Get your Trifolds and 5th Amendment Cop Cards on www.DeleteLawZ.com
Thanks,
Chille
@ChilleDeCastro PayPal
@Chille-DeCastro Venmo
$ChilleDeCastro Cashapp
ZELLE: sohi90069 AT gmail dot com
source
40 thoughts on “MAN WITH TOY CAR GETS AGGRESSIVELY PULLED OVER!”
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This is what happens when cowards have nothing better to do 🖕🖕🖕🤣
A cruiser and a tow truck tops….that is all that is needed.
The bigger question is why do you care? It’s clearly not street legal.
Guys, the police are right in this situation. Having 20 officers show up might be excessive, but this go-kart driver is putting both themselves and others in danger in traffic. This is a very wrong move. If you are going to criticize something, criticize the number of police officers. However, the police stopping this person is absolutely the right decision and a necessary move."
You know you ate in a FACIST country when you have 20 cops to stop 1 guy.
STUPIDITY AT IT'S FINEST!!!!🤔😞🤔😞
DEFUND THE COWARDS NOW!!!!
END QUALIFIED IMMUNITY NOW FOR THESE COWARDS!!!!
Its against the law for it to be pn the road. Chili is a sexual predator snd retarded 😅
This proves police are overfunded. With 20 cops showing up for this proves they have nothing to do.
DID THE PIGS CALL A TOW TRUCK ?🌶️👿💪2-23-26
He should be on the sidewalk. It's weird no one is talking to him
Tax dollars well spent 😂😂😂 yeah right
Its almost as if they were afraid
he's not white. …which explains the blueline cowardness
You imagine if they protect the children this way against predators against child rapist if they protected children the same way to go after innocent people specially innocent Black people because they love shooting them down
It's obviously a prank, they just want a story to tell their buddies, they've got nothing going for them in life, it's sad
That's why police is so hated in America
eon is behind this !!
No lights😮
All getting paid. Some on ot
I'm not surprised, after all we are dealing with low IQ 🤡
I don't agree with a lot of things the police are doing, but not every cop is a bastard or out to get you. So please seek out the rotten ones and don't gaslight the rest. It's getting boring.
Butt hurt 🐖's
He’s not driving, according to Blacks Law Dictionary: Driver: one employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle or motor car, though not a street railroad
car. A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle. Wallace v. Woods, 340 Mo. 452, 102 S.W.2d, 91, 97. The right to travel includes a vehicle and does not require a license or tags or registration or insurance. However, I would carry coverage for insurance personally. In Sáenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999)
Justice Stevens, writing for the majority, found that although the "right to travel" was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the concept was "firmly embedded in our jurisprudence." He described three components of the right to travel:
1. The right to enter one state and leave another;
2. The right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger;
3. For those who want to become permanent residents, the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens.
Because the statute did not directly impair entry or exit from the state, Stevens declined to discuss the first aspect of the right to travel although he did mention that the right was expressly mentioned in the Articles of Confederation. He briefly described the scope of the Art. IV Privileges and Immunities Clause, but the main focus of his opinion was the application of the Fourteenth Amendment. For the proposition that this amendment protected a citizen's right to resettle in other states, Stevens cited the majority opinion in the Slaughter-House Cases:[7]
Despite fundamentally differing views concerning the coverage of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, most notably expressed in the majority and dissenting opinions in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873), it has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel. Writing for the majority in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Miller explained that one of the privileges conferred by this Clause "is that a citizen of the United States can, of his own volition, become a citizen of any State of the Union by a bona fide residence therein, with the same rights as other citizens of that State."
Justice Stevens further held in Sáenz that it was irrelevant that the statute only minimally impaired the plaintiffs' right to travel. The plaintiffs were new to the state of California, but they had the right to be treated the same as long-time residents, especially given that their need for welfare benefits was unrelated to the amount of time they had spent in the state. Furthermore, wrote Stevens, there was no reason for the state to fear that citizens of other states would take advantage of California's relatively generous welfare benefits because the proceeds of each welfare check would be consumed while the plaintiffs remained within the state. This distinguishes them from a "readily portable benefit, such as a divorce or a college education", for which durational residency requirements had been upheld in cases such as Sosna v. Iowa and Vlandis v. Kline.
California justified the statute solely on fiscal grounds, and Stevens held that this justification was insufficient. The state could have found another non-discriminatory way to reduce welfare costs, other than conditioning the welfare benefit amounts of new residents by reference to their length of stay within the state, or their state of prior residence. Moreover, the fact that PRWORA authorized states to set their own benefit levels did not assist in the determining the constitutionality of the state statute because Congress cannot authorize states to violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
"pig tails", Lol
The police just wanted a look at this unique vehicle. I’m sure it was a slow boring night and they just wanted to get a look at it.
How about you do there job for a year and come back and talk about how cops are. If have never did that job u don't have a say.
I know it's not street legal but this is ridiculous! Waste of taxpayers money.
OMG!! SOMETHING DIFFERENT! Must be suspicious.
Shut up you douche canoe
20 cops for this and 0 for the Epstein clients.
If you have that many cops to put on a scene for something like that, then you have way too many cops employed, and you could reduce the taxpayers burden by getting rid of half of those cops
This is how you know this guy is literally spreading misinformation and lies just to push his agenda and create division within us……. This was not a grown man this was a special needs child who also had an illness and loved the lights of cop cars and sirens so they gifted him a car and escorted him because although he was special needs, he had finally overcame his illness. Shows you how disgusting this guy really is to use this video to try and spread hate
COWARDLY, CORRUPT POLICE STATE.
violent animals too terrified to function.
The IDIOCRACY is REAL
Extreme government waste.
He black that why
I used to ride my go-kart as a kid on the neighborhood streets. We were respectful and safe about it. No one cared and the cops just told us to take it home. Until later we ride again!