Recently I came across a questionare that a citizen can ask a government employee to complete before you answer any of the questions asked of them. It is covered by the PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 (Public Law 93-579), which empowers citizens to require full, written disclosure from a government official who seeks information. It is quite lenghty and detailed. You might want to check it out. On the page also are guidlines as for using it. Perhaps this would stop a few of the abuses we are currently seeing.

[url]http://guntruths.com/Resource/public_servant_questionnaire.htm[/url]


Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/url]

Why not? LEOs are government agents. You give em your license and if they start asking you questions about where you are going etc etc. You get the paperwork out before you start answering questions.


Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]

Two suggestions:
1.  Have at least 5 copies on clipboards with pens attached by string (some cops have sticky fingers).
2.  Ask your buddies to keep a stack of $100 bills handy and to please bail your rear out at 8am the next morning.

Kharn

Read it again. The questionnaire part only applies to federal agencies. The right to remain silent applies everywhere, but as Sweep mentioned, the road block probably is not  made up of Federal agents.
I tend to think showing that you have a valid license and driving away within a fwew minutes is more appropriate than sitting there for a long period of time and refusing to cooperate at all. But then again, I do have better things to do than sit and wait.

Well, the text on the directions for the thing are as follows...

"If a citizen chooses to cooperate with [b]government officials[/b] who are seeking information, BEFORE questioning begins, the citizen should politely inform the government agent or agents that a prerequisite for the citizen's cooperation with "the government" is the agent¹s cooperation with the citizen."

To me an LEO is a Government Official. Be it Local, County, State, or Federal Government. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Second, No I would not whip this thing out every time I was stopped. But, a little hastle is worth it for me to stop those kinds of road blocks. If enough people raised hell about it then they will end. On the other hand, if everyone has something better to do than try and fight it (within the law) then we will continue to loose our freedoms.

Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]

Answer a question for me if you would, SGB. Are you of the opinion that an officer has a right to stop any driver at any time for the sole purpose of checking on the status of that driver's driving priveleges? In other words, no other probable cause is neccessary to stop a driver than the fact that they are driving.

FMCDH
Semper Fidelis
Jarhead out.

-----------------
"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe that they are free."
--Von Goethe

I understand that, What I said above is that if you are stopped, they ask to see your licesne, you give it to them. then, when they ask where you are going or whatever random question they ask to see if you are drunk or otherwise acting nervous you then use the paperwork. Like I said, not trying to be a dick to LEOs just impress upon them that perhaps that type of checkpoint is not quite the right thing to do.


Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]

Stirring the pot

I would like to hear SGB's answer to Jarheads question above...
well, were waiting...

Well, if you don't mind- I'll answer a bit.

Pulling over a vehicle merely to check on the liense is not alllowed. (darn stupid too) However, running the plate/owner for a current license  without stopping it is allowed. if the license check comes up bad, you can stop the car.

Roadblocks, as you refer to them, are a different matter. You do not need a reason to pull someone over at a roadblock. A "license check" roadblock sounds real stupid also.

Aviator- actually, I misunderstood your intentions, no flames intended. I thought you were another troll like some on this board, but you appear not to be one, you are a concerned citizen. But btw- as I said in my post-the right to reamin silent is available any time. Should you use it always-of course not if you can be quickly cleared so the police can go back to finding the violator.

The questionnare itself still only applies to Federal agents.

However- your target is wrong. Don't bust the cops as they are doing their legal duty. Call up the mayor, the chief, etc and tell them how the resources could be better used. Get people together on that and results may happen.

Mike, no not being a troll. [:)]

Have you by chance read the thread on this issue that was running the last couple of days? [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=30586#lastPost[/url]

This is what I am talking about. And not trying to be a pain here, but can you explain to me why that applies only to Feds? Not trying to be argumentive, just getting facts straight.

And yes, belive me, in addition to making the process as painful for the LEOs at the stop as I can within my rights, I would be writing and calling the Chief LEO and mayor of the city if I ever run across someting like that. It may be seen as being a pain in the ass, but if enough people were being a "pain in the ass" it might just get some peoples attention. As long as people have the attitude that thaey have something better to do than fight things like this we will loose our rights one small chunk at a time.


Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]

Hey, people, these LEO's manning the checkpoints aren't to blame, they are just following orders.   Don't give them a hard time, after all, you may hurt their feelings.

Present your papers and if you get lucky, you are on your way with nothing but a little lost time.  After all, if you aren't a criminal, why should you mind having your travel papers checked?

The guards who worked in concentration camps were happy to go home at night also...

hand them your liscences then tell them all kindas of weird answers..there no law against lying...
where are you going....mars
what are you doing......playing a banjo
where did you come from.....my moma tummy

with the exception of answering stupidly follow all of their orders/demands after a while you will be placed under arrest for some stupid charge or be presented with a ticket...sign it so you dont get arrested if arrested continue to submit to drug/liquor test be corpertive except in your answers... now when you get in front of the judge answer correctly and make bond bail or whatever ..then go get a good attorney and sue the shit out of what ever agency arrested you because why did they arrest you because they didnt like your answers...
I wonder if this would realy work...?

this is assuming you  are not in fact breaking some other law...

hielo: The Nuremburg excuse doesnt pass muster.  Everyone in public service must know what to do about an illegal order and what constitutes a legal order.

Kharn

Burn: you know that may also get you a ride with those nice fella's in the white labcoats, who have a butterfly net with them. Also before you get to hilarious many LE agencies are putting video cameras in cars. In the past the officer's description of behavior may not be as colorful as the incident and may get dissmissed as to unsual to be true. However when they play that video tape of you in court with you singing "I'm a little teapot short and stout...." when the officer asks what your address is it probably won't get the big laughs you thought it would [;)].

If this is in reaction to the roadblock issue: if you did nothing wrong, why not just be polite to the officer there, he probably is "just doing his job". Later when you get time write the mayor, and police chief of the municipality you were stopped in. If the officer you talked to was decant/professional say that, then say how unpleasant you think a roadblock is, noting that you are unhappy with the CHEIF's law enforcement stategy. Ask for a response from the cheif/mayor in writing.

Does anyone have the exact law stating that "driving is a priviledge" instead of just parroting what the DMV test booklet says?

Aviator...see what I mean about trolls?
You can put something in front of people and some will refuse to accept that it is there.
No, I didn't check out that thread for the reason above.



Oh btw Hielo- I take offense to your insinuation that the cops are concentration guards. I have a question for you:
A shooting just occurred with a white Mazda two door with California plates. You see a matching vehicle a block away.....but, as you say, this vehicle shouldn't be stopped because it may inconvience the driver.
Where do you draw the line as to reasonable and unreasonable. As long as its not you and somebody else that's ok?   Sorry..didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

Yes it is true you may be inconvienced, but what is the net result? Is a roadblock for DWI OK or not? I think that a DWI checkpoint is fine (and soi does the Supreme Ct). However, I agree with you aviator (maybe surprising you) that the license check is a silly thing. However....knowing that the trolls tend to exaggerate and miscontrue facts...was that actually done? If so- wrong thing to do.

Mike, good to hear you think that way also. I would guess most LEOs (I am assuming you are one) would agree with the license check thing also. I understand you guys have a tough job, and while I do not mean to make it that much harder, but when it comes to things like that I try to put as much pressure to turn it around as I can. Sometimes that may include a little pressure on the field officers as well. The way I look at it, if we make them unhappy about doing things like that, perhaps they will raise questions about it themselves. I would encourage you to go to the above link, and watch the video of the Virginia Highway Patrol Officers who stopped and arrested a woman at one of those checkpoints. After getting her into the car they were talking between themselves to figure out if they HAD in fact done something wrong. She refused to show her license which I think was dumb, but I do understand where she was coming from.

Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]

You must show them your driver's license because driving is a state granted privelege, but if an officer asks where I am going or where I am coming from...  Sorry, that is none of his business, and I will [i]respectfully[/i] tell him so.  My only duty to the officer is to show him that I am indeed driving legally (license, proof of insurance if required by state law, and current tags), and that is as far as it goes.  I will not grant permission to search or anything beyond that.  I don't want to be a pain, but I also will not waive any rights that I may have as principle.

SOL

Bottom line is traffic cops are tax collectors, plain and simple. and any chance their departments see as a opportunity to line the govt coffers they jump on it.
All they have to do is yell PUBLIC SAFETY and the sheeple get in line.
Why else do they have Quotas ? parking fines ?
people who can afford tickets dont care and drive how they please. IF they get caught, they pay up and do it again.
Not long ago in our local fishwrap, the chief of police admitted that they use a quota system to increase funds for LEO needs.
TAX COLLECTORS !!!!! always follow the money trail.
flame on
[heavy]

Actually, Aviator...I think I am poorly stating my main point.
If you are all set with the checkpoint and want to leave, ask/say you are going to do so.
My point is that giving the cops there will only result in the extending of your detention for no reason other than a pissing contest neither will win. Yes you can be detained for quite a period of time and not get arrested.
Your arguement/delay/whatever with the cops on the scene will have ZERO effect on management. Management is who set up that checkpoint to start with. They do not listen to the line dogs and couldn't care if they reported lots of hostility towards that checkpoint. A much more productive (and maybe less time consuming) efort would involve getting a group or petition together and caling for a meeting for the chief and politicians to explain themselves. If there is a valid concern, the checkpoints will stay. If it is a whim of the bosses or a misuse of police resources, call out a reporter whom you can trust to be fair (few) and begin to chew them new A-holes in public. If they don't show, have the reporter print that up too. Pick your battles too...a license checkpoint is rather stupid, but a checkpoint for escaped criminals isn't.

Butkis---I thouight the days of traffic tickets for revenue were long over..guess not in your neck of the woods. I am surprised.