork showing this officer actions have been questionable. If anyone in the future sues it will look bad on the officer.