Stop & Frisk Captures Wanted Murderer - Trump Was Right

Taft2016 said:
I know what Stop, Question, and Frisk requires, and you had an iota of honesty you'd admit quite frankly that I was the one who explained it to you.
Click to expand...
yeah, you also explained to me that I was required to let you take a laptop that you claimed to own when everyone in the coffee shop saw a woman using it before she left. so no, I wont be accepting your definitions any time soon.

Taft2016 said:
They had reasonable suspicion (as opposed to probable cause) to inquire what he was up to.
Click to expand...
feel free to detail that reasonable suspicion of what crime he had committed, was committing, or was about to commit when they stopped him......
 
SmarterthanYou said:
really? so do you believe that they should redefine 'reasonable suspicion' to a point that everything is illegal and someone can be stopped for anything? For instance
Click to expand...

For instance, that's the way the country was run for its first century. It wasn't until search and seizure rulings from the Supreme Court began in 20th century by liberal activist judges.

You should admit you're a liberal on this issue. All of the restrictions upon search and seizure have come about as a result of liberal reforms.
 
Taft2016 said:
For instance, that's the way the country was run for its first century.
Click to expand...
i'm sure you can provide some factual citations to that effect?

Taft2016 said:
It wasn't until search and seizure rulings from the Supreme Court began in 20th century by liberal activist judges.
Click to expand...
more cites

Taft2016 said:
You should admit you're a liberal on this issue. All of the restrictions upon search and seizure have come about as a result of liberal reforms.
Click to expand...
maybe you should re=familiarize yourself with US v. John Bad Elk again, to get an understanding of 'reasonable' or not if you wish to continue POLICE STATE tactics over freedom.
 
Taft2016 said:
All lost during database crash, as you well know.

You remember, when I blew up your crazy internet meme that the courts ruled nuts like you can run around shooting the police if you happen to think the arrest is unlawful?
Click to expand...

i also remember how power hungry cops love it when courts rule FOR them, but decry the courts when they rule against them. face it, you're a piece of shit statist government thug, that's all there is to it.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
really? so do you believe that they should redefine 'reasonable suspicion' to a point that everything is illegal and someone can be stopped for anything? For instance, 3 years ago the florida highway patrol started instituting drivers license checkpoints because driving without a license is illegal, therefore they have reasonable suspicion that anyone driving COULD be driving without a license. Is that reasonable?
Click to expand...

Driver's license checkpoints are perfectly reasonable.

The only people who get pissed off about driver's license checks are people who are breaking the law by either driving under the influence, driving on a suspended or revoked license, or both.

If crud like you would stop abusing traffic laws and losing your driving privileges, you wouldn't need to worry about getting caught every time you're out driving illegally.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
i also remember how power hungry cops love it when courts rule FOR them, but decry the courts when they rule against them. face it, you're a piece of shit statist government thug, that's all there is to it.
Click to expand...

Face it, you're a contemptible libtard who is eager to wipe his butt with the beloved Constitution bestowed upon us by the Founders.
 
" 3 years ago the florida highway patrol started instituting drivers license checkpoints because driving without a license is illegal, therefore they have reasonable suspicion that anyone driving COULD be driving without a license. Is that reasonable? " SY #40
Click to expand...
No.
It is not reasonable.

Government awareness crime exists does not provide adequate government authority for search, which is what a roadblock is.
 
Taft2016 said:
1. You don't even know what "probable cause" means. Probable cause means they can arrest him.
2. What is a crowbar probable cause of? That he has a flat tire? Unlawful possession of a crowbar?
3. I heard you got demoted to putting the labels on the sardine cans now. Is that true?
Click to expand...

Shhhhh! He's telling everyone he got promoted. :palm:
 
Taft2016 said:
I know what Stop, Question, and Frisk requires, and you had an iota of honesty you'd admit quite frankly that I was the one who explained it to you.

They had reasonable suspicion (as opposed to probable cause) to inquire what he was up to.

So you can stop with your "ZOMG! Police State!" nonsense.
Click to expand...

Hysteria makes them feel safe and comfy.

Bizarro World.
 
sear said:
a) The argument against Stop-&-Frisk was never that it wouldn't occasionally result in a valid arrest.

Instead the reasoning if far simpler and more logical. We don't want to live in a police State.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Thomas Jefferson to James Madison

b) That's why our Founders enshrined it in our 4th Amendment, article number four in our Bill of Rights:

B. O. R. ARTICLE #4: Ratified December 15, 1791
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Certainly if we turned the U.S. into a totalitarian regime like North Korea, a few more criminals might be captured.

You think it's worth it?!

Well if you think so, why don't you move to North Korea where you'll be happy?
Click to expand...

Taft is totalitarianism shithead.
 
" 3 years ago the florida highway patrol started instituting drivers license checkpoints because driving without a license is illegal, therefore they have reasonable suspicion that anyone driving COULD be driving without a license. Is that reasonable? " SY #40

"No." sear

"Yeah, it does.
Sobriety checkpoints are perfectly legal." T2 #51

Since ancient times, necessity has been recognized as making an exception in law.
The ancient Latin legal maxim is:

quod alias non fuit licitum, necessitas licitum facit:
What otherwise was not lawful, necessity makes lawful.

There are 3 different issues here.

The DWI checkpoint / roadblock is a practical necessity, because a simple computer check of DMV records isn't goint to detect BAC in drivers whether licensed or not.
And human life is at risk w/ DWI.

A citizen whose license expired yesterday is not necessarily any more dangerous a driver than s/he was 2 days before.

Government agents are needed at known high concentration DWI times / dates / locations. For example:

- New Year's Day, drunks driving home from New Year's Eve parties

- Superbowl night, drunks driving home from the SB party

- etc.

Prison break check-point & roadblocks are also legal, and also a practical necessity.

I even found a DMV sticker check-point once. The troopers checked the date on my registration and inspection stickers, and finding them valid waved me through without question.

Where do we draw the line?

You know, I know, THEY know; crime exists.

Does that alone constitute probable cause for a roadblock?

"Fruit of the poison tree."

BTW
I suspect the per capita population affected by government check-points & roadblocks has increased since the Revolutionary War ended.

DWI checkpoints, or even seat-belt check-points may be legal today.
Do you think the Founders would have approved them?
 
Taft2016 said:
1. You don't even know what "probable cause" means. Probable cause means they can arrest him.
2. What is a crowbar probable cause of? That he has a flat tire? Unlawful possession of a crowbar?
3. I heard you got demoted to putting the labels on the sardine cans now. Is that true?
Click to expand...

Probable cause allows a search without a warrant sophist.
 
Taft2016 said:
You might be conflating two things.

The scenario above is the one I gave several years back to show that SQF is a necessary law enforcement tool. In the above scenario SQF is the only thing the police would be able to do, as no crime had yet been committed. You take away SQF and all they could do is roll up, say, "Yeah, there he is," and drive away. A conclusion I don't think anybody would find satisfactory.

However, that is not the crowbar scenario with this murderer.
Click to expand...

Wrong.
Carrying a crowbar openly at 3:00 am and looking into cars is enough for probable cause.
Stop lying
 
sear said:
" 3 years ago the florida highway patrol started instituting drivers license checkpoints because driving without a license is illegal, therefore they have reasonable suspicion that anyone driving COULD be driving without a license. Is that reasonable? " SY #40

"No." sear

"Yeah, it does.
Sobriety checkpoints are perfectly legal." T2 #51
Click to expand...

Sooooo.....????

Post 6 vs post 56 ?

You ought get on one side of the fence or the other......
 
In reality, there is no probable cause at DUI checkpoints or drivers license checkpoints.....its a fishing expedition....

but to stop and frisk a suspicious person in a high crime neighborhood or one that has just experienced a murder is another matter.....

Yet....I support both.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top