All you are doing is creating evidence that can be used against you
Why is it not the least bit surprising that a cop wants you to make his job easier? So far, the Man with no name has seemingly stated that refusing searches is bad protocall, and that recording an officer only will incriminate oneself. I, respectfully submit that this "officer" is simply trying to make his job (arresting people) easier. If you give them evidence....by allowing a search...you've made his job easier. If you don't record the encounter....or allow the only a/v recording to be the officer's....you've again made his job easier, while reducing the amount of evidence you can submit to the contrary. WE all like our jobs to be easier, MWNN, but actually giving people advice that quite possibly potentially incriminates them, I feel as if you have lapsed ethically. What you would prefer a suspect to do during a traffic stop, and what would be MOST PRUDENT for them to do are seemingly two different things. In an era where police corruption isn't exactly unheard of, hedging one's bets isn't a bad idea. You can mock the ideas of recordings and search refusals, but in the end, it just seems as though you'd rather the suspect just give up his rights rather than utilize them to his or her best benefit. Like I said, we all want our jobs to be a bit smoother or easier, but the advice you give here is very much opinion, and shouldn't be taken as cold hard facts by anyone.
Many cops give advice here, but most seem to come at it from a different angle. Your take seems to be "compliance and cooperation above all, including common sense" and I find that disturbing. Talking about laughing at suspects, talking about how there are "other ways" to seearch a vehicle....well, it just all seems a little biased
This isn't a personal attack, MWNN...its just that people give answers based on their jobs, and the people here would be better served by taking advice from soemone along the lines of a defense attorney....someone whose job it is to keep people OUT of jail....than they would be served by taking advice from an officer of the law, someone whose employment partially consists of putting people IN jail. From your POV, maybe a refusal to search or recording a stop is stupid, petty, insulting, what have you.....but if that recording captured illegal behavior on the part of the officer, then I say its served its purpose. If someone is trying to convict me of a crime, I'm going to do all in my power to legally prevent that from happening. My recording may be laughed at...or it may capture the one moment that proves my innocence. If it is going to save me fines, jailtime, a criminal record, etc....I'll take the risk of being laughed at. Your job is simply to collect evidence that points to my having committed a crime. If you have that, I'll be convicted. If you don't have that...and I don't GIVE it to you, there's a good chance I'll walk. If you are so sure you can search my vehicle without my permission, by all means do so. However, advocating I willingly give up legal protections that could potentially exonerate me at a later time is asinine and hardly good advice from anyone aside from you and the prosecutor. You can threaten to laugh at me, or to call a K9 unit...whatever. Being laughed at, or having a dog called to the scene doesn't hurt my feelings....but may potentially offer me some protections. When defense attorneys tell me to comply with searches and to willingly comply with any and all officer requests, I may start to believe I'm being steered in the right direction. However, you just want the alleged suspects to do your job for you and hand you any evidence, real or imagined, over to you rather than you having to legally discover it through your own techniques and abilities
