Search found 3 matches

by Soccerdad1995
Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:55 pm
Forum: Off-Topic
Topic: Poll: Stop and Frisk
Replies: 63
Views: 10846

Re: Poll: Stop and Frisk

LucasMcCain wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote: :iagree:

But I also have an issue when police stop cars for a traffic infraction and then pressure the occupants into consenting to a search. If you are stopping me because you have reasonable suspicion that I was speeding (radar gun reading, etc), then by all means, investigate that potential offense. But you do not need to know where I am headed, or whether I have anything "you need to know about" in order to complete that investigation. Just issue me a summons and we can both get on with our business.
Yeah, I got pulled over by troopers one time because one of my passengers had not fastened his seat belt. At the time that meant that he (not the driver) got a ticket. However, we got our persons and my car searched for more than 2 hours during that stop. Nothing was found; nobody was arrested; he got an $80 ticket. There's something wrong with that. We were guys with long hair, so the whole time they were asking us where the marijuana was. We kept telling them we didn't have any. They seemed really annoyed that we were telling the truth. We were really annoyed that we got home hours later than we were supposed to.

However, I would like to point out that neither of us got shot. Because we weren't criminals. Because we followed instructions and were polite.

A bit more on topic, this is the sort of problem I have with Stop and Frisk. I don't like being harassed just because someone doesn't like the look of me.

In case I haven't made it clear in this thread, I am a big supporter of police. I don't at all want it to sound like I'm bashing cops. I most certainly am not. However, police are human beings just like everybody else. Some are good, and some are bad. Policies need to take that into account.
:iagree: with everything you said, including your support for police.

I also think that we are doing police officers a disservice when we allow things like stop and frisk to occur. It is precisely these types of things that cause bad blood to develop between LEO's and the people they serve. I am an upper middle class white guy with no criminal record. I drive a nice car, generally look presentable and I do not commit crimes. And when I see a police car near me on the road, my first thought is not "oh good, he will keep me safe in case anything bad happens". Rather, I think about the possibility of a negative encounter should I happen to interact with that officer. This is learned behavior on my part, and it started with encounters that I had as a young man who didn't drive a nice car, and may not have looked quite as presentable (but who also did not commit any crimes).

I think that my experience allows me to understand, in a little way, the tension that poor and minority citizens have toward police. And IMHO, using tactics like stop and frisk will only make that situation worse, not better.
by Soccerdad1995
Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:19 pm
Forum: Off-Topic
Topic: Poll: Stop and Frisk
Replies: 63
Views: 10846

Re: Poll: Stop and Frisk

mr1337 wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
mr1337 wrote:100% unconstitutional to stop and detain someone without BARE MINIMUM reasonable suspicion.

The reason we have the 4th amendment is because the British would go around searching homes and ships in order to find something illegal. Sometimes that involved falsified evidence, and those people suffered.

It would be the same as police randomly stopping cars to do drug searches without them first committing a traffic offense or crime.
:iagree:

But I also have an issue when police stop cars for a traffic infraction and then pressure the occupants into consenting to a search. If you are stopping me because you have reasonable suspicion that I was speeding (radar gun reading, etc), then by all means, investigate that potential offense. But you do not need to know where I am headed, or whether I have anything "you need to know about" in order to complete that investigation. Just issue me a summons and we can both get on with our business.
Absolutely. I cringe every time I see a video or COPS episode where the officer insists on ID'ing passengers and finds something on them (warrant or prohibited item) when they had no legal obligation to ID just because the officer "needs to know everyone he's dealing with." 4th Amendment still applies there.
I want to love that show but every time it comes on, I change the channel when the situation you just described happens. I usually last less than 5 minutes.....
by Soccerdad1995
Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:07 pm
Forum: Off-Topic
Topic: Poll: Stop and Frisk
Replies: 63
Views: 10846

Re: Poll: Stop and Frisk

mr1337 wrote:100% unconstitutional to stop and detain someone without BARE MINIMUM reasonable suspicion.

The reason we have the 4th amendment is because the British would go around searching homes and ships in order to find something illegal. Sometimes that involved falsified evidence, and those people suffered.

It would be the same as police randomly stopping cars to do drug searches without them first committing a traffic offense or crime.
:iagree:

But I also have an issue when police stop cars for a traffic infraction and then pressure the occupants into consenting to a search. If you are stopping me because you have reasonable suspicion that I was speeding (radar gun reading, etc), then by all means, investigate that potential offense. But you do not need to know where I am headed, or whether I have anything "you need to know about" in order to complete that investigation. Just issue me a summons and we can both get on with our business.

Return to “Poll: Stop and Frisk”