Operation Rolling Thunder in Upstate SC

[Roadwolf]

Read this this morning and I have to say, I find it to be a rather scathing indictment of these crackdowns on the Interstates, trying to find drugs and other illegal items... what do you guys think of these operations? Those that know my previous posts can figure out where I stand (pretty much opposed to them), but would like to hear others chime in.

 

Operation Rolling Thunder

[Tank]

Well Chris, I believe that I would not have faired well under the circumstances.

1. It is NONE of his business where I go or come from. 2. No you cannot search.

3.You have my license , registration, and insurance papers.... ticket me and let me be on my way.

 

PERIOD

 

 

I also know that the news line is his side of the story...

[tallman]

Don't know about rolling thunder but my security program

cautioned me strongly not to open the link for whatever that is worth.

[Roadwolf]

Tim, that link takes you to the story on a newspaper's local site...

 

Brief synopsis... Operation Rolling Thunder is a law enforcement presence on I-85 in Spartanburg County. Agencies from other jurisdictions in SC, GA, and NC "lend" their officers (about 200 strong) to pull over speeders, etc. and then search vehicles for contraband.

 

The story recounts one guy's encounter with an officer after getting pulled over for following too close (probably the go to infraction for pulling over someone where normal law enforcement wouldn't even give it a second thought). His account is not very positive and how the officer was going into it with an attitude/agenda.

 

More to it in the link, but a pretty interesting take from his perspective. Granted the other side is not presented here and to read the FB comments at the bottom, the locals are siding with the local and very much beloved Sheriff Chuck Wright.

 

First time I saw this years ago, it was startling to see Sheriff Deputies Crown Vics from the lower part of the state parked every quarter mile or so.

[Dave McReynolds]

Similar to our "zero tolerance days" on the interstates around here. They are announced in the newspapers beforehand. The only reason I can imagine for that is to avoid riling the locals too much (or at least the ones who read the newspaper). At least they stick to whatever traffic law was violated (however slightly) and don't seem to fish around too much for other things.

 

Whenever I hear about these things, I think that for all the yelling and gnashing of teeth, perhaps the law enforcement budgets still haven't been cut quite enough. And I'm not generally known as a budget-cutting hawk.

[Mike]

Read this this morning and I have to say, I find it to be a rather scathing indictment of these crackdowns on the Interstates, trying to find drugs and other illegal items... what do you guys think of these operations? Those that know my previous posts can figure out where I stand (pretty much opposed to them), but would like to hear others chime in.

 

Operation Rolling Thunder

 

Chris, I think they're horrific. Taking the author's story at face value, it appears that the operation was predicated on the notion of mass "pretext stops," which have been upheld as legal, but which I think are often abused. Ultimately, a great deal of law enforcement manpower is used and the results are generally minimal when measured against the amount of time and money invested.

 

What often results from these publicity-seeking stunts is little more than an intrusion into the lives and privacy of many law-abiding individuals on flimsy pretexts such as "following too closely," when in fact the purported violation would not get a second glance from an LEO who was patrolling in an earnest effort to maximize public safety.

 

Generally, it strikes me that this sort of thing is absolutely nothing more than an effort to stoke the egos and reputation of individuals--often county sheriffs--who want to project an image that will appeal to the electorate. Many of the cops who get sucked into these things likely would tell you the same thing.

[Albert]

It's behavior like this that caused the Conch Republic to secede from the Union . . . successfully.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

I think most folks living in America don't realize they have the right to remain silent - even before they are advised of that right.

 

They also have the right to refuse consent for a search of their vehicle (though the officer may search it anyway if he has a search warrant or if contraband is in plain sight through the window of your vehicle).

 

It's likely Mr. DiRico's encounter would have been much shorter than 45 minutes if he had made it clear he wasn't going to answer any questions (other than identifying himself) and if he had refused to allow a search of his vehicle.

 

He might also have more impact on future law enforcement operations if he wrote letters about his experience to the elected representatives in the South Carolina state government.

[upflying]

Here we have a one-sided, hearsay, biased hit piece by some cop hater citizen writing to the newspaper editorial page.

I don't see how any of us could intelligently comment on Mr. Dircco's expereince without hearing the other side of the story.

None of us were there.

[malcolmblalock]

While this story is not about operation "Rolling Thunder", I had an experience a few weeks ago that left me understanding how innocent people can be convicted inappropriately.

 

Returning from the Unrally on Sunday, July 29, I spent Saturday night in Dodge City, KS. Sunday morning I got up early (before daylight) to beat the heat and started east towards Missouri.

 

Riding on US 160 I stopped for breakfast in Harper, KS at about 9:15am. Leaving Harper, I rode east, staying on US 160, which has a speed limit of 65mph. I set the cruise control for 71 and just rode through the nothingness of KS.

 

In about 25 minutes, I got bored and got out my camera to take a couple shots of the landscape and road in front of me. I do this sometimes when there's no traffic. A few seconds later, I heard a noise, looked in my rear view mirrors, and there were two KS highway patrol cars with blue lights flashing directly behind me. One was behind me and the other was in the left lane.

 

Since I knew I hadn't done anything illegal except speeding 6mph over the limit, I was shocked by the sight. I immediately pulled over and stopped. When I got stopped, I looked in the rear view mirrors again and they were stopped behind me, had the front doors of both cruisers open, and they were crouching behind the doors with pistols pointing at me and yelling something I could not understand.

 

I couldn't hear what they were saying, so I removed my helmet, pulled out my ear plugs and then heard them screaming for me to get off the bike and to lay down on the road on my stomach.

 

I did that immediately. A few seconds later, one of the men ordered me to move my right arm behind my back; I did. Then an order to move my left arm behind my back. I did, and was now handcuffed for the first time in my life. I still didn't have any idea why they were going to this extreme for speeding.

 

Then I was ordered to roll over and to stand up. I couldn't. A 64 year old man in "normal" shape cannot get up with handcuffs behind his back. I was ordered again, but told them I couldn't get up without some help. Then one of the officers let me push off him to rise.

 

The two officers were firing questions at me as fast as I could answer them. I don't remember all the questions, but the younger officer asked reasonable questions and seemed to consider my response. The older officer asked accusatory questions that made me guilty of something.

 

Finally the younger officer said I had "Blew by him", and that he started after me, "chasing" me for over 3 miles. He even called in the second car. He said he saw me waving something around in the air and thought it was a gun (actually the camera). He thought that because I did not stop immediately for the blue lights and siren, I was trying to elude them, and was under arrest for speeding and attempting to elude law enforcement officers.

 

Answering his questions honestly, he came to understand that the "gun" was a camera and that I did not stop because I did not see them and did not hear them. I also iterated repeatedly that I was not speeding fast; the fastest I went was 71mph. And I explained that I don't run from law enforcement but if I were I certainly would have gone faster than 71.

 

After a while, he announced that he was going to take my word for it on the trying to evade charges, but that he was not sure what he was going to do about the speeding. At one point early in the incident, he said I was doing 81 when I "blew by him". I wasn't and repeated that.

 

Finally, he said he was going to let me go, but warned me that when he called in that they had a pursuit going on, that all law enforcement within 100 miles had my bike information and would be on the lookout for me. And that they would stop me for any infraction and carry me to jail.

 

Needless to say, I was stunned, dumbfounded, and very scared. It was 10:30am, in the middle of nowhere in Kansas, and I was alone. I had done nothing worthy of their initial treatment. I was simply trying to get back home in NC; was not in a particular hurry; and minding my own business.

 

The younger officer was generally reasonable and did listen to what I had to say. The other officer had me guilty of whatever came to mind. I am 100% certain that if the older one had been in charge and alone, I would have ended up in a jail in KS. Even as they were leaving, the older one was making accusatory statements to me. He was very scary and I am sure terrorizing people on the roads of southern KS.

 

After I got home, I decided to check my tracks on my GPS to see if somewhere along the way I actually did speed as accused. I was able to find the tracks of that day, checked them carefully, found where the stop was made, and I was riding at 71mph for 13 miles before the place stopped. I have no idea why I was stopped. I do understand their actions after they saw my camera and I did not stop. I would love to know the real reason they stopped me.

 

For those who might say that I was foolish for taking pictures while riding, perhaps I was. But when you're on a road and see a car maybe every 15-20 minutes, have cruise control, and are paying attention, I don't think it's a high-risk activity. I took 3 pictures and was in the process of putting away the camera when I heard the siren.

 

I wanted to share this story to illustrate another case of police activities that (IMO) are questionable. I will never ride in Kansas again. And I hope this never happens to anyone again.

[upflying]

Sounds like KHP explained why you were treated like that. They thought you had a gun and you were not yielding to the emergency lights and siren.With a helmet, they do not know you are 64.

LEO's are trained to prone out people on the ground if they feel they are armed. What they did to you is approved procedure.

Once they were confident your explanation sounded reasonable you were dusted off and sent on your way.

BTW, do not try to take photos while driving a motorcycle. That is distracted driving and treated like cell phones and texting in many jurisdictions. Had you been paying attention none of this would have happened.

Yes, the cop lied about you going 81. That's why you did not get a ticket.

 

[Mike]

Sounds like KHP explained why you were treated like that. They thought you had a gun and you were not yielding to the emergency lights and siren.With a helmet, they do not know you are 64.

LEO's are trained to prone out people on the ground if they feel they are armed. What they did to you is approved procedure.

Once they were confident your explanation sounded reasonable you were dusted off and sent on your way.

BTW, do not try to take photos while driving a motorcycle. That is distracted driving and treated like cell phones and texting in many jurisdictions. Had you been paying attention none of this would have happened.

Yes, the cop lied about you going 81. That's why you did not get a ticket.

 

Bob, I have to call "baloney" to your response. Sometimes cops just blow it. This is one of those times.

[Dave McReynolds]

And I have to call baloney to the baloney.

 

A LEO turns on his lights and follows a motorcycle. The motorcycle ignores the LEO long enough that the LEO feels like he needs to call in backup, and then more time passes until the backup arrives. How can this be "a few seconds later?"

 

Maybe not the equivalent of OJ's slow speed chase, but certainly long enough to get the hair up on any LEO's neck.

 

I would suggest that it is unwise to engage in any activity on a MC that takes your attention away from the road that long.

 

That said, we gentlemen in our 60's feel that we deserve a little more respect than was shown here, and I'm sure I would be as pi$$ed as the poster. Now whether we really do deserve more respect...not everyone is in agreement on that. But we certainly feel like we do.

[Mike]

I dunno. I think we often imagine that a police officer should be held to a lower standard of rational observation than the rest of us, when anyone who's been in that seat knows better. Think about it--touring bike, dude in full safety gear, max of 6 over the limit, and a camera in hand. It's been a bajillion years since I've made a traffic stop and I think that even I, decrepit as I am, could easily assess the situation.

 

Poor situational assessment is not the necessary product of heightened awareness. In fact, if the copper is competent, just the opposite is the case. I say this as someone who routinely confronts suspected felons--albeit admittedly white collar types--in settings that are highly unexpected by the subjects and are calculated to induce stress. I don't claim to be the ultimate authority on judging others' intentions, but I think I have a reasonable handle on the assessment of individuals in those situations. People in my position--and I do not claim to be anything more than a mere bureaucrat--and that of the officers involved in stops Ike this should be held to the highest standards of competence, not a one-size-fits-all reaction that mistakes a geriatric moto-photographer (sorry, siman00 ) for a felon. Assuming that he described the situation correctly, it's a gross overreaction. Perhaps honest in its genesis, but the result of piss poor observational skills.

 

Seriously--and I speak as someone who's about as pro law enforcement as can be--if described accurately, this was poor policing on the part of the young gent whose assessment of the situation was seriously flawed.

[David13]

America doesn't respect old people. They are all ga ga over young people.

I never had a problem. Maybe I just don't look suspicious.

They have a lot of roadblocks in Mexico. They ask where are you coming from. Los Angeles. They wave me on. Where are you going to. Cabo San Lucas. They wave me on.

I do speak Spanish.

One told me, you look suspicious! I pulled up my visor. He said, now you are ok. And waved me on.

I know they have a lot of problems with drugs, and they want to confiscate as much as possible, here, or North Carolina.

I just say take a look, I have no drugs. And they let you go.

dc

[Mike]

BTW Bob, nothing personal in my "baloney" comment...but I'd bet a seasoned professional Iike you would have a much different reaction. One that would not result in drawn weapons.

[malcolmblalock]

It was truly a weird experience, and, as I said, after the younger officer asked and I answered his questions and he thought about it, all was well. Now, after lots of thinking through the situation, I cannot fault them for doing what they did. However, I cannot understand what got his attention in the first place. While I am "geriatric" (no offense taken), I know how fast I was going, and the last time it was 81 was on the Interstate in Colorado. So, I don't see what caused him to come after me. The picture-taking took place probably 1 minute before I heard the siren. So, he did not stop me for "waiving a gun". The "waiving" happened just before the end.

 

I guess I was guilty of distracted riding for taking the pics. However, it was less than using the GPS to find gas or changing the station on a radio. I didn't even look at the viewfinder on the side shots. I did glance at the shot of the road in front of me. And with NO traffic and a good two lane road that has sight distances that measure in miles, I see that as pretty low-risk.

 

Maybe he just needed to stop someone and I was the lucky guy....

 

Surreal, yes. Scary, yes. Appropriate action after the "chase", yes. Sufficient cause to stop me initially, no.

[tallman]

"For those who might say that I was foolish for taking pictures while riding, perhaps I was. But when you're on a road and see a car maybe every 15-20 minutes, have cruise control, and are paying attention, I don't think it's a high-risk activity. I took 3 pictures and was in the process of putting away the camera when I heard the siren".

 

While your treatment was excessive, I would respectfully submit that if you rode for miles, 3 or more, with a police car flashing lights and possibly siren on, without stopping, then actually, for you, it was a high risk behaviour.

 

When we don't notice huge changes in our riding environment because we are engaged in a non-riding activity while riding,

risks escalate exponentially.

 

I imagine that if you had stopped immediately the LEO response would have been very different.

Maybe not, we'll never know.

 

I had a police officer appproach me rapidly and unexpectedly

while I slowed (due to traffic for an accident that was down the road) in rural Georgia.

My attention was on the road/vehicles ahead and it surprised me becasue I regularly check my six.

Because of the known threat/change ahead I allowed myself to focus there.

That was a mistake as I found out becasue it diverted my attention from my regular scan in all directions.

I check six every 5 seconds or so but had gone at least a minute without doing so.

I learned a good lesson and when I find myself in a low traffic rural setting, or anywhere, I continue to do my due dilligence because to fail to do so is a high risk behaviour on a motorcycle, IMO.

YMMV

[FLrider]

I would respectfully submit that if you rode for miles, 3 or more, with a police car flashing lights and possibly siren on, without stopping, then actually, for you, it was a high risk behaviour.

 

 

 

I had a similar situation. When the cop pulled me over and asked me why I hadn't stopped 3 miles earlier I told him that my wife had left me for a cop a few weeks ago. I thought he was the same cop bringing her back !

 

Baa da boom....

[Husker Red]

Sufficient cause to stop me initially, no.

Well, you were going 6 over, right? There you go.

I think handcuffing you was overkill, but if you were actually riding for 3 minutes with them following you with lights and siren that might look like you weren't planning to stop.