Cop Loses Mind At Unconstitutional Checkpoint

Driving is a privilege, just like anything else the Government deems is a privilege, is. If they say breathing is a privilege, that needs to be taxed, then it is so.

The Government is God.

I feel like it's not safe anymore to be out at night with all the out-of-control psycho cops roaming around unchecked looking to cause trouble.

Good point.

Driving on streets built, funded, and maintained by the government is a privilege. If you want to drive without a license/insurance/etc. you're free to do so on your own private property.

no they haven't idiot. they are null and void

idiot

Very constructive, moron.

Well put! Take away their Federal toys and they will have to start making some serious choices in life about what's really of value.

Federal Funding does not give you the license to abuse.

YOUR PAPERS PLEASE!!!

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

Pretty soon the cars will be driving themselves and we will only have to provide papers at every other potential abuse of our "PRIVILEGES".

When the hell are people gonna wake up? You come into this world with the skin on your back, and you wind up with retina scans, national I.D.'s, road blocks, snipers pointing rifles at protestors.....

endless.

On the front and the back of your car registration paper
Write in BIG BOLD letters ALL RIGHTS RESERVED UCC 1-305
The UCC people changed it. It used to be 1-207 it will piss
the cop off because you know your Rights.

I fucking hate pigs. They are the lowest of the low. How anyone could derive satisfaction from oppressing their fellow man for the benefit of the ruling elite is completely beyond me.

Things like that bother me.

When I see an evil spirit, I have to crush its head.

I use hard words that sometimes lead to violence.

When there is violence, I go for the head.

Cops like that are playing with fire.

I am a big foot.

You voted for Obama, didn't you?

Not a slave a serf, a slave couldnt get licesed to hunt and fish on the govenors land.

My point is they put stuff within things and things within stuff to make it illegal, if they cant make it illegal they tax it, if they cant tax they make you get a license, then tax the license.

You are free as long as you dont want to do much, if you do, get a license and play by the rules, or lose it and whatever crap they decide to take from you.

Greater men than will ever post on this board fought it for years, most are dead now. They fought for automatic weapons and gun rights and finally were tricked.

Automatic weapons, use to you could own one, or get a rifle mailed to your house from Sears and Roebuck, a ten year old could buy a rifle and take it to school.now that's gun rights. That is te shit that happens when you have rights, you want it? Get it! It's your right!

No! Now you have to be 18 to purchase a rifle, (21 for pistol) now you have to have a background check and some gun stores are so paranoid you cant leave while they are doing the background check.

Automatic rifle? Sure you can still get one, pay a background check and a class III stamp and wait 6 months and you can get a shiney new machine gun.... No you can't, it can't be newer than 1986, so they are sky high. If it were a right, you could make one in your garage (dont try it unless you like contained areas and communal showers, seriously don't)

Im just saying the next time you hear the phrase "so it will never happen again" whatever the "it" is at the moment, call them on it. Wife, mom, dad, brother, friend, senator, president.Doesnt matter, fly into a discussion because you are about to lose more freedom.

And cops arent the ones to be arguing it with. They are enforcing what they are told. I know some cops like them real well, most are the kind that will do exactly as they are told. Stand here and flag traffic for 10 hours, sir yes sir. Write 100 tickets a day, sir yes sir. Get some drunk drivers then meet us at the club later, sir yes sir. Cops dont change laws and never will, they enforce them, whatever the laws are.

News media, city council, state legislatures, your friends, thats who needs to hear. (forget the federal, my senators respond with no phone calls and emails that taunt my serfdom outright)

My dad had a construction company he started in the 70s, you cant imagine the rules, policies, insurance ( health, liability, workers comp) business taxes, codes, zoning and educational and licensing requirements that have come to pass since then. Its another world.

Bought a new car not to long ago, I use to sell cars, I know a little. State and local tax was around 10%, the dealer didnt make 10%. The state had nothing at risk, no dog in the fight, but they got thier cut.

Dunno what it takes to get out of serfdom, but we arent on the road out, deeper and deeper in everyday. Slaves soon. Unless more people know one at a time how it creeps up.

If you made it this far, sorry.

The guy was an idiot and went about it all wrong. The cop should have more restraint. Seemed like he had roid rage. They were both foolish.

This multiplication of regulations is called oppression of the poor.

Jesus hated it.

People who do it know what they are doing, and they know where it is leading.

Death camps.

This too.

He should have asked the cop to get a superior.

roydrage id say
needs to back of those drugs just a tad

"Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable." 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
This concept is further amplified by the definition of personal liberty:
"Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." [emphasis added] II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135.
and further...
"Personal liberty -- consists of the power of locomotion, of changing situations, of removing one's person to whatever place one's inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint unless by due process of law." 1 Blackstone's Commentary 134; Hare, Constitution__.777; Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed.
Justice Tolman was concerned about the State prohibiting the Citizen from the "most sacred of his liberties," the Right of movement, the Right of moving one's self from place to place without threat of imprisonment, the Right to use the public roads in the ordinary course of life.
When the State allows the formation of a corporation it may control its creation by establishing guidelines (statutes) for its operation (charters). Corporations who use the roads in the course of business do not use the roads in the ordinary course of life. There is a difference between a corporation and an individual. The United States Supreme Court has stated:
"...We are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for examination on the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his Constitutional Rights as a Citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life, liberty, and property. His Rights are such as the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his Rights are the refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under warrant of law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
"Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the limitations of its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and find out whether it has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange anomaly to hold that the State, having chartered a corporation to make use of certain franchises, could not in exercise of its sovereignty inquire how those franchises had been employed, and whether they had been abused, and demand the production of corporate books and papers for that purpose." [emphasis added] Hale vs. Hinkel, 201 US 43, 74-75.
Corporations engaged in mercantile equity fall under the purview of the State's admiralty jurisdiction, and the public at large must be protected from their activities, as they (the corporations) are engaged in business for profit.
"...Based upon the fundamental ground that the sovereign state has the plenary control of the streets and highways in the exercise of its police power (see police power, infra.), may absolutely prohibit the use of the streets as a place for the prosecution of a private business for gain. They all recognize the fundamental distinction between the ordinary Right of the Citizen to use the streets in the usual way and the use of the streets as a place of business or a main instrumentality of business for private gain. The former is a common Right, the latter is an extraordinary use. As to the former the legislative power is confined to regulation, as to the latter it is plenary and extends even to absolute prohibition. Since the use of the streets by a common carrier in the prosecution of its business as such is not a right but a mere license of privilege." Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 657l, 168, p.516.
It will be necessary to review early cases and legal authority in order to reach a lawfully correct theory dealing with this Right or "privilege." We will attempt to reach a sound conclusion as to what is a "Right to use the road" and what is a "privilege to use the road". Once reaching this determination, we shall then apply those positions to modern case decision.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
and...
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. 486, 489.
and...
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights." Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946.
Streets and highways are established and maintained for the purpose of travel and transportation by the public. Such travel may be for business or pleasure.
"The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived." [emphasis added] Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163.
and...
"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." [emphasis added] Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.

not an illegal search its called a terry stop

Watch this video. This can happen to a police officer during ANY encounter with a civilian. And on top of that they have to deal with the "am I being detained?" dingleberries :

I hate these fucking pigs at least world war 3 coming up soon will change everything. Because USA loses the war and the militia and Russia are in charge of the country by 2024.

I believe the argument is "driving" is considered conducting commerce, "traveling" is a citizen`s right.

This creates so many questions, like does this mean any law such a speed limits do not pertain to a citizen`s traveling? As long as you do not cause property damage or harm to another?

Maybe photo copy these case laws much like your post here and laminate and hang outside the window as you are getting pulled over, a la the guy with his papers in the other video?

Yep, being a cop is an inherently dangerous occupation that they made a choice to enter, however that doesn't give them the right to make up laws as they see fit, harrass citizens and violate the constitution.
Don't you love your country? Don't you love the US constitution?

that guy deserved to get shot! You DO NOT reach into your vehicle during a stop !