Border Wars

[ATF Consumer]

I am currently watching a bit of Border Wars on NatGeo and am disturbed by the LEOs technique they use when they cannot obtain a legal search warrant. They call it a "knock and talk" procedure in which they have every bit of intent to enter the home in which they believe houses illegal activity, whether it be illegal aliens or drugs. They basically pressure and scare the occupants into allowing them to search the property without a warrant.

 

[alxjmrk]

I have heard interesting things about CBP. 'nuff said.

 

[kevinj110]

Does it surprise anyone. Its the same thing they do at a Sobriety check point.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Clearly an abuse of power...they are told by the court "NO", yet they do it anyway as they see fit.

 

[alxjmrk]

America's fault or Mexican influence?

 

[alxjmrk]

really? they couldnt just fill the tunnel with dirt? "CHEAP" CONCRETE REALLY?

 

[ATF Consumer]

America's fault or Mexican influence?

American government's fault. There would not be a Mexican influence if it were not for the laws and actions of our government.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This shocks you? Maybe if you do not encounter it all day.

Look for:

1. Asking resident to step into hallway and then parking lot and then arresting him for Public Intoxication and then having arrestee back into house for shoes, wallet, clothing and then searching house.

2. Breaking into the home and then getting a search warrant after the fact. (The residents wouldn't open the door so "officer safety" was at risk).

Keep watching, you should see all kinds of zany hijinks.

 

[Joe Williams]

Shouldn't be surprised. You've got a cop on this forum, with other cops supporting him instead of condemning the actions, who states that if you exercise your right to not answer his questions at a traffic stop he'll stick a gun in your ear and split your head open.

The position holds a lot of power, and positions with power will always attract those who hope to abuse it. Not everybody is fit to wield it, but the good ones are far to shy about keeping their "brothers" in check.

 

[techres]

Shouldn't be surprised. You've got a cop on this forum, with other cops supporting him instead of condemning the actions, who states that if you exercise your right to not answer his questions at a traffic stop he'll stick a gun in your ear and split your head open.

The position holds a lot of power, and positions with power will always attract those who hope to abuse it. Not everybody is fit to wield it, but the good ones are far to shy about keeping their "brothers" in check.

Link please.

 

[wtfd661]

Shouldn't be surprised. You've got a cop on this forum, with other cops supporting him instead of condemning the actions, who states that if you exercise your right to not answer his questions at a traffic stop he'll stick a gun in your ear and split your head open.

The position holds a lot of power, and positions with power will always attract those who hope to abuse it. Not everybody is fit to wield it, but the good ones are far to shy about keeping their "brothers" in check.

I'd like to know which "Cop" that is, and a link to the thread where that was stated.

 

[Joe Williams]

Link please.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e/71049-what_to_do_during_a_traffic_stop.html

 

[techres]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e/71049-what_to_do_during_a_traffic_stop.html

The exact quote in question was this one right:

Your actions, or words in this case, is going to prolong the stop. I will run your drivers license, I will run warrant checks, and based on my experiences as an LE that people tend to lie to the PoPo when they are trying to conceal something, like a gun, and when I asked you specifically about it you gave vague answers, then that gives me resoanble suspicion to believe that crime is afoot (think Terry here)...that gives me enough to pat you down. When I feel your gun, what do you think is going to happen?!

Since I asked you directly about weapons and you said you have nothing illegal but you made no mention about guns, as soon as I feel yours, you are going to get detained at best, and probably more likely I am going to screw a gun in your ear and gently tell you that if you make any movements that I will spit your head open like a canoe.

You kinda left out the part where he is frisking a suspect, finds a gun that he asked about, and then puts the suspect at gunpoint and says if they move then they will have a really bad day.

While flowery in language, that is a bit different than I understood your comment to imply.

Did I miss something? I have not had my redbull this morning yet.

 

[Joe Williams]

The exact quote in question was this one right:



You kinda left out the part where he is frisking a suspect, finds a gun that he asked about, and then puts the suspect at gunpoint and says if they move then they will have a really bad day.

While flowery in language, that is a bit different than I understood your comment to imply.

Did I miss something? I have not had my redbull this morning yet.

You kinda left out the part where he pulled you out of your car, is frisking you, and he's sticking his gun in your ear because you refused to answer questions you have no legal requirement to answer.... IOW It's exactly my comment implied. He will assault you and threaten your life if you choose to exercise your rights.

Drink more coffee, I reckon.

 

[techres]

You kinda left out the part where he pulled you out of your car, is frisking you, and he's sticking his gun in your ear because you refused to answer questions you have no legal requirement to answer.... IOW It's exactly my comment implied. He will assault you and threaten your life if you choose to exercise your rights.

Drink more coffee, I reckon.

I guess the difference is he said he is frisking you for your refusal to answer. The gun pointing comes out when he finds a gun on you. Then he tells you not to move or else.

That is different that pointing a gun at you and threatening you because you exercised your rights.

Do you see those both as one and the same?

 

[tyler34]

playing devils advocate here but he could be making that call based on the rule of averages.

 

[wtfd661]

Sorry I found the thread on my own and came back in an attempt to delete my question rather than open this can of worms again. I don't see wear this is applicable to the OP's thread.

To the OP my apologies.

 

[Joe Williams]

I guess the difference is he said he is frisking you for your refusal to answer. The gun pointing comes out when he finds a gun on you. Then he tells you not to move or else.

That is different that pointing a gun at you and threatening you because you exercised your rights.

Do you see those both as one and the same?

Yes, in the situation he described absolutely. We do NOT have to answer questions at a traffic stop (or anywhere else for that matter) and any abuses that follow our exercise of rights are all one and the same. Do YOU think exercising your right not to answer questions is GROUNDS for ripping you out of your car, frisking you, sticking a gun in your ear, and splitting your head open? Or do you support his contention that exercising your rights constitutes suspicious behavior and justifies such actions?

If not answering questions is grounds for such roadside punishment, we don't really HAVE our rights, do we?

 

[lashicoN]

Why did you guys close down the other thread if we're just going to talk about it here? I would have liked to talk about it too, but of course, several people were advocating not succumbing to a cop's whim, so it got locked. I don't understand the argument going on here...or why there is one, rather.

In the state of Indiana we do NOT have to let an officer know we are carrying. It does not say we "do not have have to notify the officer one has a gun until the officer asks about it" or we "do not have to notify the officer one has a gun until one is being frisked". It just says we don't have to notify. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are we not innocent until proven guilty? Does that only apply to the courtroom? Why do certain Law Enforcement officers get to assume I'm illegally carrying a gun, just because I chose to plead the 5th? On that note, is the 5th Amendment gone? Because it seems that we no longer have the right to remain silent. Believe it or not, we have the right to remain silent, always, not just after we're arrested.

So here was the scenario - You get pulled over for "using every bit of the yellow lines" (yes, real pull-over reason here, apparently staying inside my two yellow lines is not acceptable anymore?) The cop asks if you have any weapons and you reply to the officer "Public servant, I have no illegal weapons in my car. Is there a reason why you pulled me over, apart from wondering about my weapons? Then the cop asks again, and you reply, "Public servant, I have nothing illegal in my car, am I free to go?" Then the cop makes you get out of the car, because you clearly didn't make him happy by answering a question you lawfully don't have to answer. He pats you down, finds a gun, and puts a gun to your head, ready to "split your head open". Yes, this does seem wrong to me. We either need to change the law or educate police officers, once again (as gun owners had to do with Open Carry) that we legally do not have to tell them we are carrying in the state of Indiana.

 

[tyler34]

Clearly an abuse of power...they are told by the court "NO", yet they do it anyway as they see fit.

devils advocate again, last time I checked ILLEGAL immigrants don't have rights. so doing what they have to do and reading between the lines of liberal lawmakers rules set up to give ILLEGALS a red carpet treatment is fully justified. what do you do when you don't like a law like the speed limit? obey it anyway or speed? I'm guessing the latter. skirting the law happens everyday I guess it just depends on what side of the equation your on as to your opinion of it. if they are getting ILLEGAL immigrants off U.S. soil and making me even a pinch safer then I say go for it. and if you've done nothing wrong accept it as par for the course a deal with it because if they didn't do what they did and how they did there would be a lot more criminals around.