New Mexico Traffic Stop

Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
1,444
Likes
101
Location
Warren, MA
Feedback: 2 / 1 / 0
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8bc_1310260736

This is as good of an example as you can get of asserting your rights. Pete is no stranger to filming police and this is the second video of his used by Cop Block. The first was confronting Arlington police officers about parking their cruiser illegally, which Cop Block is still waiting to hear the outcome of that investigation. Petes decisions to go to his girlfriends aid, film the police, open carry a firearm, refuse to produce ID and to walk away from the police,without satisfying their request, were all perfectly legal acts.

Though you dont ever have to talk to the police, Pete has a background in Law Enforcement along with a great knowledge of open carry laws. Therefore, while he still talked to the police and provided them with information, above and beyond whats legally required, he did so with caution. Stating things like, yes, I have an ID but am I legally required to show you? When told he was legally required to (a lie) Pete would ask if the officers could show him that statue which states such? Pete does this because the police are legally allowed to lie to you, which they did several times in this video, but Pete counters that by asking questions to the officers which would force them to back up their lies. As you can see they were unable to do that. After talking with them for a few minutes Pete stated he was going to leave and why, then slowly backed away.

They didnt follow him after that and he never had to produce his government issued ID. There really was no wrong doings by the police officers in this video (other than the harassment and lying) as they seemed to be stumped by Petes actions. Though they have typical cop syndrome of if you have nothing to hide why dont you just give us what we ask for and/or do what we say. Youd think that with all the police training and on the job experiences they would of quickly came to the conclusion that felons dont walk up to cops openly displaying not only a firearm but a camera too. Do these cops think that Pete is going to film his last five minutes of freedom, if he were a felon? I highly doubt it and Im speaking from the perspective of a felon (as Im a victim of the drug war).

So what can be learned from this video? A lot, but the two biggest things to me are how Pete always keeps his cool and doesnt get in a shouting match with the officers. He doesnt try to impress them with a bunch of legal rambling that would make him seem like a know it all. He lets the officers speak and then replies giving as little information as possible in a calm cool collected manner. The second is how Pete counters questions with questions. In most cases, unless driving or suspected of criminal activity, youre not required legally to produce ID when asked to by an officer. Cops phrase it as a request, may I see your ID? Which isnt them telling you to produced it but merely a request to. Sometimes when asked if you legally have to show them they lie and say yes because they can lie. Therefore instead of just handing it over ask them, Am I legally required to do so? If they say yes then ask to see the law. If you start to feel uncomfortable remember at any point you can simply stop talking to them. State that unless youre under arrest youre just going to go on your way, like Pete-8does here. Leaving the cops dumbfounded.
 
From the link: "Added: 1 day ago Occurred On: Jul-9-2009"

Don't think so - this looks like winter to me...or was Santa Fe part of the 'Agent Orange' program?
 
Last edited:
I think he had every right to be there and be didnt break any laws. And the LEOs did the right thing letting him go. However I would be a bit nervous if I had an unknown Guy with a pistol behind me during a traffic stop. I didn't like the threatening behaviour later though when it was obvious the Guy wasn't a threat and walked away. The supervisor did a decent job of toning it down when he realized that the Guy knew what his rights were. I'm sure they wouldn't do anything to him later if they got his ID right?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
 
Anyone who produces ID at the request of a cop for no reason is a sheep - suitability or not. If you submit to 'papers please' just because you're worried about suitability, you may as well dump your guns and your dignity in the goddamned ocean...

I'm pretty sure I've asked this before, but either I keep forgetting the answer or have never gotten one:
Is there any MA statute stating whether or not you need to produce ID when asked (outside of traffic stops)?
 
I highly doubt it and Im speaking from the perspective of a felon (as Im a victim of the drug war).

You might want to put something showing this whole poorly worded sadly punctuated text is a quote from the page. Wouldn't want people to read it as something you put together.
 
I'm pretty sure I've asked this before, but either I keep forgetting the answer or have never gotten one:
Is there any MA statute stating whether or not you need to produce ID when asked (outside of traffic stops)?

MA does not have a "stop and identify" law, there is no law requiring you to carry ID of any kind (unless operating a motor vehicle) and the police can't ask to see your papers unless they have a reasonable suspicion that you've been involved in a crime, don't ask them if they have "reasonable suspicion" ask "am i free to go?" if you are free to go, walk away immediately and don't answer any more questions, if you're being detained.... decide whether you want to take the chance of being arrested, etc....
the cops CAN LIE TO YOU, there's no law against that.... "i have to show you my ID?" they'll say "yes" and that's a lie, ask "am i free to go?" and unless they have a reason to detain you they'll say you're free to go... that ends the conversation...

N.H. (so much for live free or die) and R.I. do have stop and identify laws, and in R.I. not showing ID can factor into whether they want to arrest you or not...

i should put this link in my sig... everyone needs to watch it and follow it...
Don't Talk To Police, ever, under any circumstances, it can never help you.
 
Just for the record, asking a cop to "show you the law" is a bad tactic. They are not required to educate you on what laws you are breaking and are under no obligation to prove to that you are wrong by showinging you a law book. There are a million laws on the books in MA and people are under the assumption that a LEO is required to know all the MGL numbers off the top of their heads. If he knows that you have met the elements of the crime, it is enough to say that you are engaging in "disorderly conduct" for instance and then look up the MGL numbers after the arrest.

I'm kind of torn on the whole producing ID upon request thing. Maybe I have a little bit of sheep in me still, but I think for the most part that cops are good guys that are serving the community despite the fact that there are many BS laws that the state forces on us. I have been asked many times over the years to produce ID while out walking and I have refused only once because of the way I was approached.

Most times the cop pulls up, gets out of the car and calls me over, then asks if I have ID. I always reply that I do and can I ask why he / she wants to see it. If they say that I fit the description of someone they are looking for that was involved in a crime, I give my ID and am on my way a few minutes later. By refusing in a situation like this, it only delays the cop in his investigation into a real crime and allows Joe Crackhead more time to get away. I just don't see the nobility in busting a cops balls just because I can. I actually want them to catch the guy that stole grandma's purse and helping them to rule out me as a suspect allows them to be on their way.

The only time I refused when when the cop told me that "I looked suspicious" because I was out walking on a nice summer night. I gave my name and address as required and left it at that. That had a nazi germany feel to it and it pissed me off. The encounter actually got better from there when the officer explained that he was new to night shift and that he had seen me out walking a couple times late at night and he was just trying to get to know the neighborhood. I explained that I worked until 11pm and liked to go for a walk to wind down, and that was the end of it.

A couple times after that, he would wave if he drove by me. I don't know, there are certainly dickheads out there, but I still think they are the exception.
 
Last edited:
Just for the record, asking a cop to "show you the law" is a bad tactic. They are not required to educate you on what laws you are breaking and are under no obligation to prove to that you are wrong by showinging you a law book. There are a million laws on the books in MA and people are under the assumption that a LEO is required to know all the MGL numbers off the top of their heads. If he knows that you have met the elements of the crime, it is enough to say that you are engaging in "disorderly conduct" for instance and then look up the MGL numbers after the arrest.

This is very true. Fact is, I once arrested a smarta$$ punk for "Gaping with intent to gawk"....or at least that's what I told his buddies when they asked me what I was arresting him for. At the time I didn't know what I was arresting the dipshtick for, all I knew was he was going to the can. Period. Complaint I wrote up was Idle and Disorderly. When it went to court, Daddy's little boy had Daddy's hot shot lawyer represent him. When the kid told the court what I had said to his buddies, the bailiff had to turn around and look out the window. The judge was laughing so hard he started to cry. All you could see was his clenched jaw and the tears running down his cheek. After the judge regained his composure he asked me if Junior had been embarassed enough....I nodded....he gave me a wink, a smile and dismissed the case.

I miss those days sometimes.......
 
I absolutely see the nobility in busting a cops balls just because I can. It is a learning experience for him that he won't see in the academy and perhaps he won't be such a dick to the next law abiding citizen. I say well done Pete and don't let up.
 
I absolutely see the nobility in busting a cops balls just because I can. It is a learning experience for him that he won't see in the academy and perhaps he won't be such a dick to the next law abiding citizen. I say well done Pete and don't let up.

Unfortunately it can also have the opposite effect and only widen the gap between the cops and the citizens. If a cops worldview is that all citizens are d***heads, then you will reinforce that world view and will only compel the officer to look at means and motive to find a way to thwart lawful but confrontational behavior. Sooner or later cop ball busting will get ya in the slammer one way or another. It's called testi-lie and for petty stuff, the officer's word will usually prevail in court or in front of a clerk magistrate. If you are going to harass cops, then make sure you have reliable witnesses.

Also too, consider this, busting a cop's balls only takes time out of the cop's schedule, while he or she could be out doing some patrol work.

It's a two edged sword and I appreciate your feelings, 'cuz the cops are changing with regard to attitudes towards the general public.
 
All the cop has to do is follow the law.We are required to and so should he.I expect no more and I will accept no less.
 
I remember hearing that when a cop ask to see your FID/LTC(if they happen to know that you are armed), it's considered an "executive inquiry". They check to see if it's valid ect. then let you go.......... They even do it at "roll call" sometimes to make sure their own guys are carrying them!(that's mass. for ya!)
 
I remember hearing that when a cop ask to see your FID/LTC(if they happen to know that you are armed), it's considered an "executive inquiry". They check to see if it's valid ect. then let you go.......... They even do it at "roll call" sometimes to make sure their own guys are carrying them!(that's mass. for ya!)

Most days I have coffee at the store across the street from my house with a long-term member of my local PD. His son and my daughter are a year apart, and attend the same school. We have had many interesting chats about gun laes in Mass, and I even took him and his son shooting at MFL for the kids13th Birthday. Fun time, that kid KNOWS guns!

Anyway, I asked him once about the LTC thing, and he oulled out his guide, which he showed me. Essentially, if ASKED, you can say no. If TOLD "Produce your LTC" you have no choice. IIRC, this is in a situation where you are observed with a weapon, not necessarily "I think you have a gun, may I see your LTC." Next time I see him I'll ask him to show me again, and write down the MGL statute...
 
There are a million laws on the books in MA and people are under the assumption that a LEO is required to know all the MGL numbers off the top of their heads.

But we non-LEO keep getting told "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse". If I'm supposed to know every law so I'm not ignorant of them, why shouldn't the LEOs?

If he knows that you have met the elements of the crime, it is enough to say that you are engaging in "disorderly conduct" for instance and then look up the MGL numbers after the arrest.
This sounds an awful lot like guilty until proven innocent.
 
But we non-LEO keep getting told "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse". If I'm supposed to know every law so I'm not ignorant of them, why shouldn't the LEOs?


This sounds an awful lot like guilty until proven innocent.
I am refering to the actual MGL #s not the elements of the crime itself. If you interpreted the second part you quoted me on as "guilty until proven innocent" then you should brush up a bit on how the legal system works.

Short version is that police arrest when there is probable cause of a crime. ie, they witnessed it first hand. That is not being found guilty of anything. You still get your day in court.
 
So a LEO is not supposed to know the MGL # off the top of his head, but he "recognizes" the elements of every law on the books and determines if I broke one of them?

"Millions of laws on the books" and Joe Citizen on the street can't use "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"? Sounds like an excuse to "I've probably got cause to charge you with one of those millions of laws. I'll figure it out later on"
As funny as it was qmmo "Gaping with intent to gawk" is a very good example of what I mean, especially the part "At the time I didn't know what I was arresting the dipshtick for, all I knew was he was going to the can." Sounds like he just had a problem with the punks attitude and decided I'll toss him in jail, serve him right. Last time I checked being a Smart A$$ is still allowed in this country.

"If he knows that you have met the elements of the crime..." does not sound like "...they witnessed it first hand"
 
So a LEO is not supposed to know the MGL # off the top of his head, but he "recognizes" the elements of every law on the books and determines if I broke one of them?
"
WHat is your wife's SS#? Then how do you know you are married to her? That seems to be the point you are trying to make. Most people know a crime when they see it. Nobody remembers all the numbers. It's kind of a silly point to argue. That like your employer insisting that you have memorized every phone number in your rolodex, because you must be stupid if you can't.

As for the gawking thing, sure it's wrong, but nobody likes being disrespected at work. Police are in a position were they can jack someone up for effing with them. Not that it's right, but why would someone screw around with a guy that can lock you up cuz he feels like it?
 
Not that it's right, but why would someone screw around with a guy that can lock you up cuz he feels like it?

Because for some, asserting your rights as a free man is not considered screwing around. For some, the faint memory of liberty, freedom and justice, compels them to live as intended - regardless of consequence. If a police officer views my refusal to participate in a 'papers please' society as being confrontational - if adhering to the principles of the Constitution, (which he is sworn to uphold and protect), is viewed as "screwing around", then I for one, shall gladly go to jail or resist. At some point, one has to make a stand, be able to look in the mirror and see a free man, or fade into the meadow to graze alongside those who gave up their liberty - or never really knew what it was in the first place....
 
This is very true. Fact is, I once arrested a smarta$$ punk for "Gaping with intent to gawk"....or at least that's what I told his buddies when they asked me what I was arresting him for. At the time I didn't know what I was arresting the dipshtick for, all I knew was he was going to the can. Period. Complaint I wrote up was Idle and Disorderly. When it went to court, Daddy's little boy had Daddy's hot shot lawyer represent him. When the kid told the court what I had said to his buddies, the bailiff had to turn around and look out the window. The judge was laughing so hard he started to cry. All you could see was his clenched jaw and the tears running down his cheek. After the judge regained his composure he asked me if Junior had been embarassed enough....I nodded....he gave me a wink, a smile and dismissed the case.

I miss those days sometimes.......

So you made up some shit to arrest someone for something that wasn't a crime?

I'm glad you no longer carry a badge. You're unfit for the job.
 
Unfortunately it can also have the opposite effect and only widen the gap between the cops and the citizens. If a cops worldview is that all citizens are d***heads.
It's a two edged sword and I appreciate your feelings, 'cuz the cops are changing with regard to attitudes towards the general public.


Cops ARE Citizens...... Cops ARE Civilians......


They are Civil Servants, nothing more, nothing less.
 
So you made up some shit to arrest someone for something that wasn't a crime?

I'm glad you no longer carry a badge. You're unfit for the job.

Fine and dandy, but kindly don't express moral outrage when a perp in Washington State in pre-trail confinement gets to look at kiddie porn, or when a mother beats a murder charge in Fl. That's the system too.

I hear a lot of rumblings on the forum about all the bad ass punks that get away with s**t and what should be done to them. Now I don't have the particulars of this case, but one plausible scenario was that the gmmo was dealing with an a**hat, knew that the charges couldn't stick but wanted to make sure the person got the message. That's old fashioned community policing IMO, not too different from when the beat cop used to kick some little punks ass and then turn them over to their parents. I've heard many people on this forum express a desire that we return to that kind of policing.

There have been several threads posted recently about how people want to "get even" with asshats and plenty of suggestions to do it. qmmo had the resources.

So, the bottom line is that you can't have your coffee both ways (I am not saying that you have ever articulated a viewpoint that advocates 'street justice" or payback BTW) and I see where you are coming from, and I fully understand intellectually your position...still a part of me is saying some little jerk-off got what he deserved for being a jerk-off. I fully realize the dangers inherent in a police state and deplore many of the actions by the police today. Police officers are human too, and no one carrying a badge has never made a mistake. A statement such as "You're unfit for the job"...is a sweeping generalization IMO, we do not know qmmo's police service record, for instance. Nobody is 100 percent perfect on any job.

I was told once that I was unfit to collect my military pension and a disgrace to the Army because I did not advocate the invasion of Iraq by G.W. Bush. Those words hurt me today, as much as they did when they were first uttered to me, maybe I am hypersensitive, but when anyone gets in public service gets a searing indictment of why they are unfit or a disgrace, or whatever, I tend to react a bit emotionally. Maybe qmmo was out of line, but I wouldn't condemn his whole career or his ability to be a police officer based on one incident. If he was bounced from the Job for being a jerk-off, then it is a different story.
 
Fine and dandy, but kindly don't express moral outrage when a perp in Washington State in pre-trail confinement gets to look at kiddie porn, or when a mother beats a murder charge in Fl. That's the system too.

I hear a lot of rumblings on the forum about all the bad ass punks that get away with s**t and what should be done to them. Now I don't have the particulars of this case, but one plausible scenario was that the gmmo was dealing with an a**hat, knew that the charges couldn't stick but wanted to make sure the person got the message. That's old fashioned community policing IMO, not too different from when the beat cop used to kick some little punks ass and then turn them over to their parents. I've heard many people on this forum express a desire that we return to that kind of policing.

There have been several threads posted recently about how people want to "get even" with asshats and plenty of suggestions to do it. qmmo had the resources.

So, the bottom line is that you can't have your coffee both ways (I am not saying that you have ever articulated a viewpoint that advocates 'street justice" or payback BTW) and I see where you are coming from, and I fully understand intellectually your position...still a part of me is saying some little jerk-off got what he deserved for being a jerk-off. I fully realize the dangers inherent in a police state and deplore many of the actions by the police today. Police officers are human too, and no one carrying a badge has never made a mistake. A statement such as "You're unfit for the job"...is a sweeping generalization IMO, we do not know qmmo's police service record, for instance. Nobody is 100 percent perfect on any job.

I was told once that I was unfit to collect my military pension and a disgrace to the Army because I did not advocate the invasion of Iraq by G.W. Bush. Those words hurt me today, as much as they did when they were first uttered to me, maybe I am hypersensitive, but when anyone gets in public service gets a searing indictment of why they are unfit or a disgrace, or whatever, I tend to react a bit emotionally. Maybe qmmo was out of line, but I wouldn't condemn his whole career or his ability to be a police officer based on one incident. If he was bounced from the Job for being a jerk-off, then it is a different story.

Have I expressed moral outrage about the perp in WA state or bitched about the Caylee Anthony case? No, I have not.

True community policing would be a cop calling the kid's parents and saying "hey, your kid is being a jackass, you might want to speak with him before this gets out of hand and he does something he'll get arrested for."

Instead, he made up some asinine charge, deprived the kid of his liberty and tied up the court system with a BS case. That's ridiculous.
 
Have I expressed moral outrage about the perp in WA state or bitched about the Caylee Anthony case? No, I have not.

True community policing would be a cop calling the kid's parents and saying "hey, your kid is being a jackass, you might want to speak with him before this gets out of hand and he does something he'll get arrested for."

Instead, he made up some asinine charge, deprived the kid of his liberty and tied up the court system with a BS case. That's ridiculous.

Never in my reply did I suggest or imply that you personally had made a comment on either the Washington State Case or the Anthony case. Please don't look for something that isn't there. You are an intelligent person IMO with critical reading skills [grin].

I understand the moral outrage, but I cannot accept your sweeping generalization about a person's LE career in total as for the person being "unfit". One needs to take the totality of a person's record to make that statement. There are very few actions in life that become life defining (yes, there are some but this certainly doesn't rise to that occasion IMO).
 
Have I expressed moral outrage about the perp in WA state or bitched about the Caylee Anthony case? No, I have not.

True community policing would be a cop calling the kid's parents and saying "hey, your kid is being a jackass, you might want to speak with him before this gets out of hand and he does something he'll get arrested for."

Instead, he made up some asinine charge, deprived the kid of his liberty and tied up the court system with a BS case. That's ridiculous.

Everyone 'won' in that scenario. I knew the family and I knew the problems they were having with their son. I didn't charge the kid with A&B on a PO either (creep slapped me lightly in the face....because he knew me....showing off I guess). I also didn't charge the kid with driving under (he was stoned). Point I was making is people sometimes do things in a misguided manner that can result in unintended consequences. The Idle & Disorderly charge was a valid one and at the time carried a $50 fine. Found out later the judge knew the family too. As far as I know, junior went on to college and there weren't any more issues after that. Afterwards, the parents thanked me for 'saving their son's life' or some such BS....I only half listened as I didn't care for the Mom too much....a real dingbat.

While I do miss those days at times, I'm glad to have long since moved on. Dealing with families that I knew in situations like this was a real downer.
 
Back
Top Bottom