I don't agree that there was reasonable suspicion that the OP was violating a law. The LEO couldn't see both of the drivers hands and the driver was looking down. Well, he could have been doing alot of things. He could have been cleaning something. He could have been changing the radio station. He could have been texting. He could have been fashioning a homemade bomb. He could have been cleaning a spot on his pants. He could have been doing hundreds of different things. Some of those things are crimes, so it is OK for the LEO to detain him for questioning? I think this is dangerous logic.Keith B wrote:Actually, they can. All that is required to make the stop is reasonable suspicion. In this case, I believe he had that. However, he should have asked IF the OP was texting or not and allowed for an explaianation instead of just assuming that was what he was doing.RoyGBiv wrote:The policeman THOUGHT.....Commander Cody wrote:I see nothing wrong with the stop. The police man thought you were texting, you told him you were not texting... done deal.
Not a very high bar you're setting...
A policeman can THINK whatever they want.... they cannot act without PROOF
It requires PROOF to exceed the burden set forth in the 4th Amendment.
It is NOT, IN ANY way OK for anyone to stop me while driving my car because they are unable to see both of my hands.
The day this becomes the law is the day America is lost forever.
OMG.! I'm becoming a Libertarian.!
If a man is driving with kids in the car, he could be a sexual predator who just kidnapped the kids. Better detain him for questioning as well. Don't forget the guy driving alone in his car (car may be stolen but not reported yet, you never know).
I think that the bar is ridiculously low in this case.