Member 34319
- Messages
- 17,146
- Reactions
- 37,069
It's me questioning things, is that ok?Thousands if motorists are lawfully pulled over every month solely for expired tags. 99.999999999% of them are not killed by police. Why is that?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's me questioning things, is that ok?Thousands if motorists are lawfully pulled over every month solely for expired tags. 99.999999999% of them are not killed by police. Why is that?
You have to remember as long as you're not on parole ect. LE have to have consent from you to search your body or vehicle. They need that or a warrant. If you give them consent you can stop the search at any point and time. If LE is fishing they can only get so far if you have nothing to hide. You still have rights that are protecting you. Where as your rights are thrown out the window with red flag laws. I'm not trying to persuade you just trying to give you some insight. They can't just dig through your personal property whenever they want. Just be aware of case laws that have founded things like the clear view doctrine ect. If you get pulled over for a tail light and have nothing to hide and are professional and polite with the officer you will be on your way. Give them an attitude and they may just decide to write that ticket or look a little deeper than the originally had intended.You make some good points.
Those that favor red flag laws could argue that you can have your say and if you don't like your charges, you can take them to court and fight it.
I do believe these are similar. You have not completely sold me they are not.
Speeding, duh. Fishing till you find something because the officer believes you to be a criminal (sounds like a few steps were slipped or a judgement was made), I can't call that the exact same as having officers showing up at your house to take your guns, but it sure is similar.
From a rights perspective, it certainly puts the 4th amendment into question.
I should have the right to not be looked at and judged to be a criminal, so that a cop fishes to find legal, or not, reasons to pull me over.
It's me questioning things, is that ok?
A lot of times they won't say why they stopped you immediately cause they are going to get all your information first. Run it. And then come back to you when they know who they are dealing with. It also allows you to self incriminate yourself. If you start saying what you did wrong without them saying anything and it's recorded than you have self incriminated yourself without them even having to say anything and that is completely legal. Criminals talk. And in effect shoot themselves in the foot a lot of time.I have zero arguments if pulled over and this is takes place.
Ive seen stops where the officer doesn't state the reason for the stop. This should be the first thing out of their mouths in my opinion. To %100 clarify the stop was legal.
If they can't articulate the reason for the stop, it's legality is questionable.
I've seen plenty of footage where a cop pulls someone over, does not give driver reason for stop. Immediately asked for license and registration. If at any moment a person knows or shows they know their right to have the cop state the legal reason for doing so, god forbid they question the legality of the reason, the cops tend to escalate.
Again, not saying it's what happened to Mr Wright, just illustrating that it happens, and is being privately documented more and more. Which likely means it happens a lot to a lot of people and they just "go along" with it.
No need to try and persuade, I'm learning a lot. I'm guessing you are or were LEO? No worries if you don't wish to state that personal information.You have to remember as long as you're not on parole ect. LE have to have consent from you to search your body or vehicle. They need that or a warrant. If you give them consent you can stop the search at any point and time. If LE is fishing they can only get so far if you have nothing to hide. You still have rights that are protecting you. Where as your rights are thrown out the window with red flag laws. I'm not trying to persuade you just trying to give you some insight. They can't just dig through your personal property whenever they want. Just be aware of case laws that have founded things like the clear view doctrine ect. If you get pulled over for a tail light and have nothing to hide and are professional and polite with the officer you will be on your way. Give them an attitude and they may just decide to write that ticket or look a little deeper than the originally had intended.
Sorry, I don't believe I'm breaking any rules. I really try not to. There are two here I've had really good conversations with and it's been really helpful to get a better understanding of outlooks on law enforcement.That's perfectly fine, that's what our forum is about.
Provisions being, staying within the rules, staying on topic and avoiding sophistry.
This topic is currently turning into sophistry, if it continues, unfortunately the thread will be locked.
That's where I think a lot of the trouble is starting to develop lately. More people are learning their rights and starting to question this. Sadly, some cops turn it into being uncooperative and then escalate. Seen lots of nasty stops because the driver questions or refuses to identify until reason for stop is articulated. Then cop goes for refusal to comply.A lot of times they won't say why they stopped you immediately cause they are going to get all your information first. Run it. And then come back to you when they know who they are dealing with. It also allows you to self incriminate yourself. If you start saying what you did wrong without them saying anything and it's recorded than you have self incriminated yourself without them even having to say anything and that is completely legal. Criminals talk. And in effect shoot themselves in the foot a lot of time.
Kinda. It's hard to explain over text. I have never been a civilian LEO but I was a MP in the Marines and had to enforce California state law, Federal law, Base codes, and the UCMJ. A lot of moving parts. I learned a ton during my time in the Marines. There are ways that you can get in a lot of trouble as a LEO and can get cases tossed easy. It's also fairly easy to communicate and manipulate people into telling the truth and admitting to crime. It just takes time and practice and mistakes. Biggest difference between red flag laws and criminal conviction/citation is due process and your right to search and seizure. One allows it and the other doesn't.No need to try and persuade, I'm learning a lot. I'm guessing you are or were LEO? No worries if you don't wish to state that personal information.
Im coming to understand the tactic of fishing a lot due to our conversation here. I'll admit I was entirely shocked by the "skinhead" post earlier. While I understand it, at the same time the constitutionality of it is questionable, especially since there is no law against being a skinhead.
I would say this, using your words in or out of context to illustrate.
Red flag laws must go through law enforcement, something must "flag" the person to be looked at. Just like something must "flag" the cops attention during fishing.
Yes, if you did nothing wrong, you move along from a traffic stop. If you did nothing wrong in a red flag situation, you can get you guns back.
Again, not exactly the same, but similar.
Both are working on the basis of crime prevention rather than enforcement. One only has the convenient use of lawful detainment by means of having a foot in the door by means of a traffic stop. Ones only the 4th amendment in question where the other is the 2nd and 4th.
You are required to identify yourself/show proof of idea if pulled over. Now if a cop randomly walks up to you on the street and demands it without you doing anything wrong then you don't have to surrender it. Ask if you are being detained. If they say no than continue on your day. It's not a good look though. If you have no reason to hide your ID why not comply, be courteous and show it. That will go leaps and bounds further than arguing with the cop over identification.That's where I think a lot of the trouble is starting to develop lately. More people are learning their rights and starting to question this. Sadly, some cops turn it into being uncooperative and then escalate. Seen lots of nasty stops because the driver questions or refuses to identify until reason for stop is articulated. Then cop goes for refusal to comply.
Is it truly required to give an officer ID if pulled over for driving if you didn't do anything wrong and they don't tell you what you did wrong?You are required to identify yourself/show proof of idea if pulled over. Now if a cop randomly walks up to you and demands it without you doing anything wrong then you don't have to surrender it. Ask if you are being detained. If they say no than continue on your day. It's not a good look though. If you have no reason to hide your ID why not comply, be courteous and show it. That will go leaps and bounds further than arguing with the cop over identification.
Normally if your ID is taken that means you are being detained at which point you are no longer free to go. Normally once the ID, insurance, and registration is turned over the officer will tell you why he or she stopped you. There is rarely a point when you get stopped, your ID gets ran and then the cop lets you go without explanation.Is it truly required to give an officer ID if pulled over for driving if you didn't do anything wrong and they don't tell you what you did wrong?
If that's the case, what stops officers pulling over anyone for anything just to get ID and look for warrants?
I think it's highly immoral and wrong if the officer gets your ID and then goes and runs it without giving you any sort of information to why you got pulled over. Even if they pulled you over legally.
Yes, it's legal, but that's just wrong in my opinion.
That only adds to why I still see similarities between this sort of thing and red flag stuff.
Maybe I'm going about this asking the wrong questions.
Is it illegal to drive if you have warrants for your arrest?
Thanks will do. I do think our dialogue is worthy for others to read, even if not %100 pertaining to the original subject. I'll leave it be there and hit you up later.@Reno if you got questions feel free to message me. That way we dont hijack this thread anymore than it already is. Haha. Hope I helped clear up some things. I'm no expert and some laws may have changed from when I was in but I'm more than welcome to talk to you about this stuff. Legal stuff can be tricky.
Indeed, not a reason to be shot. I am sure they had enough information to know his living whereabouts to catch him later. Also, Ben Crump, a lawyer made a good point about this shooting, omparing it to a few years ago, a white male beat two cops with their baton and stole their cruiser. The coppers did not even unholster their weapon (or taser), even as the perp struggled to get the cruiser in function all the while the old copper was standing besides the driver-side door. Strange?! Will they not shoot their own car if stolen?Not a justified reason to be shot. And yes normally departments have you position your taser on the opposite side of your firearm. But some departments allow you to set up your gear as you wish.
Is this true? Honest curiosity.Brooklyn Center police followed bad form for dealing with a known felon, known to be armed.
Thats what I keep hearing, news/talk program's talking with retired LEO, they've all said it was bad procesure to attempt to cuff with the drivers door still open. And some have detailed what I posted, identifying that as the proper or preferred procedure in dealing with a felony stop. Makes sense when you think about it, the police didn't have control of the situation.Is this true? Honest curiosity.
See details below.Not the last one, last I checked being white in a Hispanic neighborhood isn't a crime, and not to say you are racist, but that comes off pretty close in my opinion
That was me. Let me expand the real scenario. Nazi skinheads were fighting with Hispanic gangs with firearms in play. If an officer sees a car full of these yutes, again driving slowly at 11:30pm in the neighborhood. If you see this car and it has expired tags, a brake light out or some other vehicle code violation is it good police work to lawfully stop this vehicle to have a little conversation while you are discussing the violation? Or do you pass up a lawful opportunity and wait to see if the 3 year old gets shot? I'll pick the first answer every time. The key, lawful stop. If you don't have a VC violation then your articulation on why you stopped the car must be very high.Fishing is questionable and I've seen it abused. In some cases fishing, as a possible LEO member here stated, "skinheads driving at night in a neighborhood that is primarily Hispanic" is grounds for a stop?
If that is trained or common practice, neither have due process.
Yup.Just looking like a skin head is not a reason for a stop. But if you are in a Hispanic community and as a cop you see a truck with white guys, shaved heads, and swastika tattoos you should automatically have reasonable suspicion something is gunna pop off. That's not a reason to initiate a stop. But I can guarantee you that cop is going to find something illegal on the vehicle to initiate a stop. Lights, exhaust, tags, fender flares, mud flaps, whatever. We would be the first to blame that same cop if he saw them, did nothing, and they went and shot up a kids birthday party.
So, typically you can only detain someone for long enough to conduct your lawful business (i.e. writing a citation). You cannot detain someone an unreasonable amount of time. I have let people go before a warrant check was completed because I was done writing the cite. Part of the rules to respect the right of citizens.If that's the case, what stops officers pulling over anyone for anything just to get ID and look for warrants?
Im coming to understand the tactic of fishing a lot due to our conversation here. I'll admit I was entirely shocked by the "skinhead" post earlier. While I understand it, at the same time the constitutionality of it is questionable, especially since there is no law against being a skinhead.
Is it truly required to give an officer ID if pulled over for driving if you didn't do anything wrong and they don't tell you what you did wrong?
If that's the case, what stops officers pulling over anyone for anything just to get ID and look for warrants?
I think it's highly immoral and wrong if the officer gets your ID and then goes and runs it without giving you any sort of information to why you got pulled over. Even if they pulled you over legally.
Is it illegal to drive if you have warrants for your arrest?
But what of the part about him being historically armed? That is what I highlighted.Thats what I keep hearing, news/talk program's talking with retired LEO, they've all said it was bad procesure to attempt to cuff with the drivers door still open. And some have detailed what I posted, identifying that as the proper or preferred procedure in dealing with a felony stop. Makes sense when you think about it, the police didn't have control of the situation.
Just repeating what I've heard.