A Cop pulled me over for having teenagers in my truck

The cop doesn't ask the kids their names or ages but tells them to get out and start walking. This is BEFORE she talks to you, the driver.
What did the kids do then? Did they have to walk home? I don't care if it was a block or a mile or more. What was the traffic condition of the street they had to walk on? Could it be said that SHE was endangering the kids by forcing them to walk home? She apparently had no idea how far they had to go yet. What if they were 10 miles from home? If it was very hot were they in danger of heat stroke? Do any of the kids have health problems that would make a long walk dangerous? (Diabetes, asthma, etc.) And what did you do? Did you follow the kids home with them walking and you driving the truck?
Did the cop follow them home to see that they got home safely?

There was a time in this country, before seatbelts, when people would pile a bunch of kids in the back of a pickup and go. Nobody complained, nobody tattled, and if you met a cop on the way they would just wave and go on. Heck, I remember biking and skating without helmets, kneepads and gloves! Occasionally someone got hurt but we got up and did it again--and we learned.

As for your having fun with this....
I guess that depends on how much time, effort and money you are willing to spend on it. It will certainly be a learning experience and I hope you let us know how it goes.

In Contra Costa County, California (and probably others) it's illegal to have a dog loose in the back of your pickup truck.

One of the reasons is that too many were being bounced or ejected into traffic. Not only was this a danger to vehicles and pedestrians nearby, but the dogs didn't always survive.

Personally, I would not tie them by the neck, either, although it's safer for others in the area. Probably a dog crate is safest for the dog.

Teenagers sitting down in the bed (not on the sides) have a lower center of gravity than a dog, but the laws of physics are still hard to ignore.

If someone crossed the divider and hit you head-on, the sudden stop could really knock heads against the cab. If someone rear-ended you at a high rate of speed, the kids might land on his hood or windshield before falling off into the street.

I'm not saying we don't have a right to take risks, because of course we do. But if I were selling you insurance, I'd charge you a higher rate.

IMissLiberty

I'm not sure how the officer was able to determine the ages of the people in the car from a distance. I personally think seatbelt laws are unjust anyway. I own me and I decide whether or not to wear safety equipment when I do anything. This nanny state crap has to stop.

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of seatbelts, chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government."

— Thomas Paine

for Liberty!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139/sizes/l/

Don't have any info for you, but like what you did. Good luck and have fun

I see that most here are lovers of freedom. I definitely want to get this thing dropped but am willing to go as far as I can push and am willing to face the maximum fines just to have some fun and get educated. It is a small matter.. I might as well learn as much as possible. Education is never free... and I am willing to pay the price. please continue to post.

The choice: Maybe your right on principle but was the officer doing her sworn duty to serve and protect? Using the word "apparently" indicates that you did not know the law until after the incident. The initial non-harassing nature of the "go on, get out of here" response of the cop should have been enough, but you goaded her and brought on what could have developed into an entirely different situation, one which would have had you asking an entirely different question of us tonight.....

The question that would have been a better fit would be "Are you even aware if those are my children or not" assuming(and you know what that does) that type of exchange went on and all the bases were covered I am afraid that you are just gonna bite the big one on this. Just pay the ticket. This is not one of those kinda battles.

The consequence: you gotta roll around in your head a whole host of what if's and when's tonight, tomorrow and all the way foward into your future until the case is closed

my moral opinion-you are responsible for knowing the law in your community. You are responsible for the passengers in your car. You are responsible for yours and other's children while in your presence and primarily responsible for their saftey, that of which was the officer's primary concerns and reasons for pulling you over. You must have needed a reminder or "notification" of the law and it looks like your real clear on it now.

consequence for other's: so you sue the city and what happens to your neighbor's, their taxes? How is it your paid in a suit like that? Careless, non-accountable people cause alot of damage for our society, don't be one of them.

"Ideas have consequences." Ron Paul

The rest of it is a possibility.

When they call your name, say you are here about that matter. Do not give your name. They will ask you for your name and you will say: "I am not the accuser". they will act confused and the Judge may insist you state your name. But again you will say: "I am not the accuser". The reason for this answer is that if you give your name you are identifying yourself to the prosecutor (testifying against yourself) to the court. At some point the judge will threaten you with contempt of court and to put you in a cell. At that point you say this: In that case, let it be known for the record that I am giving my name under threat and coersion without granting jurisdiction and without prejudice. Now the Judge will know that what you say is not admisable and can't be used against you. You see at this point you have not granted jurisdiction. You grant jurisdiction when you enter a plea (surrender to the jurisdiction). The 5th amendment says that any evidence you are compelled to give can not be used against you.
The worst that will happen is that you will be found guilty but the verdict will be thrown when you appeal. That is it!
I would not have signed that ticket.

how old are the kids?

http://www.coppercards.com

************
http://www.dvds4delegates.com

"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear."

~Ambrose Redmoon

do not subjugate yourself to the bureaucrats, give them the biggest headache possible!!!!

The officer has no knowledge of any of the kids being younger than 16, so it should be easy enough for you to win in traffic court.

Just remember that you have the right not to incriminate yourself, in case they start asking you questions.

cop. You are right, she should have checked their ages but I also see it as a safety issue. Two wrongs never make a right.
Ask yourself, "what lesson did I learn from this?" We cannot make every incident an issue.

Most accidents happen within 25 miles of our homes.

in the city court. Don't even waste money on an attorney. Then appeal it. You should make out ok in the appeal.

Another angle you could try is, demand a jury trial, which you have a right to. They'll be more likely to dismiss it before it goes to trial in order to avoid all that hassle and expense.

----
Don't blame me if there's no voice for liberty opposing McCain and Obama in the Presidential debates. I donated to Bob Barr's campaign.