Vid of cop losing it when told he'll need a warrant to search car

[Squisher]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7Kw9-vTJYs

He sure doesn't take rejection well.

 

[blackangst1]

Depending on the circumstances, a cop doesnt need a warrant for an auto search.

 

[mugs]

Fake

Among other reasons, the camera is mounted on the outside of the cop car. Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA9HbtbBqwY&feature=related

 

[Jumpem]

Cops acting like morons. Shocking.

 

[DayLaPaul]

Did you even read the description?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Depending on the circumstances, a cop doesnt need a warrant for an auto search.

Never consent, no good can come from it. Best case, they let you go with all your stuff not ripped out of your car. Worst case...I think you get the picture.

 

[NiceCold]

was that real or fake? i cant even tell real from fake videos in youtube anymore. everybody trying to have fame and do acting pretending to be real jus for millions of views and get to be a guest in talk shows and in tv. later on it was revealed... they actors.


is this video real? if it is then lucky the crazy cop dont use power to abuse pulling up his stick or even worse his gun. always act like a suck up if see cop crazy like that. they the one who have weapon and we dont. they can be crazy and use weapon on us.

 

[Squisher]

Did you even read the description?

It was imbedded at another website, I just truncated the URL.

 

[DCal430]

Cops do not need a warrent to search a car, or even a person once pulled over for a traffic violation.

 

[NiceCold]

Cops do not need a warrent to search a car, or even a person once pulled over for a traffic violation.

do school security need a warrent to search students bagpack?

 

[TridenT]

Troll thread.

Ban the OP.

 

[DCal430]

do school security need a warrent to search students bagpack?

Every school security I have seen are also police officers, if they have a reason to suspect you of a crime, I do not see why a warrent is needed.

It probably should be some type of reasonable suspicion though before they can go searching.

 

[Alone]

Cops do not need a warrent to search a car, or even a person once pulled over for a traffic violation.

Yes they do. There are some exceptions (mainly being if you give consent, or if you and/or a passenger are arrested). They can't just pull you over for a busted light and tear through your shit.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Cops do not need a warrent to search a car, or even a person once pulled over for a traffic violation.

A warrant, or probable cause. One of those is needed, or your state appointed attorney will have all the evidence tossed out. If you do not consent, and no warrant is issued, then it's not a legal search.

 

[NiceCold]

Every school security I have seen are also police officers, if they have a reason to suspect you of a crime, I do not see why a warrent is needed.

It probably should be some type of reasonable suspicion though before they can go searching.

14,15 years ago i got in a fight in school. school security (not school police) search my bag and i was like wtf how is that relevant to the fight? but i didnt say anything. luckly my porn magazine wasnt in there.

 

[DCal430]

There was a big court case here a while back, a guy was pulled over on bicycle for a minor traffic violation. The cop searched him and his bike and found marijuana hidden in his bicycle. It was not visible, the police took his bicycle apart to search. He did not consent to a search. The state supreme court ruled that being pulled over for a traffic violation was enough probable cause for search of a suspect and his bicycle.

 

[DCal430]

Yes they do. There are some exceptions (mainly being if you give consent, or if you and/or a passenger are arrested). They can't just pull you over for a busted light and tear through your shit.

The courts here in California have ruled otherwise. A minor traffic violation is all that is needed for a search.

 

[Alone]

There was a big court case here a while back, a guy was pulled over on bicycle for a minor traffic violation. The cop searched him and his bike and found marijuana hidden in his bicycle. It was not visible, the police took his bicycle apart to search. He did not consent to a search. The state supreme court ruled that being pulled over for a traffic violation was enough probable cause for search of a suspect and his bicycle.

http://legal-ease.blogs.heraldtribune.com/10678/officer-illegally-searches-boy-on-bicycle/
You mean that case where the search WASN'T determined to be legal?

 

[Alone]

The courts here in California have ruled otherwise. A minor traffic violation is all that is needed for a search.

Well, California is its own mess altogether, but I'd still appreciate some links.

 

[DCal430]

http://legal-ease.blogs.heraldtribune.com/10678/officer-illegally-searches-boy-on-bicycle/
You mean that case where the search WASN'T determined to be legal?

No this was a different cases a few years back. I left one part out the case, the suspect didn't have ID. Failure to have ID while committing a code violation is an arrestable offence under California State Law. It could be as simple as jay walking to running a red light. Not having ID when being ticketed for these offenses could get you arrested. They used this to justify the search.

 

[Alone]

No this was a different cases a few years back. I left one part out the case, the suspect didn't have ID. Failure to have ID while committing a code violation is an arrestable offence under California State Law. It could be as simple as jay walking to running a red light. Not having ID when being ticketed for these offenses could get you arrested. They used this to justify the search.

That's different. I told you they can search your vehicle if you're arrested. You left out a pretty critical piece of information.

 

[olds]

There was a big court case here a while back, a guy was pulled over on bicycle for a minor traffic violation. The cop searched him and his bike and found marijuana hidden in his bicycle. It was not visible, the police took his bicycle apart to search. He did not consent to a search. The state supreme court ruled that being pulled over for a traffic violation was enough probable cause for search of a suspect and his bicycle.

You say they don't need a warrant to search a car (which is untrue) then use a bicycle as an example. Were you dropped on your head as a child?

 

[mugs]

The courts here in California have ruled otherwise. A minor traffic violation is all that is needed for a search.

[citation needed]

For this and everything else you've posted in this thread.

 

[blackangst1]

Never consent, no good can come from it. Best case, they let you go with all your stuff not ripped out of your car. Worst case...I think you get the picture.

Of course; however, if the cop has probable cause, consent is moot. They dont need it.

 

[DCal430]

You say they don't need a warrant to search a car (which is untrue) then use a bicycle as an example. Were you dropped on your head as a child?

Bicycle and car are both vehicles. They just need probable cause.