Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
Here's another nugget of truth. When an officer has contact with someone he or she has the right to "terry frisk" a person based on reasonable, articulable facts as to why you believe the person may be armed. The same applies to a vehicle. If your acts lead me to believe a weapon may be in the car it is getting searched in your area of reach. If I find drugs they are seized and may be used as evidence. If they get suppressed then at least I didn't get shot.


just wondering, why do you call it "terry frisk", cause i have a friend named "terry" who too often frisks people.
quote:
Originally posted by Woodsman:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
Here's another nugget of truth. When an officer has contact with someone he or she has the right to "terry frisk" a person based on reasonable, articulable facts as to why you believe the person may be armed. The same applies to a vehicle. If your acts lead me to believe a weapon may be in the car it is getting searched in your area of reach. If I find drugs they are seized and may be used as evidence. If they get suppressed then at least I didn't get shot.


just wondering, why do you call it "terry frisk", cause i have a friend named "terry" who too often frisks people.


Terry v. Ohio

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and searches him without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.
I have had friends and even family members who have had bad experiences with the Florence police and in other cities. On the other hand, I have been pulled over several times and ticketed (usually late for work...)but I have never felt abused or harassed. I can only remember one time that a cop was really hateful to me when I was in Mobile. I really believe that it is the first few seconds of contact that can set the whole tone of the experience. I have no reason to be afraid of cops or think that they are "out to get me". I'm pretty sure that luck doesn't have anything to do with it. Also, the folks that I know (I'm not talking about the people on this topic) that had a bad experience probably smarted off or had an attitude that could put a cop on the defensive real quick. Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
The funny part about this thread is how most posters are people who would never be subjected to a vehicle search. Not all but most. Those of you with horror stories are excluded of course. So partriot let me pose you this question. If your home was burglarized while you were not home and the police want to collect valuable evidence to hopefully find a suspect and recover property will you let them inside? Just curious. Not all police are these "training day" personas you cast upon them. Some take your safety very seriously and have sacrificed to protect it.


well, i know my position sounded harsh, i didn't intend it to. my point was that all law enforcement officers are trained to use their eyes, nose, ears, etc. in every encounter with the public to look for ANY reason to detain/arrest. you know that is true being a police officer, i in no way mean to judge you or any other leo as a person, i'm sure many of you are great guys, and like i've said before, i am personal friends with several police officers. but to answer your question, NO i would not allow my home to be searched for evidence if burgularized. i have a top of the line security system installed (which would stop most burgularies dead in it track) and if not then other layers of security include, i live next door to my parents and brother, chance are one of us will be home 99% and we have lots of shot-guns. now several months ago my workshop out back which wasn't equiped with security was broken into and several items were taken, the sheriff's deputy who came out for the report only asked what was taken, there was no "lookin" for valuable evidence or finger prints etc. and it would be my guess that unless there was a capital crime or death involved in a home burgulary the same case would apply so it would be a mute point, the deputy didn't get with 100ft of my shop.

and you are exactly correct, i'm 43 years old and have been stopped several times over the years and have never had a police officer ask to search my vehicle, and i don't expect to ever encounter that, however, if i ever do, i will stand my ground as i stated in my first post.
quote:
Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
It all boils down to this. If an officer wants to search your car...he/she will more than likely find a way. If the officers (current or ex) that post on this forum would be completely honest, they would agree.


Articulation on the officer's part usually wins in this situation everytime. So, if the officer is smart enough to articulate his reasoning for searching your vehicle, then yes, the officer will find a way.
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
The funny part about this thread is how most posters are people who would never be subjected to a vehicle search. Not all but most. Those of you with horror stories are excluded of course. So partriot let me pose you this question. If your home was burglarized while you were not home and the police want to collect valuable evidence to hopefully find a suspect and recover property will you let them inside? Just curious. Not all police are these "training day" personas you cast upon them. Some take your safety very seriously and have sacrificed to protect it.


well, i know my position sounded harsh, i didn't intend it to. my point was that all law enforcement officers are trained to use their eyes, nose, ears, etc. in every encounter with the public to look for ANY reason to detain/arrest. you know that is true being a police officer, i in no way mean to judge you or any other leo as a person, i'm sure many of you are great guys, and like i've said before, i am personal friends with several police officers. but to answer your question, NO i would not allow my home to be searched for evidence if burgularized. i have a top of the line security system installed (which would stop most burgularies dead in it track) and if not then other layers of security include, i live next door to my parents and brother, chance are one of us will be home 99% and we have lots of shot-guns. now several months ago my workshop out back which wasn't equiped with security was broken into and several items were taken, the sheriff's deputy who came out for the report only asked what was taken, there was no "lookin" for valuable evidence or finger prints etc. and it would be my guess that unless there was a capital crime or death involved in a home burgulary the same case would apply so it would be a mute point, the deputy didn't get with 100ft of my shop.

and you are exactly correct, i'm 43 years old and have been stopped several times over the years and have never had a police officer ask to search my vehicle, and i don't expect to ever encounter that, however, if i ever do, i will stand my ground as i stated in my first post.


I know what you meant. I see your point most of the time but hate that you have a reason to feel that way. As far as "looking for evidence" goes I always at a minimum take photos of the entry point (most criminals do the same thing every time and you can tie different crimes together), general photos to set the scene for a jury if an arrest is made, try and collect finger prints if the conditions are right, and do a neighborhood canvas in hopes of finding a witness or some other evidence. Burglaries and property crimes will increase and need thorough investigation.
@ wright, you are correct, property crimes do seem to be on the rise, i've gotten to where i hate to look at the "law and order" section, sad testament to our economy or at least part of it. do you think drug usage and theft related crimes would decrease if we had more jobs available in the area? i do, i really believe people are good by nature and often adapt to the situation in which they find themselves, it's a survival instinct, let's say the average petty thief or drug abuser had a good paying stable job, do you think they would still be petty thieves and drug abusers?
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
The funny part about this thread is how most posters are people who would never be subjected to a vehicle search. Not all but most. Those of you with horror stories are excluded of course. So partriot let me pose you this question. If your home was burglarized while you were not home and the police want to collect valuable evidence to hopefully find a suspect and recover property will you let them inside? Just curious. Not all police are these "training day" personas you cast upon them. Some take your safety very seriously and have sacrificed to protect it.


well, i know my position sounded harsh, i didn't intend it to. my point was that all law enforcement officers are trained to use their eyes, nose, ears, etc. in every encounter with the public to look for ANY reason to detain/arrest. you know that is true being a police officer, i in no way mean to judge you or any other leo as a person, i'm sure many of you are great guys, and like i've said before, i am personal friends with several police officers. but to answer your question, NO i would not allow my home to be searched for evidence if burgularized. i have a top of the line security system installed (which would stop most burgularies dead in it track) and if not then other layers of security include, i live next door to my parents and brother, chance are one of us will be home 99% and we have lots of shot-guns. now several months ago my workshop out back which wasn't equiped with security was broken into and several items were taken, the sheriff's deputy who came out for the report only asked what was taken, there was no "lookin" for valuable evidence or finger prints etc. and it would be my guess that unless there was a capital crime or death involved in a home burgulary the same case would apply so it would be a mute point, the deputy didn't get with 100ft of my shop.

and you are exactly correct, i'm 43 years old and have been stopped several times over the years and have never had a police officer ask to search my vehicle, and i don't expect to ever encounter that, however, if i ever do, i will stand my ground as i stated in my first post.


I know what you meant. I see your point most of the time but hate that you have a reason to feel that way. As far as "looking for evidence" goes I always at a minimum take photos of the entry point (most criminals do the same thing every time and you can tie different crimes together), general photos to set the scene for a jury if an arrest is made, try and collect finger prints if the conditions are right, and do a neighborhood canvas in hopes of finding a witness or some other evidence. Burglaries and property crimes will increase and need thorough investigation.


Wow...you do such a good job. I guess that explains all the OPEN burglary cases in the area. What was it? 14 in Sheffield alone? Maybe you could give them some advice. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by WH:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
The funny part about this thread is how most posters are people who would never be subjected to a vehicle search. Not all but most. Those of you with horror stories are excluded of course. So partriot let me pose you this question. If your home was burglarized while you were not home and the police want to collect valuable evidence to hopefully find a suspect and recover property will you let them inside? Just curious. Not all police are these "training day" personas you cast upon them. Some take your safety very seriously and have sacrificed to protect it.


well, i know my position sounded harsh, i didn't intend it to. my point was that all law enforcement officers are trained to use their eyes, nose, ears, etc. in every encounter with the public to look for ANY reason to detain/arrest. you know that is true being a police officer, i in no way mean to judge you or any other leo as a person, i'm sure many of you are great guys, and like i've said before, i am personal friends with several police officers. but to answer your question, NO i would not allow my home to be searched for evidence if burgularized. i have a top of the line security system installed (which would stop most burgularies dead in it track) and if not then other layers of security include, i live next door to my parents and brother, chance are one of us will be home 99% and we have lots of shot-guns. now several months ago my workshop out back which wasn't equiped with security was broken into and several items were taken, the sheriff's deputy who came out for the report only asked what was taken, there was no "lookin" for valuable evidence or finger prints etc. and it would be my guess that unless there was a capital crime or death involved in a home burgulary the same case would apply so it would be a mute point, the deputy didn't get with 100ft of my shop.

and you are exactly correct, i'm 43 years old and have been stopped several times over the years and have never had a police officer ask to search my vehicle, and i don't expect to ever encounter that, however, if i ever do, i will stand my ground as i stated in my first post.


I know what you meant. I see your point most of the time but hate that you have a reason to feel that way. As far as "looking for evidence" goes I always at a minimum take photos of the entry point (most criminals do the same thing every time and you can tie different crimes together), general photos to set the scene for a jury if an arrest is made, try and collect finger prints if the conditions are right, and do a neighborhood canvas in hopes of finding a witness or some other evidence. Burglaries and property crimes will increase and need thorough investigation.


Wow...you do such a good job. I guess that explains all the OPEN burglary cases in the area. What was it? 14 in Sheffield alone? Maybe you could give them some advice. Big Grin


OH MY GOD! A population of 10,000 and they have 14 open cases? Stop the presses! Eeker

You really need to get a dose of reality if this is your only point in the argument. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
@ wright, you are correct, property crimes do seem to be on the rise, i've gotten to where i hate to look at the "law and order" section, sad testament to our economy or at least part of it. do you think drug usage and theft related crimes would decrease if we had more jobs available in the area? i do, i really believe people are good by nature and often adapt to the situation in which they find themselves, it's a survival instinct, let's say the average petty thief or drug abuser had a good paying stable job, do you think they would still be petty thieves and drug abusers?


Sure people are opportunistic about crime. The failing economy will definitely bring people to err. However, burglars are usually repeat offenders. The downtown smash and grabs always peak when a certain person is not in ail. Now that he is our burglaries in downtown have ceased. The big thing now is big t.v.'s. I have interviewed numerous burglars and they have it down to a science. That's why it is so hard to catch a burglar in the act. And yes I think jobs would help. I contend though that drug users and criminals will find it hard to leave that lifestyle and work for a living. Not all but some.
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
an officer will have to bash in my window, drag me out of my vehicle (probably after being tazzed) and detain me to search my vehicle and when you fing nothing (unless you plant it) then we're gonna have some fun in the court room. additionally, a police officer will never be allowed in my home without a search warrant. I value my privacy, break no laws, and will defend my 4th amendmant rights to the fullest extent possible. the police are not your friends, their job is to do everything possible to arrest and convict you.

expert advice from a Regent Law School Professor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...sgik&feature=related


You might want to re-think your position here because depending upon content of radio traffic, the officer might be in a frame of mind to pop your window and yank you out of there like a Kleenex out of the box. Do not be guilty of resisting the lawful order of a LEO and obstructing a police investigation. Co-operation and compliance will take you a long way if you are not involved in any thing illegal.
quote:
Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
an officer will have to bash in my window, drag me out of my vehicle (probably after being tazzed) and detain me to search my vehicle and when you fing nothing (unless you plant it) then we're gonna have some fun in the court room. additionally, a police officer will never be allowed in my home without a search warrant. I value my privacy, break no laws, and will defend my 4th amendmant rights to the fullest extent possible. the police are not your friends, their job is to do everything possible to arrest and convict you.

expert advice from a Regent Law School Professor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...sgik&feature=related


You might want to re-think your position here because depending upon content of radio traffic, the officer might be in a frame of mind to pop your window and yank you out of there like a Kleenex out of the box. Do not be guilty of resisting the lawful order of a LEO and obstructing a police investigation. Co-operation and compliance will take you a long way if you are not involved in any thing illegal.



And don't ever forget sheldiver...what you talk about is a two way street! The cop doesn't need to forget that a citizen has rights...and can defend himself as needed. Wink

You must have really been a fan of the KGB.
quote:
Originally posted by WH:
quote:
Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
an officer will have to bash in my window, drag me out of my vehicle (probably after being tazzed) and detain me to search my vehicle and when you fing nothing (unless you plant it) then we're gonna have some fun in the court room. additionally, a police officer will never be allowed in my home without a search warrant. I value my privacy, break no laws, and will defend my 4th amendmant rights to the fullest extent possible. the police are not your friends, their job is to do everything possible to arrest and convict you.

expert advice from a Regent Law School Professor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...sgik&feature=related


You might want to re-think your position here because depending upon content of radio traffic, the officer might be in a frame of mind to pop your window and yank you out of there like a Kleenex out of the box. Do not be guilty of resisting the lawful order of a LEO and obstructing a police investigation. Co-operation and compliance will take you a long way if you are not involved in any thing illegal.



And don't ever forget sheldiver...what you talk about is a two way street! The cop doesn't need to forget that a citizen has rights...and can defend himself as needed. Wink

You must have really been a fan of the KGB.



Try it YOUR way and then let us know how it worked out for you. KGB....not so much but I do know how to provide motivation when it is lacking. While you are "defending" yourself try not to wind up with a felony on your hands.
WH was driving through a small town and came to a stop sign. He performed a 'rolling stop'. Sure enough a cop pulled him over and requested liscense and registration.
"Why are you stopping me" he said, "no one was coming and I slowed down to a near stop."

The officer replied,"you didn't stop. Liscense and registration please." Big Grin

"I'll tell you what cop," he say's " you show me the difference between stop and slow down and I'll sign your ticket."

So the cop yanks him out of the car and starts beating him with his night stick. After about 5 minutes the cop says,"All right sir, would you like me to stop or slow down?"
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
WH was driving through a small town and came to a stop sign. He performed a 'rolling stop'. Sure enough a cop pulled him over and requested liscense and registration.
"Why are you stopping me" he said, "no one was coming and I slowed down to a near stop."

The officer replied,"you didn't stop. Liscense and registration please." Big Grin

"I'll tell you what cop," he say's " you show me the difference between stop and slow down and I'll sign your ticket."

So the cop yanks him out of the car and starts beating him with his night stick. After about 5 minutes the cop says,"All right sir, would you like me to stop or slow down?"


that's not funny man, that really happened!! Big Grin
Interesting discussion. Before I weigh in, I support our police agencies and have a great deal of respect for the difficult job the do every day.

I present you with an all-too-often used tactic by police; The Request. Say you are pulled over for a... broken lens on your tail light. The LEO checks your license, registration and proof of insurance. Then, while still holding your papers the officer walks back to your car and says something like this, "We have had reports that a car similar to your was used in a convenience store robbery tonight. I need to look in your trunk. That OK?" Being a good citizen, and wanting to cooperate with the police, you tell the LEO, "Sure officer. Anything to help". You pop the trunk, and the officer walks back to take a look. Unknown to you, your spouse put their collection of inert hand grenades back there. The next thing you know, you're sitting in the back of the S.W.A.T. van. Because you wanted to be a good citizen. You see, you gave the cop permission, based on his B.S. statement about a crime earlier that night. Sure, you'll have the charges dropped, but not until you've had your First Appearance, have written a check to your bail bondsman and your attorney, and spent some time away from your life being photographed, finger printed, and had some quality time with the drunk in the cell with you.

Yep, all you self-righteous, "I have nothing to hide", pizwits are really bright. I am glad you don't mind having your vehicle searched. Maybe you will keep the LEO's busy as I make my way home. I'll wave at you as I drive past you and the flashing lights of the police cars and the S.W.A.T. van.

What's the moral of this story? If a LEO asks you if it's OK to peek inside your trunk, just say, "NO".

I love the Fourth Amendment. Next discussion, I hope we can discuss the Fourteenth.
quote:
Originally posted by Isayso:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I didn't get in the middle of the road, but I did "fall down" in the elevator.


Where did you fall from? Explain...

Lauderdale co. courthouse. An unruley arrestee was sometimes known to 'fall down in the elevator.' The police officers would give you a little tune up while in the privacy of the elevator.
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
Interesting discussion. Before I weigh in, I support our police agencies and have a great deal of respect for the difficult job the do every day.

I present you with an all-too-often used tactic by police; The Request. Say you are pulled over for a... broken lens on your tail light. The LEO checks your license, registration and proof of insurance. Then, while still holding your papers the officer walks back to your car and says something like this, "We have had reports that a car similar to your was used in a convenience store robbery tonight. I need to look in your trunk. That OK?" Being a good citizen, and wanting to cooperate with the police, you tell the LEO, "Sure officer. Anything to help". You pop the trunk, and the officer walks back to take a look. Unknown to you, your spouse put their collection of inert hand grenades back there. The next thing you know, you're sitting in the back of the S.W.A.T. van. Because you wanted to be a good citizen. You see, you gave the cop permission, based on his B.S. statement about a crime earlier that night. Sure, you'll have the charges dropped, but not until you've had your First Appearance, have written a check to your bail bondsman and your attorney, and spent some time away from your life being photographed, finger printed, and had some quality time with the drunk in the cell with you.

Yep, all you self-righteous, "I have nothing to hide", pizwits are really bright. I am glad you don't mind having your vehicle searched. Maybe you will keep the LEO's busy as I make my way home. I'll wave at you as I drive past you and the flashing lights of the police cars and the S.W.A.T. van.

What's the moral of this story? If a LEO asks you if it's OK to peek inside your trunk, just say, "NO".

I love the Fourth Amendment. Next discussion, I hope we can discuss the Fourteenth.


Yesssss! Another these aren't my pants scenario. I want to know what moron would put a prisoner in the back of a SWAT van with all the equipment.
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Isayso:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I didn't get in the middle of the road, but I did "fall down" in the elevator.


Where did you fall from? Explain...

Lauderdale co. courthouse. An unruley arrestee was sometimes known to 'fall down in the elevator.' The police officers would give you a little tune up while in the privacy of the elevator.


Those days are long gone thankfully. LASO hasn't house prisoners at the courthouse in a very long time. That is why my camera runs 100% of the time. I had a woman call one time and blatantly lie saying I punched her in the stomach. When I popped the tape in with her and my supervisors there she quickly crawfished. All to get her escapee boyfriend out of jail.
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
Interesting discussion. Before I weigh in, I support our police agencies and have a great deal of respect for the difficult job the do every day.

I present you with an all-too-often used tactic by police; The Request. Say you are pulled over for a... broken lens on your tail light. The LEO checks your license, registration and proof of insurance. Then, while still holding your papers the officer walks back to your car and says something like this, "We have had reports that a car similar to your was used in a convenience store robbery tonight. I need to look in your trunk. That OK?" Being a good citizen, and wanting to cooperate with the police, you tell the LEO, "Sure officer. Anything to help". You pop the trunk, and the officer walks back to take a look. Unknown to you, your spouse put their collection of inert hand grenades back there. The next thing you know, you're sitting in the back of the S.W.A.T. van. Because you wanted to be a good citizen. You see, you gave the cop permission, based on his B.S. statement about a crime earlier that night. Sure, you'll have the charges dropped, but not until you've had your First Appearance, have written a check to your bail bondsman and your attorney, and spent some time away from your life being photographed, finger printed, and had some quality time with the drunk in the cell with you.

Yep, all you self-righteous, "I have nothing to hide", pizwits are really bright. I am glad you don't mind having your vehicle searched. Maybe you will keep the LEO's busy as I make my way home. I'll wave at you as I drive past you and the flashing lights of the police cars and the S.W.A.T. van.

What's the moral of this story? If a LEO asks you if it's OK to peek inside your trunk, just say, "NO".

I love the Fourth Amendment. Next discussion, I hope we can discuss the Fourteenth.


Yesssss! Another these aren't my pants scenario. I want to know what moron would put a prisoner in the back of a SWAT van with all the equipment.

Ar
What??? OK, for the dimwits here, I promise to not use hyperbole in my future replies. Poll: Who else thought I was serious about the SWAT van? Are you, by any chance, a cop?
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
quote:
Originally posted by wright35633:
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
Interesting discussion. Before I weigh in, I support our police agencies and have a great deal of respect for the difficult job the do every day.

I present you with an all-too-often used tactic by police; The Request. Say you are pulled over for a... broken lens on your tail light. The LEO checks your license, registration and proof of insurance. Then, while still holding your papers the officer walks back to your car and says something like this, "We have had reports that a car similar to your was used in a convenience store robbery tonight. I need to look in your trunk. That OK?" Being a good citizen, and wanting to cooperate with the police, you tell the LEO, "Sure officer. Anything to help". You pop the trunk, and the officer walks back to take a look. Unknown to you, your spouse put their collection of inert hand grenades back there. The next thing you know, you're sitting in the back of the S.W.A.T. van. Because you wanted to be a good citizen. You see, you gave the cop permission, based on his B.S. statement about a crime earlier that night. Sure, you'll have the charges dropped, but not until you've had your First Appearance, have written a check to your bail bondsman and your attorney, and spent some time away from your life being photographed, finger printed, and had some quality time with the drunk in the cell with you.

Yep, all you self-righteous, "I have nothing to hide", pizwits are really bright. I am glad you don't mind having your vehicle searched. Maybe you will keep the LEO's busy as I make my way home. I'll wave at you as I drive past you and the flashing lights of the police cars and the S.W.A.T. van.

What's the moral of this story? If a LEO asks you if it's OK to peek inside your trunk, just say, "NO".

I love the Fourth Amendment. Next discussion, I hope we can discuss the Fourteenth.


Yesssss! Another these aren't my pants scenario. I want to know what moron would put a prisoner in the back of a SWAT van with all the equipment.

Ar
What??? OK, for the dimwits here, I promise to not use hyperbole in my future replies. Poll: Who else thought I was serious about the SWAT van? Are you, by any chance, a cop?


I am a police officer. I however am not a dimwit. I can teach college level english based on my education level so I need no lecture on hyperbole and the such. My reply was in jest. Maybe you should lighten up just a bit and have some fun. If you read the past few pages you would see that this post went south a long time ago thanks to WH. On a serious note do you know how many criminals are apprehended just because we ask a few questions? A few major examples would be the trooper who stopped Timothy McVeigh or the patrol officer who encountered Eric Rudolph dumpster diving. I am glad however that you are educated and aware of your 4th amendment right. I for one do not wish to violate anyone's civil liberties. Enjoy your 4th and remember that sometimes these posts are meant to be fun and are not mean-spirited.
quote:
I am a police officer. I however am not a dimwit. I can teach college level english based on my education level so I need no lecture on hyperbole and the such. My reply was in jest. Maybe you should lighten up just a bit and have some fun. If you read the past few pages you would see that this post went south a long time ago thanks to WH. On a serious note do you know how many criminals are apprehended just because we ask a few questions? A few major examples would be the trooper who stopped Timothy McVeigh or the patrol officer who encountered Eric Rudolph dumpster diving. I am glad however that you are educated and aware of your 4th amendment right. I for one do not wish to violate anyone's civil liberties. Enjoy your 4th and remember that sometimes these posts are meant to be fun and are not mean-spirited.


Well... OK. I will accept that your 'pants' comment wasn't intended as a slight. Please accept my apology if you feel that I insulted you. I have a great deal of respect for everyone involved in Law Enforcement and am proud to say that many of my friends are Officers, District Attorneys, Judges, Supervisors and Chiefs.

I am, however, a staunch advocate for those people who find themselves face to face with a person with a badge and feel intimidated. You know the score. And you also know what I mean when I say that some officers use their power of intimidation to trick people into waiving their Constitutional rights to gain entry into the trunk of a car, or to shine their flashlight in the backseat. Frankly, it doesn't matter why a cop wants the access, if he has to trick somebody into surrendering their rights. Just because a motorist isn't as familiar with procedure as the Officer, it doesn't make it OK. The Constitution protects dirtbags as well as saints. And that protection is supposed to be meted out equally. I sure you disagree. But we can be civil and have a civil disagreement. I'm sure that if we were to meet someday over a beer, we would have more in common than we have differences. All the best.
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
Interesting discussion. Before I weigh in, I support our police agencies and have a great deal of respect for the difficult job the do every day.

I present you with an all-too-often used tactic by police; The Request. Say you are pulled over for a... broken lens on your tail light. The LEO checks your license, registration and proof of insurance. Then, while still holding your papers the officer walks back to your car and says something like this, "We have had reports that a car similar to your was used in a convenience store robbery tonight. I need to look in your trunk. That OK?" Being a good citizen, and wanting to cooperate with the police, you tell the LEO, "Sure officer. Anything to help". You pop the trunk, and the officer walks back to take a look. Unknown to you, your spouse put their collection of inert hand grenades back there. The next thing you know, you're sitting in the back of the S.W.A.T. van. Because you wanted to be a good citizen. You see, you gave the cop permission, based on his B.S. statement about a crime earlier that night. Sure, you'll have the charges dropped, but not until you've had your First Appearance, have written a check to your bail bondsman and your attorney, and spent some time away from your life being photographed, finger printed, and had some quality time with the drunk in the cell with you.

Yep, all you self-righteous, "I have nothing to hide", pizwits are really bright. I am glad you don't mind having your vehicle searched. Maybe you will keep the LEO's busy as I make my way home. I'll wave at you as I drive past you and the flashing lights of the police cars and the S.W.A.T. van.

What's the moral of this story? If a LEO asks you if it's OK to peek inside your trunk, just say, "NO".

I love the Fourth Amendment. Next discussion, I hope we can discuss the Fourteenth.


Watches waaaay toooo many COP shows on television... Wink
quote:
Originally posted by SteveSheffield:
quote:
I am a police officer. I however am not a dimwit. I can teach college level english based on my education level so I need no lecture on hyperbole and the such. My reply was in jest. Maybe you should lighten up just a bit and have some fun. If you read the past few pages you would see that this post went south a long time ago thanks to WH. On a serious note do you know how many criminals are apprehended just because we ask a few questions? A few major examples would be the trooper who stopped Timothy McVeigh or the patrol officer who encountered Eric Rudolph dumpster diving. I am glad however that you are educated and aware of your 4th amendment right. I for one do not wish to violate anyone's civil liberties. Enjoy your 4th and remember that sometimes these posts are meant to be fun and are not mean-spirited.


Well... OK. I will accept that your 'pants' comment wasn't intended as a slight. Please accept my apology if you feel that I insulted you. I have a great deal of respect for everyone involved in Law Enforcement and am proud to say that many of my friends are Officers, District Attorneys, Judges, Supervisors and Chiefs.

I am, however, a staunch advocate for those people who find themselves face to face with a person with a badge and feel intimidated. You know the score. And you also know what I mean when I say that some officers use their power of intimidation to trick people into waiving their Constitutional rights to gain entry into the trunk of a car, or to shine their flashlight in the backseat. Frankly, it doesn't matter why a cop wants the access, if he has to trick somebody into surrendering their rights. Just because a motorist isn't as familiar with procedure as the Officer, it doesn't make it OK. The Constitution protects dirtbags as well as saints. And that protection is supposed to be meted out equally. I sure you disagree. But we can be civil and have a civil disagreement. I'm sure that if we were to meet someday over a beer, we would have more in common than we have differences. All the best.


I was only insulted by being referred to as a dimwit. I actually agree with you. The constitution applies to all citizens with exceptions to the warrant clause of course. I never have to use intimidation to gain consent. It frankly seldom works. I find that being upfront and honest and treating people with respect works best. I shine my light in backseats all of the time though. It is referred to as "plainview" and is an exception to the warrant clause. I'm sure we would agree on a wide variety of issues. Its not always like it is on tv or what horror stories people tell.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×