A new regulation in California ends the use of a long-standard question by cops during traffic stops. Instead of asking, “Do you know why I pulled you over?” officers will now be required to immediately inform the motorist of the cause for the stop.
This prevents cops from just pulling over people for very minor things, and then going a on vague fishing expedition.
If they immediately say, “I pulled you over because your tire touched the center line 2 times,” a person can respond, “Sorry officer, I will try to do better.” Instead, the cops hope the driver starts blurting other stuff the cop was not aware of.
A broken taillight might have been the initial cause of a traffic stop, but it could escalate because of open-ended queries which are trying to yield unknown information. It will be tougher for police to stop people without a valid cause, who are just pulling people over “on a hunch” if they are required to explain their reasoning.
I’m not as think as you drunk I are, officslur.
Always have the cop articulate your crime before handing them an ID. Then shut up and answer no questions.
That was one of the cornerstones of a system known as Verbal Judo, created at least 3 decades ago by a Dr. Thompson. I was an instructor of it for the last 7-8 years of my LEO career. It’s based on human nature and linguistics, designed to generate voluntary compliance and is extremely effective. Florida made it part of a model policy for traffic stop procedures many years ago. What took California so long to adopt a common sense practice that actually works? Oh, sorry, never mind…
Officer: “Do you know why I pulled you over?”
My reply: “You knew I was on my way to Dunkin’ Donuts.”
Officer: “Have you been drinking?”
My reply: “Have you been eating donuts? Your eyes are glazed.”
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: No, I left my fucking crystal ball at home.
Cop: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me:
(option 1) You didn’t pull me over. I stopped to take a leak. Mind your shoes.
(option 2) Have the corpses in the trunk started to smell bad?
(option 3) No. Although I’d dearly love to be able to read minds, I can’t imagine why I’d want to read yours.
Cop: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me:
(a) Do you?
(b) I don’t if you don’t!
(c) Your city is broke and you have a quota to fill?
(d) Dunkin is out of your favorite donuts?
(e) You’re having a bad hair day?
(f) You WOKE and g̶o̶t̶ u̶p̶ o̶n̶ t̶h̶e̶ w̶r̶o̶n̶g̶ s̶i̶d̶e̶ o̶f̶ t̶h̶e̶ b̶e̶d have something stuck up your ass?
Cop: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: Do you often do things and wonder why? Would you like to talk about it? Here, get in, recline the seat, close your eyes, and relax. Did any grownups touch you down there when you were little?
Do you know why I pulled you over?
I’d just as soon not incriminate myself right now, if it’s all the same to you.
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: Yes
Officer: Oh really?
Me: Yes… Really.
Officer: Care to explain?
Me: In accordance with your sworn oath, and orders from your commanding officer, you were patrolling this area and observed something you deemed probable cause to detain me and open an investigation. You’re now investigating.
@RickeyG, I had that training, too, as a leo. It really works and I understand other businesses use it, too.
I never used that line when pulling people over; I just told them what my reason for a traffic stop was. I don’t see why a law has to control it; should just be training.
It’s a Bull Shit law and I’ll tell you why. Because once again it wasn’t ratified by the voters. California voters have had no bills to vote on since Newsom’s second year in office. They dream up what ever law they want to pass and shove it down out throats. This sure as hell isn’t a Republic. And it’s doesn’t qualify as a Democracy. It’s a dictatorship.
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: Am I required by law to answer that question?
Officer: No
Me: Then I choose not to.
Officer: Did you see those two kids playing in the street back there?
Me: Honestly officer, if there were two kids playing in the street a little after midnight on a school night, I didn’t see them.
In was speeding and blew through two stop signs (in an undeveloped area with nobody around) a little after midnight. I got away with a verbal warning.
I took a quick peek at Verbal Judo. It looks interesting.
I knew someone who was a state patrol officer. There was another officer who was forever getting into fights. The guy I knew did not know why until he backed the other guy up one night. What did the officer I knew think about the situation? He said “I wanted to hit him.”
When I drove a bus in Seattle, I never really had trouble with anybody. (That is not to say I didn’t have trouble on the bus, it just did not involve me.) In the rare instance I had a verbal spar with somebody, most of the other passengers would apologize to me as they got off. I even had one passenger slip me a note. I even drove down in the Rainier Valley. Those who know Seattle know the Rainier Valley. There were some drivers on the same route who had altercations on a weekly basis.
Sometimes the police are their own worst enemies. While I happen to think that the officers in the Miranda case were probably being conscientious in their job, many officers in other cases were not. The result was the Miranda decision. I think the courts will do a smack down regarding sniffer dogs at traffic stops. The police bring these things on themselves.
It’s a terrible law, and it will lead to people getting killed, including police officers. It just kills another tool for police first contact with people they have no idea of their criminality. This is going to backfire for noncriminals, because the first thing you’re going to get hit with is an accusation, which you’ll be on the spot to either deny or admit. Every law passed in California has a sinister leftist intent. Morep police are going to get shot because of this, because it won’t give them a few moments to assess the person they stopped.
Is this the same good law that requires police to file a report on every person they interact with even casually?
Intended to frustrate and punish police against so-called over-policing, I’d guess its earnest application by cops could have the opposite effect.
resp: WTF do you want, asshole?
@RadioMattM (or any LEO here)
About those sniffer dogs. If they alert to drugs (any contra ban) and none are found, does that go on the dog’s record as a false positive? What if it has several false positives? What if the handler gives subtle cues for the dog to alert? (I know there are no dishonest handlers.) What if the dog alerts to the same location (driver’s door for example) in several searches with false positives because it learns it will be rewarded?
Before the “sniff search” the K-9 handler should be required to explain to the target individual what the behavior of the dog will be if it alerts to what ever it is trained to discover. It should also be required to disclose if or how many false positives the dog has acquired in its career before the search begins.
Check their voting record before approaching. A better way to determine if they’re law abiding.
>It’s a terrible law, and it will lead to people getting killed, including police officers. It just kills another tool for police first contact with people they have no idea of their criminality. This is going to backfire for noncriminals, because the first thing you’re going to get hit with is an accusation, which you’ll be on the spot to either deny or admit. Every law passed in California has a sinister leftist intent. Morep police are going to get shot because of this, because it won’t give them a few moments to assess the person they stopped.>
Every utterance you made is stupid.
>it will lead to people getting killed>
This implies cops shoot people during traffic stops for no reason.
>It just kills another tool for police first contact with people they have no idea of their criminality.>
Good day. I pulled you over for going 85 mph. (Man pulls out gun and shoots officer.)
Good day. Do you know why I pulled you over? (Traffic stop ends politely without the cop ever knowing had he not approached him that way the guy would have shot him.)
>This is going to backfire for noncriminals, because the first thing you’re going to get hit with is an accusation,>
As opposed to sitting in your car not knowing why tf you were pulled over while the cop goes through very vague banter, which increases your blood pressure, and makes you look evasive when really all you are is full of anxiety because you think maybe you match the description of a fleeing felon. A paranoid personality will tend to escalate the situation at this point, or panic, or do a myriad of things.
Let me put it this way. How would you like it if your doctor came into the examination room and was vague and asked you what you thought you might have.. etc.
>Morep police are going to get shot because of this, because it won’t give them a few moments to assess the person they stopped>
LOLOLOL. They can assess a driver by the reaction to, “I pulled you over for running a red light back there.”
I don’t like stupid comments. Yours is extremely stupid, ANONYMOUS.
I’m okay with it.
It’s like going to customer service and when the employee asks you how they can help you, you say, “GUESS.”
You can get shot just by pulling up to the car (as everyone has seen happen).
“Do you know why I stopped you?” is like your wife NOT telling you why she’s mad. “You should already know why I’m mad!” lol.
Honestly, this is all busywork. It’s California. Why would they arrest anyone? They murder babies up until 9 months – and slightly beyond.
The other 99 laws they passed will take whar’s left of your freedom.
Ricky G…wasn’t that jerk-off that created that joke training “verbal judo” arrested for resisting arrest during a domestic incident. It was in the 90’s when i unfortunately had to take that retarded class (which my crew walked out on). We heard it his arrest was in New Mexico and it was 6 cops and a taser needed
Q. Do you know why I pulled you over?
A. I’m not obligated to answer any of your questions
This won’t be a popular observation but in the VAST majority of cases the cops are just the best equipped street gang out there. I don’t trust any of them.
Q. Do you know why I pulled you over?
A. I’m not obligated to answer any of your questions
This won’t be a popular observation but in the VAST majority of cases the cops are just the best equipped street gang out there. I don’t trust any of them.
I am a conservative in every aspect, one thing i find myself in arguments with other conservatives is police. There does need to be police reform whether you like it or not. Most people just say if a cop tells you to do something comply, NO. This mentality has gotten us where we are. Conservatives believe in rights until its something that bothers them this is not how it works. Cops are not above the law and as of now there is no accountability whatsoever between supervisors police unions judges politicians and qualified immunity these cops run free doing as they wish. There needs to be transparency and accountability in a profession that has the ability to ruin lives.