pass referee in cali for loud exhaust...

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Are vehicle compliances a criminal act?

Some of them should be.

*cough* primered body kits and neon underglow *cough*

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Here is what I have taken away from all this:
1) Any law that you don't like is dumb and should not exist
2) You can do what ever I want because nobody has the authority to do anything about it anyway
3) The police should not do their job because it interferes with what you want
4) All police are egotistic, power hungry, bumbling fools that have a personal vendetta against every single person they pull over
5) If you knowingly break the law fight it (see #s 1 & 2)
6) The constitutional rights that were originally written to protect the innocent have been twisted to a point that they really just serve to hide guilt


In summary: Never, ever cooperate or show any form of respect because it is your god given right to put up as much resistance as possible with the full expectation that you will somehow benefit from your actions.

Just about everything you took from this is wrong...

1) liking a law has nothing to do with it. A law (or the enforcement there of) actually being legal (constitutional) does.

2) You can do whatever is within your rights to do and people should not ABUSE the authority we have given them or attempt to usurp authority we haven't.

3)The police should do their job and ONLY their job which is not primarily to enforce laws, but rather to protect the people and their liberties while enforcing the laws that enable them to do so while ensuring that they do so within the authority granted to them by the people which is primarily defined within the COTUS.

4) Some are... not all, but enforcing the unwritten blue code of protecting and keeping quiet about those that are make them all guilty of it to one extent or another.

5) No, if your liberties are infringed, fight it. IF the law is not valid or is enforced in a way that infringes on your liberties, fight it.

6) No, the constitutional rights that were designed to prevent govt from overstepping the authority granted to them by the people has largely been ignored in the name of stopping illegality and laws have been passed that violate those protections.

Statists need to wake up and realize that the ultimate end to this type of thought is a complete and utter taking control over society that is so antithetical to the form of govt that America's founders adopted that it is a frickin joke.

Jaden

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Here is what I have taken away from all this:
1) Any law that you don't like is dumb and should not exist
2) You can do what ever I want because nobody has the authority to do anything about it anyway
3) The police should not do their job because it interferes with what you want
4) All police are egotistic, power hungry, bumbling fools that have a personal vendetta against every single person they pull over
5) If you knowingly break the law fight it (see #s 1 & 2)
6) The constitutional rights that were originally written to protect the innocent have been twisted to a point that they really just serve to hide guilt


In summary: Never, ever cooperate or show any form of respect because it is your god given right to put up as much resistance as possible with the full expectation that you will somehow benefit from your actions.

This is what we call a "straw man." Instead of challenging the points actually made by your opponent, ascribe a ridiculous, unsupportable position to your opponent and argue that instead. Once you get to the point that you're just making up things to argue against, there's really no point in continuing the discussion.

[NemesisPrime909]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

LA

to people who complain about smog checks.

this is why they do it, to make sure people can actually breathe.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

This is what we call a "straw man." Instead of challenging the points actually made by your opponent, ascribe a ridiculous, unsupportable position to your opponent and argue that instead. Once you get to the point that you're just making up things to argue against, there's really no point in continuing the discussion.

My list was no way intended to be an argument. It is a simple summary of how I interpreted the discussion to that point.


I stand by my thoughts.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

This is what we call a "straw man." Instead of challenging the points actually made by your opponent, ascribe a ridiculous, unsupportable position to your opponent and argue that instead. Once you get to the point that you're just making up things to argue against, there's really no point in continuing the discussion.

I completely agree, given what you wrote below.

Originally Posted by extrashaky

No, they aren't. My other vehicle is a Jeep. I have a header and a high-flow cat on it, neither of which are CARB compliant. Yet they are EPA compliant and road legal in at least 48 other states. The emissions laws are simply not the same.

Furthermore, I have lived in ten different states, and I have never heard of anyone having a cop demand an under-hood inspection in any of them. In fact, I've never heard of that happening anywhere outside of California. Even the states that require emissions testing do not have uniformed thugs pulling you over to demand to see under your hood.

But please, by all means keep telling us about all these things they subject you to in California that people in the free part of American don't have to deal with. Eventually maybe you'll actually convince someone that government intrusion into your life is better than being left alone.

I am not going to pick apart your argument by researching all 50 states, but just because it's EPA compliant means jack shit if your state follows a stricter-than-EPA standard.

As for living in all those states and all that freedom outside of California, see your "straw man" argument above for how absurd that takes the debate.

I only started replying in this thread to provide some insight to how getting certain types of tickets work in CA and how your rights are impacted. Keep hating on California, I'll enjoy my life here.

-alex

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Jaden

How about you just stick to the socialist mecca you call home...

Jaden

Really dude?


I guess there was no way this could be debated without turning political.
My sincere apologises to anybody I offended with my opinions.
Iamoutahere.

[2much]

how dare you ned

edit - I'm suing

[Braces]

As I read this thread ... I keep thinking about all the budget cuts that the police and fire depts have had to deal with (at least here in Az). A stretched police force having to deal with a stupid issue such as loud exhaust.

[babydriver]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

A cop can ask you to open your hood. A cop can ask to come inside your house without a warrant. A cop can ask you to open your trunk or empty your pockets. A cop can ask to search the interior of your car. They can ask you all sorts of things they have no reason to ask.

Whether you're legally required to comply with their requests is a different matter.

This is not entirely true. In the United States, the officer must have what is known as "probable cause" before conducting any of those activities. What this means is that a reasonable person could infer the possibility of a crime or violation being committed by the suspect from the available evidence that can be seen BY ANYONE passing by. It does not mean (at least in the U.S.) that a police officer has carte blanche to do whatever he wants. The remedy is dismissal of the charges by the judge if the judge determines that there was no probable cause.

The distinction here is that the cop, if this happens more than a few times, will hear about it from HIS boss. Failure to adhere to probable cause can jeopardize other cases that this hypothetical officer has handled and could cause wholesale overturning of all kinds of convictions. For a traffic ticket, nobody really cares except the person who got the ticket. However, if the cop busts in on a drug house without a warrant and without probable cause (i.e., no visible/audible/olfactory evidence of a potential crime being committed) and his action causes the case to be dismissed, he could be fired, probably ought to be fired. These situations are a violation of the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, guaranteeing against unreasonable search and seizure. No probable cause = unreasonable.

Again, the remedy is dismissal of the charges by the judge. Once the ticket is written, the only way for it to be dismissed is by a judge or jury. If a cop wanted to search my trunk for no reason, and I felt ballsy that day, I would ask for his warrant or for my attorney before consenting. You really can't stop him in the end, but you can help establish a lack of probable cause. Whatever you do, however, be extremely polite!

Now if he has a drug-sniffing dog, you have hooch in the trunk and the dog smells it, then you're screwed. That IS probable cause. But he can't legally search your trunk in the case of a stop for a busted tail light. He can only write you a ticket for a busted tail light legally. Anything else should be dismissed out of hand, but you'll still have to go to court (or just plead guilty and pay the fine).

Regarding things like speeding and loudness, the police officer should have some way of measuring it using a device (radar, dB meter) and follow a prescribed procedure in his determination of the violation. His opinion alone will not stand up in court (unless the judge is his brother-in-law or something). If the cop has good evidence, just plead and pay. If not, then go to court and get it dismissed. The OP has proof that the noise level was acceptable; unless the cop has a good dB meter, knows how to use it, and can demonstrate that you changed the muffler system since the ref took his reading, then you can beat that ticket.

[2much]

Originally Posted by babydriver

This is not entirely true. In the United States, the officer must have what is known as "probable cause" before conducting any of those activities. What this means is that a reasonable person could infer the possibility of a crime or violation being committed by the suspect from the available evidence that can be seen BY ANYONE passing by. It does not mean (at least in the U.S.) that a police officer has carte blanche to do whatever he wants. The remedy is dismissal of the charges by the judge if the judge determines that there was no probable cause.

no officer needs PC to ask you to open something. I think you may have misinterpreted @extrashaky

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by 2much

no officer needs PC to ask you to open something. I think you may have misinterpreted @extrashaky

If you say, no thank you, he can't open it himself without probable cause...

If he were, could find a dead body and it would be thrown out as evidence in court.

He also can't make you sit there and wait for a dog to arrive to hit on the car (recent supreme court ruling).

Jaden

[Toyarzee]

So let's say you're driving to the track on the streets to avoid towing. The car usually gets no attention and everything is as hidden as can be to maintain the sleeper status... however, it's still loud and slammed so you KNOW it's modded.

A cop hypothetically pulls you over, while not committing any traffic violations, and says your car has no front plate, is too low, and is pretty loud. Pop the hood.

You know the giant precision turbo, methanol lines, custom shiny intake manifold, and 3" turbo back with only a muffler and turn down before the axle will not go well. You were not accused of or pulled over because you were speeding, driving unsafe, or exhibiting anything specifically done to the car, so you want to say no thanks to the officer making the request.

What happens next...? Pray to Jesus? Just flat out say I appreciate the concern officer, but I would like to respectfully decline as that is not necessary? Or say sure why not, pretend to be dumb and see what he says?

I'm only seeing a greater fluctuation in responses as I suppose was expected.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Toyarzee

So let's say you're driving to the track on the streets to avoid towing. The car usually gets no attention and everything is as hidden as can be to maintain the sleeper status... however, it's still loud and slammed so you KNOW it's modded.

A cop hypothetically pulls you over, while not committing any traffic violations, and says your car has no front plate, is too low, and is pretty loud. Pop the hood.

You know the giant precision turbo, methanol lines, custom shiny intake manifold, and 3" turbo back with only a muffler and turn down before the axle will not go well. You were not accused of or pulled over because you were speeding, driving unsafe, or exhibiting anything specifically done to the car, so you want to say no thanks to the officer making the request.

What happens next...? Pray to Jesus? Just flat out say I appreciate the concern officer, but I would like to respectfully decline as that is not necessary? Or say sure why not, pretend to be dumb and see what he says?

I'm only seeing a greater fluctuation in responses as I suppose was expected.

A cop can't pull you over for no reason and can't search your car because he feels like it.

Jaden