One for the bashers....Reasonable Suspicion

[Swami]

I didn't know it was against the law for a cop to stop you just "because"... I've been stopped several times, frisked, had to wait while they looked up my ID... I was told I "fit the description of someone they were looking for," each time. These were all when I was a long-haired kid in Monroe, btw.

At all times I was calm, polite, and compliant, which is possibly why I'm NOT complaining about having gotten my arse kicked.


It's too bad all the police don't have the special "Seagal Sense," so that they can psychically "know" who is the bad guy and who isn't.

 

[Bayoupiper]

I'll bet you from now on Officer Hasiak writes his reports differently!




.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I'll bet you from now on Officer Hasiak writes his reports differently!




.

 

[herohog]

But it is not illegal to conceal "something". It is only illegal to conceal certain things in certain situations.......right?

Isn't profiling illegal anyway?

As to the first, not being a lawyer or familiar enough with the law in that area, I can't honestly answer that. I can only offer what I think is morally "right".

On the second, it SEEMS to be (illegal), and if based solely on race, I don't believe it should be. I would like to see profiling, based on valid statistical data, not race, allowed as a tool to initially stop and question only. Any farther action, searching etc, in my opinion, should be based on more solid and defensible evidence.

 

[Hardballing]

Good basic decision by the 8th. Simply establishing that the limits, or rather reaffirming the limits in Terry, still stand.

Only other thought I had as I read all the other posts was related to the comment that Officer Hiack will now write his reports differently. That would be a bad thing imo. It appears he told the truth and in the proper context. Both in his report (assumption on my part) and in the comments by the author.

To begin playing lawyer at the street level opens up a VERY slippery slope. NYPD years ago had a name for it, Testi-lying, and it is an abuse of power. And it ALL starts with bending the truth such as adding the tiny detail that "I thought the shape of the object resembled a firearm". A lie is a lie and officers should not engage in them. EVER and on no level.

End o rant. Party on.

 

[Geardo]

Have you ever been the victim of a violent crime?

I've had people TRY to commit violent acts on me.

 

[flamatrix99]

Have you ever been the victim of a violent crime?

No I haven't... A few things stolen over the yeaars but usually that was my fault. Once I left a tool box in the bed of my truck for a few weeks. I kept saying I need to take it in but I didn't and it was stolen.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I've had people TRY to commit violent acts on me.

Then I would consider that still a victim. kinda like I consider most aggravated batteries conceptually speaking as incomplete murders.


I just think you will be hard pressed to find someone who has been raped, had a family member murdered, been robbed at gunpoint, etc, share your way of thinking.

I understand what the courts are saying, but I think we have to adapt our tactics to meet the criminal element. i have no problem being searched if it allows officers to search people like the one in the court case.

I do not agree with Benjamin Franklin;'s famous quote. In my opinion while very motivating and it stirs the emotions, it is illogical when compared against the reality of crime today.

 

[W1nds0rF0x]

They had no right to stop and search him,

I agree with that

these cops should get 20 years for that alone.

OKay, that's just really a stupid remark. I mean, really.

2nd prohibiting a felon from owning a firearm is Unconstitutional

Oh, dear, I just THOUGHT the previous remark was stupid. I was wrong again...

3rd this guys felony conviction was for a drug offense, and no government has the right to make the use, distribution, or manufacture of ANY drug illegal

Of course they do. They may be incorrect in some cases, but if it's truely dangerous, of course they do.

I find point No.2 repugnantly silly.

 

[hdfinder47]

I agree with that





OKay, that's just really a stupid remark. I mean, really.



Oh, dear, I just THOUGHT the previous remark was stupid. I was wrong again...



Of course they do. They may be incorrect in some cases, but if it's truely dangerous, of course they do.

I find point No.2 repugnantly silly.

Chill, FOX - I'm sure he was jk. At least I'm purty sure he was jk. Well, I certainly HOPE that he was jk.

 

[James Cannon]

"Adapt our tactics to fit the criminal element" is one helluva slippery slope and quite a scary statement.

The crappy side of maintaining innocent people's rights and liberties... is that we have to give them to scumbags until we can prove they're scumbags.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

"Adapt our tactics to fit the criminal element" is one helluva slippery slope and quite a scary statement.

The crappy side of maintaining innocent people's rights and liberties... is that we have to give them to scumbags until we can prove they're scumbags.

i agree it is a slippery slope.


But then how to you prove they are scumbags when their way of being scumbags outpaces your ability to prove it with current doctrine?


What if we continued to fight wars like we did in the revolutionary war. All in line marching straight ahead to the other side while out enemy was using all the technology we know today?

you have to keep up with your adversary, and ou criminal element is way more crafty than you may think.

 

[W1nds0rF0x]

Chill, FOX - I'm sure he was jk. At least I'm purty sure he was jk. Well, I certainly HOPE that he was jk.

meh... I doubt it...

 

[Nolacopusmc]

meh... I doubt it...

I have to agree with the foxy on this one.

 

[kcinnick]

If it is appropriate to let someone out of prison, then it should be appropriate for that person to purchase a firearm. The problem occurs when we let people out of prison who have no business being released back into society. I don't think Geardo is off base with the point that those who have served their time should have the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[W1nds0rF0x]

If it is appropriate to let someone out of prison, then it should be appropriate for that person to purchase a firearm. The problem occurs when we let people out of prison who have no business being released back into society. I don't think Geardo is off base with the point that those who have served their time should have the right to keep and bear arms.

To that I will say yes, but no. IMO it depends on what the felony was, and how long ago it was. Just because you got out fairly soon because you were a model prisoner, does not mean you should be allowed to pack. AND I will say that inside his own home yes, but as we all know the vast majority of felons who get out do not leave their fire arm at home.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

i think we need more use of the death penalty. If you cannot be let back into society, then why are you alive?

Life in prison should be commuted to death.

 

[kcinnick]

Just to be clear, I am not advocating allowing released felons to possess firearms under our current system, our current system is flawed. However, laws are just as good as "NO GUN" signs to a criminal.

 

[hdfinder47]

Wonder how all the libs would react when they find out that the thug that just invaded their home with a 9mm, shot their wife and raped their dog before cleaning out their gun cabinet was looked at by a LEO minutes before as being a suspicous person with a possible concealed weapon, but didn't do the stop cuz he knew a lib judge would kick it? We gotta' go back to common sense somehow.

 

[Leonidas]

If it is appropriate to let someone out of prison, then it should be appropriate for that person to purchase a firearm. The problem occurs when we let people out of prison who have no business being released back into society. I don't think Geardo is off base with the point that those who have served their time should have the right to keep and bear arms.

+1

I'm guessing that violent criminals and prisons both existed when the framers enacted the 2nd Amendment. They apparently believed that, having paid one's debt to society, one is entitled to the full complement of rights. I have no problem with longer sentences, but when you're done you should be done.

Submitted respectfully