we tried everything but one thing stop and frisk stop and frisk under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution a police officer may stop a suspect on the street without probable cause what the hell did you say under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution a police officer may stop a suspect on the street without probable cause [Applause] here's the deal here's the deal and here's the deal here's the deal because here's the deal it is a deal either give me your ID or you go to jail how about that catch me outside foreign [Music] as of the recording of this video there's a viral video from the senate floor that was uploaded about 21 hours ago it already has nearly a half a million views and a like to dislike ratio of 11 000 likes to 300 dislikes the name of the video is Justin John Kennedy issues epic warning on senate floor with over 2200 posts in the comments section you'll search in vain for any criticism of what the senator has said and yet it's plain as day that this guy like all senators and congressmen democrat or republican it doesn't matter don't give a damn about our rights they'll talk about the necessity of creating safer cities but their solution is to create a bill that will then become a law that will secure more funding to arm more men with guns so that they can come and take away more of our rights Kennedy talks for nearly eight minutes about how he loves his state of Louisiana and especially the City of New Orleans he informs those on the senate floor that crime is out of control in New Orleans murders rapes carjacking burglary it's all gone Haywire we've tried everything he says but one thing take a listen we've tried paying higher salaries we've tried paying better benefits we've tried curfews we've tried task forces we've tried social programs we've tried after school programs we've tried crime cameras we've tried facial recognition we've tried Conflict Management we've tried mentoring we've tried youth clubs we've tried job training we've tried enhanced educational opportunities we've tried Prosecuting juveniles as adults we've tried Hot Spot policing we've tried 12-hour shifts we've tried hiring administrative Personnel to take the paper workload offer off our cops to get them back on the street you name it Madam president and we have tried it we tried everything but one thing stop and frisk stop and frisk I'm going to let him continue talking about the origins of stop and frisk but before I do stop and frisk is also called a Terry stop as he'll explain from 1968. this is clearly one of those Supreme Court decisions that took a look at our freedoms enshrined in the Fourth Amendment and said screw your unalienable rights to be secure in your person officer safety is way more important than individual rights they say Terry V Ohio could rightly be called the amendment which nullifies the Fourth Amendment listen to the absolute lies this guy spews against your right to be secure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution a police officer may stop a suspect on the street without probable cause this is the fourth amendment we're going to keep this up here while Kennedy spouts his nonsense and you tell me if what he said is found in this Fourth Amendment under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution a police officer may stop a suspect on the street without probable cause where do you see that anywhere in this amendment a police officer may quote stop a suspect on the street without probable cause he said when the document clearly says you have to have probable cause and a warrant and an oath or affirmation that a crime has been committed otherwise it's considered an unreasonable or unconstitutional or unnatural search or seizure and this right to be secure shall not be violated it says the Fourth Amendment says the exact opposite of what Kennedy just said this guy is supposed to be a senator he took an oath to protect the Constitution he's trying to throw in the garbage right now it's almost unbelievable that he said that let's listen to more of this garbage as he tries to justify the violation of our rights and that police officer can stop that person on the street without probable cause so long as that police officer has what's called reasonable suspicion to believe that the person stopped has committed is committing or is about to commit a crime this allows cops to Embark upon the dangerous road of on the spot subjective judgment as they begin fishing for crimes and stripping rights and after that person is stopped if the police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the person stopped might be carrying a weapon the police officer can pat down that person on the outside of his or her clothing that's called stop and frisk Terry V Ohio employs euphemisms so that an uneducated people will be duped into believing the cops aren't violating your rights stop and frisk is a detainment or arrest and a search an unreasonable search you can call it a pat down if you want it's a search as soon as they feel something that they don't like in your pocket they're going to prolong the detention also known as an arrest and put their hands in your pockets it's a very effective law enforcement practice it is used by police officers every day in virtually every city all across America and it has been used since 1968 which means that since 1968 cops have been using the tyrannical Terry V Ohio user patient of the fourth amendment to violate rights while maintaining that they're not violating anybody's rights in 1968 the United States Supreme Court decided a case a very famous case called Terry V Ohio carry the Ohio the the very liberal chief justice I don't use the word liberal in a pejorative sense I'm just describing him as as many scholarly Works have the very liberal chief justice Earl Warren actually wrote the opinion in Terry V Ohio and he was joined in that opinion by justices Hugo Black Justice John Harlan Justice William Brenner Brennan Justice Potter Stewart Justice Byron's white Justice Abe for Fortis and Justice Thurgood Marshall they all said together here's our opinion Terryville Ohio and what did that opinion say before we get to Kennedy's interpretation of what that opinion said let's note that of all the justices that decided to pulverize our fourth amendment rights there was one guy who stood against them Justice William O Douglas who strongly disagreed with permitting cops to stop and search an individual absent probable cause listen to his dissenting opinion and warning he said we hold today that the police have greater authority to make seizure and conduct a search than a judge has to authorize such action we have said precisely the opposite over and over again to give the police greater power than a magistrate is to take a long step down the totalitarian path perhaps such a step is desirable to cope with Mod modern forms of lawlessness but if it is taken it should be the deliberate choice of the people through a constitutional amendment Douglas understood that his colleagues arbitrarily demolished a fundamental right of all Americans by empowering cops to make snap decisions on the street to search people and seize property an action that even judges have no power to authorize it shouldn't be called Terry V Ohio at all it should be called totalitarianism versus America that opinion said that under appropriate circumstances stop and frisk is permissible it is perfectly constitutional under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution everybody who's not a patient in a funny farm and has the ability to read and understand English knows this is a lie Terry V Ohio is perfectly unconstitutional and tyrannical this is part of the reason crime is so high cops are so hated prisons are so full and courts are so prosperous and Yahoo's like this right here feed into this now I want you to note that a police officer cannot stop and frisk somebody on a whim uh on a hunch a cop does not have unfettered discretion Terryville Ohio is a whim it is a hunch and it does give cops unfettered discretion in order for a police officer to to stop a person on the street that police officer let me say it again must have reasonable suspicion Reasonable Suspicion to believe that the person has committed is committing or is about to commit a crime and once again once the person has stopped the cop can Frisk that person on the outside of his clothing called a pat down only if the cop has Reasonable Suspicion to believe that the person stopped is carrying a weapon why does the cop have this authority to protect the cop during during The Question so not only are your Fourth Amendment rights to be secure in your person violated now they want to remove your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms these people are truly evil as they claim to be preventing Evil by infringing on your rights reasonable suspicion is not a hunch it's not a whim it's an objective standard it's not probable cause you have to have probable cause to make an arrest to conduct a search for example someone's home probable cause is a higher standard but reasonable suspicion is an objective standard Reasonable Suspicion exists according to the case law as you know Madam president Reasonable Suspicion exists when an objectively reasonable police officer given the facts and circumstances of that particular situation and considering the cops training and experience would suspect that a person as us had said has committed is committing or or is about to commit a crime so who exactly is going to determine that the cop was reasonably objective you guessed it the police department the police department will investigate themselves and find that they've done nothing wrong or unconstitutional while they're depriving you of your rights and if if if if probable cause is then established of course the person can be arrested every cop in America who goes through training academy and every cop in America does every cop in America knows about stop and frisk every cop in America is trained in the law enforcement practice of stop and frisk and this fundamentally means that every cop in America has been trained to hate Americans and their rights let me give you an example let's suppose a police officer sees an individual late at night walking along the street with a coat hanger or a slim jim do you all know what a slim jim is it's sometimes called a lockout tool it's a way to get into a car if you lost your keys if a police officer sees someone late at night walking down the street with a coat hanger or a slim jim looking in cars the police officer can stop that person can he arrest that person no he is not does not have probable cause no crime has been committed but he has Reasonable Suspicion to stop and talk to that person and once he stops to talk to that person if he sees a big bulge here in his top pocket he he may have Reasonable Suspicion to believe that person has a weapon why would he not have a weapon this is America why would the cop have a problem with an American having a weapon the cop has a weapon the Second Amendment says we have the right to keep and bear a weapon and the cop promised to protect that right to bear a weapon what if the guy has a slim jim because he locked himself out of his own car what if the guy looking into the car is from AAA and he's there because you called him the bottom line is unless you're committing a crime nobody has the right to bother you not even a cop no matter what they suspect and no matter if they think it's reasonable or not and it would be dangerous for him to him the police officer to keep talking to that person so the police officer he can't make him him take his jacket off or anything he can just pass him down to see if there's a weapon now I repeat cops all over America stop and frisk suspects every single day and they have for 50 years and you know who endorses it the United States Supreme Court now like all police practices it can be abused stopping for us can be abused and when it is it can be and it should be challenged in court and the abusing officer should be held accountable but most officers don't abuse it I can't even go on with the lies here we'd be here all day I'll leave the link to the original video in the description I want to hear your thoughts on this so leave them in the comments section below if you like this video maybe you'll like some of my others take a look at my popular videos list there are a lot of videos that a lot of people haven't seen and really should take a look at also I have in my playlist a memorizing rights and laws folder that'll help you memorize the Bill of Rights and some other laws that pertain to securing your freedoms as we navigate through law enforcement minefields you can Loop the videos and memorize these things fairly quickly help me overcome the algorithm by leaving your thoughts in the comment section below if you haven't done so already subscribe to this channel hit the Bell notification icon give this video a like and share it with everybody you know subscribe to my email list or my website highimpactflix.com if you want to support the channel grab a hard-hitting conversation starting design from the store you can put it on a shirt hoodie mug whatever you want I will see you in the next video foreign