A man going through a checkpoint in New York City was arrested for refusing to provide his identification after he compared officers to Nazi Polizei.
The man, who submitted the video to PINAC without leaving a name, posted the video to o his Youtube channel, which he named Nazi Germany.
“This is not Nazi Germany, sir,” he told a cop in the video. “No, you may not see my papers unless I’m being charged with a crime.”
The cop accused him of being disorderly and arrested him after him several chances to provide his identification.
The NYPD cops said they were doing an “emergency checkpoint,” but refused to tell them the man what was the emergency unless he handed over his license and registration.
Contrary to the man’s apparent belief, the Supreme Court ruled that checkpoints are Constitutional as long as they follow certain guidelines that makes the stop random in order to prevent profiling. In this case, the cops said they were stopping every third car, so if that is true, then they would have had a legal justification to ask for his identification.
Here is Video of Nazi NYPD arresting me for not showing my papers!
I asked them if they were currently conducting a crime investigation – They said they were not.
I asked if they had probable cause – They said they didn’t need it.
I then refused to deliver to them my papers because I felt their fishing expedition was arbitrary, capricious and in violation to my constitutional rights – And that I did not want to waive those US Constitutional rights which I fought for in war. [In fact my military service was meritorious and left me with life-long side effects for which I am treated for to this day: PTSD and traumatic brain injury.]
The result: they locked me up in jail!
Reichstrunkenbold Whilhelm di Blasio was elected on the promise he would end the NY Gestapo (Reichsbund Deutscher Beamten)!
Next comes the Konzentrationslager!
[Quote from Floyd v City of NY] “The Fourth Amendment protects all individuals against unreasonable searches or seizures.(1)0 The Supreme Court has held that the Fourth Amendment permits the police to “stop and briefly detain a person for investigative purposes if the officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts that criminal activity ‘may be afoot,’ even if the officer lacks probable cause.” (2)
1) Floyd v. City of New York, Connick, 131 S. Ct., and others.
2) United States v. Swindle, 407 F.3d 562, 566 (2d Cir. 2005) (quoting United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7 (1989)) (some quotation marks omitted).