New Hidden Compartment Law in Ohio

[Weezer]

And speaking of rights, how many of you read the story about the guy in New Mexico who was stopped by a cop because he didn't come to a complete stop at a stop sign in a WalMart parking lot?

Traffic stop brings 3 enemas, 2 X-rays and 1 colonoscopy in cops' fruitless drug search, suit says

All because he "clenched his buttocks". Submitted to more than 12 hours of molestation (no other way to describe what was done to him) with an illegal search warrant ....warrant was for one county and the molestation was done in a different county, and the time had expired on the warrant.

I hope this guy OWNS that town when this lawsuit is over. And since he came forward with this molestation, at least one other guy has come forward with the same story.

Constitutional? No way on God's green earth, but you can't un ring that bell.

Oh and that drug dog was not accredited. Besides, cops can train a drug dog to "false hit" on command.

[B47]

Originally Posted by Weezer

Cowracer (love your name btw) *so* many things going on these days are unconstitutional, but yet they continue.

No, I won't be going to a state that won't allow me to modify something that IS MINE.

The "voluntary" DNA sample taking in TX scares me too. Texas is the last state I'd expect that to happen.

One lady stated that she was told it was voluntary, but when she declined and tried to drive through they wouldn't allow it, and "herded" her into the parking area instead. Keep in mind these weren't police, but were people who had "contracted" to do this. NO authority whatsoever.

You do know there are "passive breathalizers" these days? The cop has it on his person with his "equipment", and as soon as you roll your window down it will pick up alcohol. Think that's constitutional?

And those who volunteered for the breathalyzer at that stop, guess what? on that disposable mouthpiece they got their DNA.

Yes, I'm a radical, married to a man who is even more radical, about our constitutional rights and privacy. We don't write checks, for *anything* because the information required is *none of their business*.

And I don't accept the "yeah you must have something to hide if you don't want to volunteer your DNA". No, I don't have anything to hide and everything to lose...my privacy and my constitutional rights...i.e. God *given* rights.

Hmm, just had a thought; does this law apply to non motorized vehicles? There was a thread a few weeks back about a compartment mod for a certain purpose.

(engaging filter)

I'm staying on the sidelines here, but one portion of your post is incorrect - the Fort Worth Star Telegram report says that the people who pulled motorists off were " off-duty officers" - so I have to assume they were,in fact, police.

I agree with the rest of your post.

Goggle "Fort Worth Star Telegram"" and look for "Local Crime" on the front page - it's in small print.

[Weezer]

Originally Posted by OldCoot

I don't think law abiding citizens have anything to worry about.

OC,

The first arrest was someone who had *nothing illegal*, meaning he was a law abiding citizen, except for that hidden compartment.

Yes, they are insinuating they were drug mules, but do they have any proof of that? Maybe they had a CCP and wanted to keep their carry piece safe from being stolen while they were out shopping?

[Weezer]

Originally Posted by B47

I'm staying on the sidelines here, but one portion of your post is incorrect - the Fort Worth Star Telegram report says that the people who pulled motorists off were " off-duty officers" - so I have to assume they were,in fact, police.

I agree with the rest of your post.

Goggle "Fort Worth Star Telegram"" and look for "Local Crime" on the front page - it's in small print.

It would have to be *very* small print, as I followed that closely. And let's say you're correct;

did that give them *authority* to do what they did? were they in uniform?

[B47]

Originally Posted by Weezer

It would have to be *very* small print, as I followed that closely. And let's say you're correct;

did that give them *authority* to do what they did? were they in uniform?

Actually go to "Crime Time" on the first page.

[Weezer]

Originally Posted by B47

Actually go to "Crime Time" on the first page.

**UPDATE TO THE VIDEO ABOVE** Fort Worth police initially said they could not immediately find any record of their officers being involved in the roadblock, but on Tuesday police spokesman Sgt. Kelly Peel said that the department's Traffic Division coordinated with the NHTSA on the use of off-duty officers after the agency asked for help with the survey.
"We are reviewing the actions of all police personnel involved to ensure that FWPD policies and procedures were followed," he said. "We apologize if any of our drivers and citizens were offended or inconvenienced by the NHTSA National Roadside Survey."

This makes it even *worse* B47. The presence of officers made it appear it was *not* voluntary. GRRRRRRRRRRR! (no angry icons to post here)

[OldCoot]

Originally Posted by Weezer

OC,

The first arrest was someone who had *nothing illegal*, meaning he was a law abiding citizen, except for that hidden compartment.

Yes, they are insinuating they were drug mules, but do they have any proof of that? Maybe they had a CCP and wanted to keep their carry piece safe from being stolen while they were out shopping?

Don't shoot the messenger, I could care less one way or the other.

[rlreed]

Search and seizure laws have certainly changed in the last few years. Last summer I flew to Las Vegas and rented a car for two weeks, spending time in Pheonix with relatives and traveling the old west towns and parts of old rt 66. Just outside of Tombstone I was stopped by Homeland Security. The car was thoroughly searched for no reason whatsoever. Having spent 36 years in law enforcement in Ohio I knew the search was unlawful at least by the old time standards but I went along with their program. Thinking back I guess I am fortunate there was no drug residue from someone else who may have rented that car, who knows what was carried in that car before I rented it.....

[Dodge Guy]

Originally Posted by OldCoot

And what would be the "right way"?

The way in which it doesn`t violate everyone's rights!

[DDC]

Like I said in an earlier post
"You guys have been brainwashed into thinking you live in a free country"
Since 2001 freedom has been lost in the name of safety but it has gone too far, I have a niece living in Texas and she was telling me she can get fined for her child missing kindergarten freedom has vanished.

[itat]

I thought we didn't get into politics on FRF?

[OldCoot]

I agree, it is getting out of control.

[F.R.O.G.]

Since no one else bothered, I just thought I'd post a couple of key provisions of the Ohio law (emphasis added):

(B) No person shall knowingly design, build, construct, or fabricate a vehicle with a hidden compartment, or modify or alter any portion of a vehicle in order to create or add a hidden compartment, with the intent to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance.
(C) No person shall knowingly operate, possess, or use a vehicle with a hidden compartment with knowledge that the hidden compartment is used or intended to be used to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance.
(D) No person who has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of aggravated trafficking in drugs under section 2925.03 of the Revised Code that is a felony of the first or second degree shall operate, possess, or use a vehicle with a hidden compartment.

[B47]

Originally Posted by F.R.O.G.

Since no one else bothered, I just thought I'd post a couple of key provisions of the Ohio law (emphasis added):

(B) No person shall knowingly design, build, construct, or fabricate a vehicle with a hidden compartment, or modify or alter any portion of a vehicle in order to create or add a hidden compartment, with the intent to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance.
(C) No person shall knowingly operate, possess, or use a vehicle with a hidden compartment with knowledge that the hidden compartment is used or intended to be used to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance.
(D) No person who has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of aggravated trafficking in drugs under section 2925.03 of the Revised Code that is a felony of the first or second degree shall operate, possess, or use a vehicle with a hidden compartment.

As far as (D) goes - perhaps vehicle manufactures should be required to post notices or warnings that their vehicle does or does not have a hidden compartment (s).

I'm all in favor of sensible and fair law enforcement,but this law has many loopholes in it that need to be closed.

[AquaMan]

If the vehicle comes from the factory with a "hidden compartment", it's not actually "hidden" because the compartment is made known to the public through manufacturer, manual, and dealer.

[B47]

Originally Posted by AquaMan

If the vehicle comes from the factory with a "hidden compartment", it's not actually "hidden" because the compartment is made known to the public through manufacturer, manual, and dealer.

Not sure on that - when we brought our 2012 Ram, the dealer didn't mention anything about the two well compartments behind each front seat and neither did the manual or manufacturer.

Could those two little compartments be considered "hidden" because they were both beneath floor mats that had to be lifted in order to access them?

[OldCoot]

B47, I think they can tell factory built from custom built, plus they could check another vehicle of the same make and model to verify.

[B47]

Originally Posted by OldCoot

B47, I think they can tell factory built from custom built, plus they could check another vehicle of the same make and model to verify.

Just another loophole - I'm done with this thread. You all carry on.

[Herk7769]

I think all the juice has been sucked out of this lemon.

Time for it to sleep with the fishes...