I'm on a slow connection, so the video isn't working very well. I had no audio, and all I got to see before it locked up was the subtitling "it was perfectly legal for me to have my window down this much and we could see and hear each other clearly..."

That being about the only specific thing I can address, I'll say this much: the officer is not asking you to roll your window down just to facilitate communication. It's also so that he can see your hands, i.e. for his own personal safety and - ultimately - yours as well. When you refuse to do something as simple as rolling down your window, you think you're simply exercising a right, while he thinks you're doing something he doesn't want you to see. Something which could ultimately harm him or someone else. I bring this up because the perceptions of the individual are usually not the same as those of the officer, which may be why people assume some things to be "perfectly" OK, while an officer does not, leading to confrontation on some level.

Here's a common term which isn't actually used in any of the reports I've ever written, but which could probably be used to effectively sum up many interactions with people who feel the need to display their "rights" while simultaneously filming it for youtube fame: "a$$hole."

This goes not only for this guy, but the "don't tase me bro" guy, some of the open gun carriers, and everyone who loves to see how far they can push it, with the primary interest being fame - not making a case for a legally-given right (which is done in a courtroom - not on the street).

Regardless whether one believes this is a violation of the 4th Amendment, it's obviously legal in the location where this is going on. So this officer is doing a job that obviously has the force of law behind it in that jurisdiction. If you disagree, don't drive there. And again, if you think it should be changed, take it to court - i.e. the place where unjust laws get changed. Don't grandstand or try to put on a show, potentially putting yourself or others at risk.

As far as what I would do or what my agency expects... My job is not to perform traffic stops. I've done them in my career, but it's not my mission, nor am I anywhere near as good at them as the guys and gals who do it all the time.

That said, I have dealt with people like this in the field and my reaction has always been to be professional and polite, record everything (not for youtube, but to protect myself), and make a note of their identifying information for future reference. And to share with my colleagues. If they're clearly doing something illegal, any chance at discretion is gone by virtue of behaving like an a$$hole, and they're getting a ticket, a la the "get what you give" rationale, which almost always holds true.

Now, what the officer CAN do in a case like this is refuse to allow the person to continue with whatever legal privilege they're currently exercising. For this guy: "OK, you're not going to be driving anywhere unless you submit to this checkpoint...".

But as the officer, you have to decide if it's worth it, based on your limited interaction with the guy. Is he just a moron, or is he a drunk, using the argument of exercising his legal rights in order to get out of the checkpoint? If it's the latter, he needs to stop, period, because you're talking about putting lives at risk. If he's just a tool, it may not be worth the hassle. The officer could always let him go, jot down his tag number, and mail him a summons for refusing to submit (or whatever the violation is in that state).

But that's a decision to be made at the time, by the officer on the scene - not by me, looking at an internet video several days later. I have no idea how long this officer may have been out there or what kind of night he was having, and despite the goal of being professional, he's human, just like the rest of us.

Tough issue, because DUI is most definitely a serious problem. And as much as I hate to admit it, it's not taken as seriously as it should, especially here in the midwest.