RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment

RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Aynne88 -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/25/2014 9:53:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern. Police officers have a job to do and to do it correctly, they cant be going through a bunch of red tape all the time. It hinders their progress. Will there be a rotten apple or two or three in the bunch, you bet, but may they also be exposed for what they do. In ANY office, in ANY religion, in ANY community, in ANY etc, you have the rotten ones and they shall be exposed. I know of some stories of abuse committed by police officers but I know more stories of real justice being served. Most likely, if someone is pulled over, it is more of an inconvenience type thing, and if that's what people cry about, that's ridiculous. Its selfish. Most likely, if the job is done right, they aren't going to bother you, for some small infraction anyway. Not correct we are rapidly turning into a police sate and they thrive on fear and intimidation.http://www.policecrimes.com/police.html

hot4bondage -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/26/2014 10:53:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess This is what the SCOTUS blog says about the holding: "Under the totality of the circumstances, the traffic stop precipitated by an anonymous but reliable tip to 911 complied with the Fourth Amendment because the officer had reasonable suspicion that the truck’s driver was intoxicated." I've bolded all relevant sections because what the above does NOT say is that "an anonymous tip can be enough reason for the police to make a traffic stop." That's how you describe the ruling, but it's incomplete. Look again at the holding above. The following things have to be met for it to be a LEGAL stop: 1. Total circumstances must support the stop 2. The 911 tip can be anonymous but must also be RELIABLE 3. The officer must have reasonable suspicion of illegal activity While this does give greater discretion to police officers and 911 operators to determine what seems "reliable" and what is "reasonable suspicion of illegal activity" it does not actually allow police officers to stop someone with just an anonymous tip. I can't just call in my neighbor's car description just for kicks. That would not meet this holding. I stand by my description. The facts in this case do not support the court's ruling. Here's why: 1. The caller made a complaint, an accurate description of the vehicle, and an accurate description of the general location a few minutes after the alleged incident. That's all the officer had to go on before he made the stop. You could easily do the same thing to your neighbor just for kicks. I think the fact that the suspect had, uh, 30 pounds of weed throws some people off. "The officer smelled pot. The guy had pot. Fuck that guy." Or something like that. The officer didn't smell marijuana until after he made the stop. 2. Again, the majority ruled that the call was somehow anonymous AND reliable based solely on the three details listed above. 3. If anything, the officer's statement was exculpatory. The only thing he witnessed prior to the stop was five minutes of "irreproachable" driving. Based on this ruling, an anonymous tip can indeed be enough reason for the police to make a stop.

DaddySatyr -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/26/2014 11:28:31 AM)
Kitty Genovese. Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Phydeaux -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/26/2014 3:27:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern. Police officers have a job to do and to do it correctly, they cant be going through a bunch of red tape all the time. It hinders their progress. Will there be a rotten apple or two or three in the bunch, you bet, but may they also be exposed for what they do. In ANY office, in ANY religion, in ANY community, in ANY etc, you have the rotten ones and they shall be exposed. I know of some stories of abuse committed by police officers but I know more stories of real justice being served. Most likely, if someone is pulled over, it is more of an inconvenience type thing, and if that's what people cry about, that's ridiculous. Its selfish. Most likely, if the job is done right, they aren't going to bother you, for some small infraction anyway. Not correct we are rapidly turning into a police sate and they thrive on fear and intimidation.http://www.policecrimes.com/police.html So the correct response is smaller government. Vote dims out, tea party in.

ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/27/2014 1:55:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Kitty Genovese. Maybe I'm being dim, but what exactly does Kitty Genovese have to do with the previous posters comment or the thread in general? IIRC, Kitty Genovese was raped and murdered while neighbors watched and did nothing. Was there an anonymous call that was placed and ignored in that case?

ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/27/2014 2:16:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr A caller called, described an incident and gave a very good description of the suspect (vehicle). Believe it or not, just the fact that the description was so good makes me think it was a decent stop. Forget the "irreproachable" driving the officer observed. One of the things taught to officers is that if someone is driving "too perfectly", they may have something to hide (I've been pulled over for driving the speed limit on a state highway, at night. The cop assumed I had bad credentials). I think the officer, based on a report and a good description, had every right to pull the car over. After all, if your neighbors are having a loud party and you call the local constabulary, isn't that enough to generate a patrol car to, at least, drive by and see if they hear the noise? That's "investigation". That's what the officer was doing when he pulled the suspect vehicle over. That he smelled marijuana is the driver's problem (and goes to support the "driving too perfectly" theory). In this particular case, the way you describe it, I don't see much of an issue. Your analogy doesn't really hold water to me. Using your noise complaint example, yes the police would be warranted in driving by to see if they heard any noise if they'd gotten a complain of a loud party. However, that's where it fails. If the police drove by and listened, and they heard no noise, the home was irreproachable, then that should be the end of it. I had a similar incident a year or so ago. Someone was talking on their phone, wandered into my lane, and I wound up on the shoulder. I called the police, gave a description or the car and driver, including a plate. I was told by the dispatcher that they'd have someone look into it, but unless there was damage to my car, if an officer didn't see the incident happen, then there was nothing they could do. And as annoyed as I was at the time, I can understand the reasoning. If there's no physical proof, then it's my word against the other driver. I say she cut me off, she says she didn't. There's no proof. Now if she were still on her phone when an officer observed her, she could be pulled over. If she were still driving erratically, same deal. But if her driving was "irreproachable", then there's really no justification to stop her. And even if they do observe her doing something wrong, she still most likely would only be charged for what the officer actually saw, not for having driven me off the road. Otherwise, what's to stop anyone from making a slew of false complaints? I see a car full of bumper stickers that annoy me. I jot down the plate number, make and model of the car, and I can make a very good description of the subject vehicle. Even if they came after me later for filing a false report, how can they prove it? He said/she said works both ways.

itsSIRtou -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 3:24:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern. Police officers have a job to do and to do it correctly, they cant be going through a bunch of red tape all the time. It hinders their progress. Will there be a rotten apple or two or three in the bunch, you bet, but may they also be exposed for what they do. In ANY office, in ANY religion, in ANY community, in ANY etc, you have the rotten ones and they shall be exposed. I know of some stories of abuse committed by police officers but I know more stories of real justice being served. Most likely, if someone is pulled over, it is more of an inconvenience type thing, and if that's what people cry about, that's ridiculous. Its selfish. Most likely, if the job is done right, they aren't going to bother you, for some small infraction anyway. Not correct we are rapidly turning into a police sate and they thrive on fear and intimidation.http://www.policecrimes.com/police.html So the correct response is smaller government. Vote dims out, tea party in. actually the correct response is responsible government. The smaller government, the tea party wants just makes things worse from the lack of oversight. Since the current problem is already happening with the current amount of oversight. How less oversight over problems like this will be solved by making it harder for a problem to be stopped Makes absolutely no sense. if your wealthy friends would just get off their ass and give enough police officers, decent wages, and the resources police departments deserve to have, there would be no need for profiling in the first damn place. .... This coming from the tea party the majority of whose members barely know what racial profiling is let alone be the subject of it. .... This is America where it's supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty".... Racial profiling.... Or any other kind of profiling for that matter.... Is, "guilty until proven innocent" and just plain wrong. ....if you can't really understand, or you have some lame exception to that concept, then I submit that it's immensely unlikely that you've ever had to be subject to such profiling, and don't really care if it happens to anybody else, as long as it's not you. That load of crap about "If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern." This tells me that you don't really care about anybody else's time but your own. There's something in your mental makeup that you consider my time to be less valuable to Me than yours is to you?? REALLY?? I really don't have 20 min. (or more) to waste on somebody else's paranoia when I'm minding my own business and him I'm obeying the law just like you are. How about "If one is legal and your nose is clean, you shouldn't be pulled over in the first place, no matter what you look like. " Which is the way America's supposed to work in the first place??

thompsonx -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 4:10:15 AM)
if your wealthy friends would just get off their ass and give enough police officers, decent wages, and the resources police departments deserve to have, there would be no need for profiling in the first damn place. Cops here make over 100k per year. There does not seem to be any shortage of money just a shortge of cops who want to actually do police work.

chatterbox24 -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 6:51:52 AM)
We had a situation where are 4 wheeler was stolen out of our barn in the middle of the night. We called the police and gave the Vin numbers. We had no descriptions of people nor vehicles. Two vehicles were pulled over carrying 4 wheelers. The first vehicle pulled over was innocent, and I am sure they were not really happy about it, it was an inconvenience. The second vehicle pulled over was carrying the stolen property, and the man behind the wheel had just been released for doing this same thing previously. Theft. I was pulled over about 10 years ago and my car searched, due to an armed robbery of a convenience store, where the vehicle matched mines description, but they had no plate numbers. Was it a little embarrassing? Yes. What else were they suppose to do in that situation? I minded but I understood their position. My step nephews truck was pulled over by an anonymous call with plates, the report was the vehicle was waving a gun at passers on the interstate. He had his daughter with him. They had them lay along side of the road, and his 14 year old daughter to search the vehicle. No gun was found. Considering the job he does, that would be the bad apple call. A vengeful call. Now who was responsible for that injustice? The caller or the police. It goes both ways. People are going to have different opinions.

Phydeaux -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:02:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern. Police officers have a job to do and to do it correctly, they cant be going through a bunch of red tape all the time. It hinders their progress. Will there be a rotten apple or two or three in the bunch, you bet, but may they also be exposed for what they do. In ANY office, in ANY religion, in ANY community, in ANY etc, you have the rotten ones and they shall be exposed. I know of some stories of abuse committed by police officers but I know more stories of real justice being served. Most likely, if someone is pulled over, it is more of an inconvenience type thing, and if that's what people cry about, that's ridiculous. Its selfish. Most likely, if the job is done right, they aren't going to bother you, for some small infraction anyway. Not correct we are rapidly turning into a police sate and they thrive on fear and intimidation.http://www.policecrimes.com/police.html So the correct response is smaller government. Vote dims out, tea party in. actually the correct response is responsible government. The smaller government, the tea party wants just makes things worse from the lack of oversight. Since the current problem is already happening with the current amount of oversight. How less oversight over problems like this will be solved by making it harder for a problem to be stopped Makes absolutely no sense. if your wealthy friends would just get off their ass and give enough police officers, decent wages, and the resources police departments deserve to have, there would be no need for profiling in the first damn place. .... This coming from the tea party the majority of whose members barely know what racial profiling is let alone be the subject of it. .... This is America where it's supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty".... Racial profiling.... Or any other kind of profiling for that matter.... Is, "guilty until proven innocent" and just plain wrong. ....if you can't really understand, or you have some lame exception to that concept, then I submit that it's immensely unlikely that you've ever had to be subject to such profiling, and don't really care if it happens to anybody else, as long as it's not you. That load of crap about "If one is legal and your nose is clean, being pulled over should not be a concern." This tells me that you don't really care about anybody else's time but your own. There's something in your mental makeup that you consider my time to be less valuable to Me than yours is to you?? REALLY?? I really don't have 20 min. (or more) to waste on somebody else's paranoia when I'm minding my own business and him I'm obeying the law just like you are. How about "If one is legal and your nose is clean, you shouldn't be pulled over in the first place, no matter what you look like. " Which is the way America's supposed to work in the first place?? Funny how a dims response to any problem is always more govt.

thompsonx -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:09:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 We had a situation where are 4 wheeler was stolen out of our barn in the middle of the night. We called the police and gave the Vin numbers. We had no descriptions of people nor vehicles. Two vehicles were pulled over carrying 4 wheelers. The first vehicle pulled over was innocent, and I am sure they were not really happy about it, it was an inconvenience. The second vehicle pulled over was carrying the stolen property, and the man behind the wheel had just been released for doing this same thing previously. Theft. I was pulled over about 10 years ago and my car searched, due to an armed robbery of a convenience store, where the vehicle matched mines description, but they had no plate numbers. Was it a little embarrassing? Yes. What else were they suppose to do in that situation? I minded but I understood their position. My step nephews truck was pulled over by an anonymous call with plates, the report was the vehicle was waving a gun at passers on the interstate. He had his daughter with him. They had them lay along side of the road, and his 14 year old daughter to search the vehicle. No gun was found. Considering the job he does, that would be the bad apple call. A vengeful call. Now who was responsible for that injustice? The caller or the police. It goes both ways. People are going to have different opinions. Then of course there is "my cousin vinny"

DaddySatyr -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:12:43 AM)
Quite the opposite. No one would call because they were afraid that the call wouldn't be anonymous and they didn't want to "get involved" in what (most assumed) was a mob hit. quote: ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted Maybe I'm being dim, but what exactly does Kitty Genovese have to do with the previous posters comment or the thread in general? IIRC, Kitty Genovese was raped and murdered while neighbors watched and did nothing. Was there an anonymous call that was placed and ignored in that case? Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

thompsonx -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:14:52 AM)
Funny how a dims response to any problem is always more govt. Where did he ask for more government?

itsSIRtou -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:28:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx if your wealthy friends would just get off their ass and give enough police officers, decent wages, and the resources police departments deserve to have, there would be no need for profiling in the first damn place. Cops here make over 100k per year. There does not seem to be any shortage of money just a shortge of cops who want to actually do police work. You ask any police department What is their biggest problem.... It's the resources to get the job done with. Every time they turn around some city Council has to make budget cuts someplace. Rarely is the Police Department or the fire department off the table from cuts. Here in Minnesota, after over 30+ years, they finally got a tornado warning system that's actually automated with the National Weather Service, the previous GOP federal administration had turned them down..... Almost any Police Department will tell you they can always use more men (and women ) to get the job done... And better updated equipment,.... And to me the police should have just as updated weapons as the military does. No Police Department should be outgunned by the bad guys.... I find it completely and totally insane that John Q Public can go to a gun show and get more firepower in three days than most police departments have or can get budget approval to buy in years. There are people who raise private money just so that police dogs can have body armor!! There's no reason for that!!! when police dogs are just as valuable assets to the of to a department as any other member of the team. Training costs money too...... in this case, training in how to deal with a public that's becoming more diverse every year should be easily funded as well so profiling wouldn't be necessary either. But oh no...... we have to act like were saving money someplace....... until there's a wrongful death lawsuit brought on by a wrongfully accused citizen..... or Where there is a crime spree or serial killer that nobody can get a handle on.....

chatterbox24 -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:41:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 We had a situation where are 4 wheeler was stolen out of our barn in the middle of the night. We called the police and gave the Vin numbers. We had no descriptions of people nor vehicles. Two vehicles were pulled over carrying 4 wheelers. The first vehicle pulled over was innocent, and I am sure they were not really happy about it, it was an inconvenience. The second vehicle pulled over was carrying the stolen property, and the man behind the wheel had just been released for doing this same thing previously. Theft. I was pulled over about 10 years ago and my car searched, due to an armed robbery of a convenience store, where the vehicle matched mines description, but they had no plate numbers. Was it a little embarrassing? Yes. What else were they suppose to do in that situation? I minded but I understood their position. My step nephews truck was pulled over by an anonymous call with plates, the report was the vehicle was waving a gun at passers on the interstate. He had his daughter with him. They had them lay along side of the road, and his 14 year old daughter to search the vehicle. No gun was found. Considering the job he does, that would be the bad apple call. A vengeful call. Now who was responsible for that injustice? The caller or the police. It goes both ways. People are going to have different opinions. Then of course there is "my cousin vinny" LOL. or the God father. You know him too?

itsSIRtou -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 7:51:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Funny how a dims response to any problem is always more govt. funny how you tea brains think a responsible government always means more. And at no point is did I ever say more government, And if that's your only response,... Thank you Phydeaux.....for being at least smart enough to be agreeing that there's a problem. A responsible government can structure itself so that it can take care of ALL the people It has without having to get bigger, unless it doesn't have the resources to get what it needs to be responsible done. IMO You tea baggers just hack and slash budgets with no regard to what is needed by government to effectively work for ALL its people. That is, until the crap hits the fan, then you run around barking that government doesn't know what to do.

chatterbox24 -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 8:01:25 AM)
I have this really good herbal tea I picked up its called "If I only had a Brain" and I am not even kidding, IM going to brew me some. Want a sip?[:D] I am sooooooooooooo going to get in trouble today. Mod 3 is going to hack and slash me.

itsSIRtou -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 8:18:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 I have this really good herbal tea I picked up its called "If I only had a Brain" and I am not even kidding, IM going to brew me some. Want a sip?[:D] I am sooooooooooooo going to get in trouble today. Mod 3 is going to hack and slash me. ..... I can only hope that it helps you have the aforementioned tea namesake...... Matter-of-factly you could probably buy that brand is and have each one of the tea party beer bong about 10 gallons of it..... Each..... (They don't do anything in moderation. Anyway!!) But of course that's just my thought.

MercTech -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 8:55:08 AM)
There is an easy way around this issue and plenty of precedent. Just add some fine print and signage worded something like "Operation of a motor vehicle upon public roads and streets gives consent to search vehicles operated on public roads and streets." There are enough precedents of such signage at federal installations and some businesses that bringing any vehicle or property onto their grounds is consent to search vehicles and property. _________________________________________________________________________________________ The issue in the court case seems to me one of "probable cause" for a search of a motor vehicle. The court ruled that an anonymous tip that a driver appeared drunk is due cause for a stop and search. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/navarette-v-california/ The original precedent for a warrantless search of a motor vehicle actually goes back to 1925. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_v._United_States

MrRodgers -> RE: R.I.P. 4th Amendment (4/28/2014 9:13:56 AM)
The 4th amend. died years ago. People have been illegally searched and successfully prosecuted on less than this which still had probable cause...for years. We've had the funeral and wake already. There are a few more of our bill of rights also dead or on life support. Welcome to the beginning stages of Neo Nazi America. Your kids will read about free America of the past in books...for a little while more anyway.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.201172E-02