Could Any American Citizen Actually Believe That This "Cop" Was On Their Side?

Experience tells me people prefer to start these stories at the end.

By ignoring everything that lead up to the incident we have "PRESTO! The police stopped me for no reason."

And if you do not abide by the paranoid belief that cops are bad, you're somehow gullible and trusting of authority.
 
http://law-faq.com/13/dealing-with-police/can-a-police-officer-stop-you-for-no-reason/



Can a police officer stop you for no reason?

Posted by Nauseum on
August 29th, 2011

There may be a reason even if they didn’t tell you.

The burden of proof to stop someone is called “reasonable suspicion”. The burden of proof to search someone is called “probable cause”.

When it appears that you have been stopped for no reason it is called a “Terry Stop”. The name comes from the standards established in a 1968 case, Terry v. Ohio. Remember, all the police need at this point is a ‘reasonable suspicion.’ Police will use a Terry Stop as a tool if he or she observes unusual conduct which leads him or her to reasonably suspect that criminal activity may be occurring. This is a gray area and left to interpretation.
this is incorrect information.
 
Oh lookie here, a paranoid idiot calling others idiots for not wallowing in the same paranoia. Truly the definition of irony.

Your irrational fear and distrust of the police suggest someone in need of psychiatric help...I'm not trying to be obtuse...seriously dude, get help.
right. read most of my posts. then see who needs help.
 
no, it's not. the idiocy of most of you in believing the so called experts is laughable.

Wait, you're right. I misread.

The burden to stop someone is "reasonable suspicion." The burden to search someone is also "reasonable suspicion," not "probable cause."

"Probable cause" is the burden of proof needed to arrest someone. An officer can search someone for an illegal weapon, for instance, if he/she had "reasonable suspicion." Otherwise, the police could never find an illegal weapon until after they already had probable cause to arrest the suspect.

You are correct.
 
Because they have a god damned RIGHT do go where ever the hell they want. If they're not doing anything illegal cops can fuck off and die.

And you're demanding that people give up their right to travel where and when they please. You're not better, fascist.

Cops have a right to question them and if they don't have a legitimate reason for being in my neighborhood at that time a night, the cops also have a right to run a background criminal check on them.
 
Cops have a right to question them and if they don't have a legitimate reason for being in my neighborhood at that time a night, the cops also have a right to run a background criminal check on them.
you're a bit mistaken on the law. while police have the 'right', like any other citizen, to ask questions, unless they can find reasonable suspicion to detain someone, they cannot run any background check on them, even if you don't want them in your neighborhood.
 
Prior to a "Stop" at the "reasonable suspicion" level of proof, there is basically no burden of proof needed for the "Common Law Right of Inquiry", sometimes known as "Request for Information."
 
Prior to a "Stop" at the "reasonable suspicion" level of proof, there is basically no burden of proof needed for the "Common Law Right of Inquiry", sometimes known as "Request for Information."
and as i've always stated, they can ask anything they want, but without reasonable suspicion I do not have to stand there and answer.
 
I would be glad my tax dollars are going toward police neighborhood protection. I would be glad that the DUI frenzy that has reached fanatical proportions thanks to the mothers against men and their lobby has finally subsided back to a sane level. So would the restaurant owners who make great profits selling drinks to their customers. So would people in those restaurants who enjoy having a glass or two of wine with their dinner.

I don't sit there in my home at night cheerleading the police out on the highways who are looking to fill quota DUI directives because I don't give a damn about the highways, I give a damn about the safety of my own neighborhood. If the police claim they're preventing crime by locking up somebody who's had a beer that evening and was stopped and put through a fascist blood alcohol test, I say the cops will be preventing crime by making a routine nightly on the hour patrol in my neighborhood instead.

You got caught; HUH!! :)
 
that would fly on the street, but the cops lose in court and I get a 5 figure paycheck

Not if it's a seasoned officer who can effectively toss around catch-phrases like "appeared nervous" and "made furtive gestures," etc.

Nonetheless, if an officer asks you something like "Sir, did you see who broke into this car?"... why would you just walk away? Does just saying "No, I'm sorry" or describing what you may have seen really represent such a surrender to big government authoritarianism to you?
 
Not if it's a seasoned officer who can effectively toss around catch-phrases like "appeared nervous" and "made furtive gestures," etc.
which is exactly why I record all my interactions with cops. because they lie.

Nonetheless, if an officer asks you something like "Sir, did you see who broke into this car?"... why would you just walk away? Does just saying "No, I'm sorry" or describing what you may have seen really represent such a surrender to big government authoritarianism to you?
if I caught someone breaking in to a car, i'd be holding him/her at gunpoint until the cops arrive. If i've seen nothing then I say 'no, sorry. have a nice night' and walk away.
 
Back
Top