TexasCHLforum.com

texanjoker wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:

jmra wrote: One of my former jobs required me to travel to Reading several times a year. I can't imagine for the life of me any reason I would possibly return. One of the most depressing places I've ever been.
Evidently it's turning into a police state to boot.

I suspect that Reading is no more of a police state than the other 60+ sites where this "survey" was conducted. We have relatives very near Reading and agree with your assessment of the town. Lancaster, also nearby, is equally depressing.

It is the pattern of police cooperation in this matter that scares the pants off of me. "It is no big deal" makes it even worse, suggesting the chief has no idea about what the Constitution was designed to protect. What is a little unjustified search among friends? I can only hope that the PA citizens raise as much of a fuss about this as many in Texas did with Ft. Worth. I'm afraid, however, that they just rolled over and played dead.

People are missing the last paragraph of the latest article:

But law enforcement agencies in other jurisdictions have taken measures to ensure that motorists know it is a "paid volunteer survey," and that they do not have to pull over.

mojo84 wrote:This is still going on. Doesn't give the appearance of "voluntary" to me.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/18/pa ... ral-study/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ Image ]

Reading Police Chief William Heim told the Reading Eagle the federal agencies are trying to see what can be done about crashes and injuries, and the swabs were not to get DNA samples but to test for the presence of prescription drugs. He said police were there for site security only and did not pull drivers over or ask questions.

"In the grand scheme of things, I think it's a pretty innocuous and minor issue," Heim said.

I wonder if the cop is holding one of those alcohol detectors. Looks like he is holding something but I can't tell what it is.

suthdj wrote:Maybe the problem is the LEO's serving in an unoffical/offical capicity. If they want to work off shift lose the uniform an car those are offical symbols of power and should only be used for offical business.

VoiceofReason wrote:What would they have done if someone was obviously hammered? Would they suddenly be “on duty” and arrest the person? A police officer would not be expected to allow a very drunk person to drive away.

If they were injured while off duty working this job, who would pay the medical FW, NHTSA, or the contractor?

This is just wrong in so many ways.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:I wonder if a Burger King owner could hire off-duty officers to direct motorists into his drive-thru. They wouldn't be forced to buy anything; they could just say they're not interested and move on.

Well, I think I just discovered a new way to get more foot traffic into our church. Just close off 620 and Steiner Ranch and move all traffic through the parking lot. You can leave if you show a pew sheet and can summarize the sermon...

They say God works in mysterious ways...

talltex wrote:

Right2Carry wrote:Let me see if I understand this correctly. The LEO's did nothing wrong yet they FORCED innocent civilians who were doing no wrong off the roadway into a parking lot to participate in a voluntary survey? I am unclear how FORCING motorists into a parking lot by LEO without probable cause or reasonable suspicion isn't some sort civil rights violation. These individuals were DIRECTED by LEO off the roadway into a parking lot to be SOLICITED by some type of government entity. However you cut this it appears to be an abuse of power by the LEO's involved and a full investigation should be initiated into those individuals who authorized this illegal activity under the pretense of a survey.

I don't think they actually FORCED anyone off the road against their will...but I think it is definitely a form of COERCION, just because they are Police Officers standing there...by Patrol vehicles, with flashing lights, motioning certain drivers to divert from the traffic flow. In most cases, no one is going to stop in the road and start questioning if they have the authority to do so...because the public has been told for years that they should "never argue with a Police Officer, just do what they tell you". That's the whole point of the Contractor hiring the off duty Officers to divert traffic...they know people will comply, just as they know most people would ignore them and drive on by if THEY stood on the side of the road with a sign ASKING for volunteers.

Right2Carry wrote:Let me see if I understand this correctly. The LEO's did nothing wrong yet they FORCED innocent civilians who were doing no wrong off the roadway into a parking lot to participate in a voluntary survey? I am unclear how FORCING motorists into a parking lot by LEO without probable cause or reasonable suspicion isn't some sort civil rights violation. These individuals were DIRECTED by LEO off the roadway into a parking lot to be SOLICITED by some type of government entity. However you cut this it appears to be an abuse of power by the LEO's involved and a full investigation should be initiated into those individuals who authorized this illegal activity under the pretense of a survey.

Jason K wrote:And what would happen if a driver refused to detour & drove through the barricade?.....

....we may find out soon....

mojo84 wrote:It appears we only have to obey the commands of a uniformed officer sometimes. Others, we don't since they are off-duty. We just have to be able to guess when. Why did they need a cop. Why not just put one of their government contractor stooges out there with a safety orange vest and let him/her flag people over? Oh, people probably wouldn't obey that person would they?

Interesting how the cops don't see the problem with this while the mere citizens do. Oh yeah, when you are the one with the "authority and power" you usually don't see a problem with it.

I wish we could add a poll to this to see how many believe there is no problem with this. The water is warming up and we are starting to boil alive.

chasfm11 wrote:I'm confused. In the story, the woman says "two police cars with lights flashing". Question: whose police cars? A marked cruiser with lights on does not equal "off duty" in my book. If I don't see armed, uniformed officers and cars with logos that I recognize, I'm not stopping and I'm dialing 911 immediately. They can hunt me down.

The fine print in the paperwork says that a breath alcohol test was done without consent. How can that be legal? I do understand that in the "no refusal" periods, mandatory blood draws are part of the deal but I thought there was PC for intoxicated driving involved first. In this case there was nothing but driving on Beech street.

We all need to track the source of this down. This has to stop.... now. Federal stops without cause in the middle of Ft. Worth in the middle of the day are not going anywhere good.

cb1000rider wrote:It's not a LEO thing, it was setup by the Feds. LEOs are hired (off duty) to enforce things that private parties want.. Think about it the next time you see enforcement of 30.06 at your City owned facility gun show. They were asked to do a job and they were doing it... Should they know better? Maybe. I don't blame the LEOs..

Dragonfighter wrote:

jmra wrote:If off duty officers ORDERED people to exit the highway to participate in a "voluntary survey", they should be fired for abuse of power. There is simply no justification for this type of behavior.
Simply can not believe any LEO on this forum could possibly defend this kind of abuse of power.

Hadn't noticed any LEO's on this forum supporting this.