Beat me by a few seconds!
This is wrong.
Part of the mission is to study individual behavior to judge their compliance with this kind of crap. Believe me, this is just a test run for the real “check points” to come.
Thanks to you both.
Okay, call me a tin-hat-wearing-conspiracy-theorist, but I am certain that these DNA roadblocks are nothing more than tests to see how docile and submissive to authority the American population has become.
Wikipedia says Reading’s current mayor is a Democrat.
This incident - if true - might be useful as a campaign issue for any opposition that is present in that city.
There may be none, for all I know.
ABUSE of public funds, public servants (police officers), public property (police cars), and power.
“Am I being detained?”
“Under what authority are you questioning me?”
“No problem; may I see your warrant?”
“I am leaving now.”
Warrant?
Warrant?
The above is a lie. The police were hired for intimidation...
The above is a lie. The police were hired for intimidation...
The city that allowed this - for their police offices to be used to intimidate citizens - should be sued.
Welcome to Amerika. Land of the slave, home of the knave.
Sorry, but, I’d have been one of the folks pulled over a few people would have gotten a good, loud cussin’ out.
People need to review the videos from the DHS checkpoints (40 miles from the border) ..... in every one I’ve seen, despite bullying tactics, calling supervisors, etc., every person who politely refused to comply and kept their comments mostly to those below, was eventually allowed to proceed. I would think this would work here. DNA swabbing? REALLY? I don’t think so.
Am I being detained?
Am I free to go?
What is your probable cause?
Am I being detained?
Am I free to go?
Since they claim it is a private company you should be within your rights to sue them for breach of your constitutional rights to be secure from search and seizure.
A class action suit would be very costly for them.
Since they claim it is a private company you should be within your rights to sue them for breach of your constitutional rights to be secure from search and seizure.
A class action suit would be very costly for them.
My latest Capitol Report:
On Friday, December 6, 2013, Nina Dean (my assistant) was informed that there was a checkpoint on Highway 79 requesting DNA samples from Missouri citizens. She drove out to the site but did not see a checkpoint. Later, Nina was told that the checkpoint had been completed before she got to the location. My assistant called me and apprised me of the situation. On Saturday, I talked to the O’Fallon Police Chief and he knew nothing about it. After more investigation by Nina, it was determined that the St. Charles County Sheriff was who set up the roadblock.
My assistant talked to the Sheriff’s office and they explained to her that it was just a checkpoint for the 2013 National Roadside Survey (NRS) of Alcohol and Drugged Driving. The 2013 NRS is the fifth in a series of national roadside surveys of alcohol-, and now drug-involved driving that have been conducted about every 10 years since the 1970s. The overall objective of the 2013 NRS is to estimate the prevalence of alcohol and drugs (illicit, prescription, and over-the-counter) in drivers on our Nation’s roadways. The data collected will provide information critical to problem identification and program development efforts in coming years. She continued the discussion with them and they promised to investigate it further.
After more investigation, the St. Charles County Sheriff’s office came to the conclusion that they had been duped. They realized that more was going on than just checking alcohol and drug levels in drivers. In fact, swabs of cheek cells and blood draws had been made. The sheriff’s department sent my office the paperwork that was sent to them and nowhere in the paperwork does it state that they will do this. In fact, it states, “They have passive alcohol sensor devices that they activate for every potential subject to help make an assessment of impairment. A Data Collector will signal a Survey Manager if they suspect a driver is impaired. The Survey Manager will make his/her own assessment and decide if the survey should continue and if the Impaired Driver Protocol should be implemented. This protocol calls for the Survey Manager to request a breath test (if needed) with a PBT that displays the BAC and then offer these choices: 1) Let a sober, licensed passenger drive after breath testing with a PBT that displays the BAC; 2) Call for two friends to come to the site; one to drive the subjects vehicle; 3) Offer to pay for a taxi or tow ride home, and making arrangements for the safe parking of subject’s vehicle if needed; 4) Let subject wait and re-test if BAC is relatively low; 5) Allow subject to walk if the distance is short and BAC is below .08 or below (lone females must be accompanied by a team member); 6) Pay for a hotel if the subject lives far from the survey site.” Therefore, the organization who contracted with the Sheriff’s department was giving the impression that they were just using breath analyzers and not collecting DNA samples. But now we know that is not true.
Once again, we are witnessing Federal overreach in our state. To end this, I will be proposing legislation to make sure this never happens in the state of Missouri again. Never should our trusted law enforcement agents be put in the situation where they violate the rights of Missourians. If you have any questions, please call my office at
Thank you,
Kurt Bahr
A few weeks ago there was a thread about this happening in Texas.
“Councilman Dennis M. Sterner was livid that government can’t pick up local drug dealers without a two-year investigation, but can stop motorists at random.”
Kind a tells you who the feds think are a danger.