![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 21, 5:00 pm, "Maxwell" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... Well, I don't know what police state you live in, but in the state of Idaho, police don't get to go around demanding to see your ID on the spot unless you are doing something that is in violation of a law. They don't get to pull you over either unless they have have violated a traffic law. Double check the laws in your state. Your statement is incorrect. I believe *your* statement to be incorrect. In my state of North Carolina (as well as the law in the other states I'm familiar with), a vehicle may not be legally stopped without some reason, such as a traffic violation. And you may read Terry v. Ohio on the question whether a pedestrian may be stopped, but you can't just stop any pedestrian without some reasonable suspicion. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government. It has been incorporated into state law by the 14th Amendment. For a while cops set up traffic stops and stopped every car coming through. When they found the courts were throwing out their cases for these dragnets in violation of the Fourth, they then began putting up signs with "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" or "Sobriety Checkpoint Ahead" and nabbing the motorists who hung a "U" or turned off at the next connector. Now that's not to say that cops don't break the law because there are few sanctions against them with any teeth. You're not ordinarily going to get into the bad cop's pocketbook or get a lien on his house, but you can file a motion to suppress evidence he has seized from you in violation of your 4th Amendment rights and pursuant to the landmark Scotus case known as Mapp vs. Ohio. And if the cop doesn't lie you'll usually win. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "jl" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 21, 5:00 pm, "Maxwell" wrote: wrote in message Well, I don't know what police state you live in, but in the state of Idaho, police don't get to go around demanding to see your ID on the spot unless you are doing something that is in violation of a law. They don't get to pull you over either unless they have have violated a traffic law. Double check the laws in your state. Your statement is incorrect. I believe *your* statement to be incorrect. In my state of North Carolina (as well as the law in the other states I'm familiar with), a vehicle may not be legally stopped without some reason, such as a traffic violation. And you may read Terry v. Ohio on the question whether a pedestrian may be stopped, but you can't just stop any pedestrian without some reasonable suspicion. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government. It has been incorporated into state law by the 14th Amendment. Dean was stating a violation was required in both examples, and that's not correct. In fact agree with your comments, on both the pedestrian or vehicle stop, only resonable suspicion is required. For a while cops set up traffic stops and stopped every car coming through. When they found the courts were throwing out their cases for these dragnets in violation of the Fourth, they then began putting up signs with "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" or "Sobriety Checkpoint Ahead" and nabbing the motorists who hung a "U" or turned off at the next connector. We still have these in Oklahoma on a limited basis, an they are very effective. Every time they do it, they kill their limit in less than a shift. Drunks, expired licenses and registration, no insurance, you name it. I'm not at all familuar with the case law in them, but I do know they excercise some precautions. Announcing when and where to the media for publication in advance, and moving them around the county to avoid being accused of targeting a specific area, are two that I recall. I think the reason you don't see more of them is more policy than constitutional. It creates a real public relations nightmare. Unfortunitly, you have to greatly inconvenience and sometimes even traumatize about 20 honest, hard working citizens to catch one bad guy, and the loss of public support for the police is just not worth it. If you no longer see them in your area, I would speculate it more of a city, county or state policy. Policing agencies are very aware of their need for public support, and when every old lady going to church gets shook down in a roadblock out on the highway on the way in, they will reassemble an return on you, or at least to city hall. Now that's not to say that cops don't break the law because there are few sanctions against them with any teeth. You're not ordinarily going to get into the bad cop's pocketbook or get a lien on his house, but you can file a motion to suppress evidence he has seized from you in violation of your 4th Amendment rights and pursuant to the landmark Scotus case known as Mapp vs. Ohio. And if the cop doesn't lie you'll usually win. I also agree that some cops often break the law, or at least push the limits, and that reasonable suspicion creates an often abused gray area. There have been at least three cop books written that I'm aware of, that promote techniques on how to verbally swindle citizens out of their constitutional rights to search their vehicle without a warrant. It's done by playing word games to con you into giving consent. I think that both the books and the techniques should be illegal, but unfortunately they are not. But I can also honestly say that 95% of the cops I have known, don't play those games. It's just not necessary to do a good job, and regardless of what we hear in the sensationalized cases, cops often loose their jobs or get passed over for promotion, if they establish a pattern of that kind of behavior. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "jl" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 21, 5:00 pm, "Maxwell" wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Well, I don't know what police state you live in, but in the state of Idaho, police don't get to go around demanding to see your ID on the spot unless you are doing something that is in violation of a law. They don't get to pull you over either unless they have have violated a traffic law. Double check the laws in your state. Your statement is incorrect. I believe *your* statement to be incorrect. In my state of North Carolina (as well as the law in the other states I'm familiar with), a vehicle may not be legally stopped without some reason, such as a traffic violation. And you may read Terry v. Ohio on the question whether a pedestrian may be stopped, but you can't just stop any pedestrian without some reasonable suspicion. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government. It has been incorporated into state law by the 14th Amendment. With all the convoluted and selectively enforced laws on the books, a cop can pretty much decide that he saw you spit out the window, or stepped on a crack, or whatever, and use that as his reasonable suspicion argument... For a while cops set up traffic stops and stopped every car coming through. When they found the courts were throwing out their cases for these dragnets in violation of the Fourth, they then began putting up signs with "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" or "Sobriety Checkpoint Ahead" and nabbing the motorists who hung a "U" or turned off at the next connector. Now that's not to say that cops don't break the law because there are few sanctions against them with any teeth. You're not ordinarily going to get into the bad cop's pocketbook or get a lien on his house, but you can file a motion to suppress evidence he has seized from you in violation of your 4th Amendment rights and pursuant to the landmark Scotus case known as Mapp vs. Ohio. And if the cop doesn't lie you'll usually win. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lexan Bend Radius | J.Kahn | Home Built | 10 | December 7th 06 04:09 PM |
Cessna 303 Down in South Bend | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 16 | November 17th 06 11:12 PM |
Big Bend, Texas airport? | Rachel | Piloting | 1 | January 23rd 06 03:18 AM |
Bend, OR (S07) to OSH route suggestions | Jack Allison | Piloting | 4 | April 12th 04 09:19 PM |
birch ply- Bend oregon? | patrick mitchel | Home Built | 0 | January 16th 04 12:40 AM |