[TalonDJ]

There is a reason the officer needs (not wants) to engage the driver in conversation. The need is derived from identifying impaired drivers. The need is derived from law. Evading conversation is interfering with the officers duty.

Nonsense. The cop could have talked about anything else. The kid just did not want to discuss his personally life. The cop could have continued the conversation on any other topic.

[miliantnutcase]

That's true, and they had no probable cause to search his vehicle.

[photodawg]

Nonsense. The cop could have talked about anything else. The kid just did not want to discuss his personally life. The cop could have continued the conversation on any other topic.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

The "kid" rolled up to the road block with camera rolling. Are you really naive enough to think that he is an innocent kid. The man is trying unsuccessfully to "set up" and bait the officers into infringing upon his "rights" and to portray the police in a bad light. Asking where you are headed tonight is not a personal question, unless you are overly defensive. The roads are populated with citizens who have a perfect right to know they are safe and protected. The boy didn't have to tell the officer anything personal. He could have answered the question by saying, just up the road to the next town, or some other such generalized answer. He chose to refuse to answer the question. At that point the officer rightfully became suspicious of the motivation for refusing to answer such an innocuous question. Was the boy under the influence? Was he mad about something that had just occurred? Was he hiding something? Cooperation will ease the officers suspicions while resistance, no matter how subtle, will increase them. People with a chip on their shoulder about police authority usually act defensively, arousing further suspicion. At any time the boy chose to cooperate, the officer would have deescalated the intimidation.