HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

BrownsMan wrote: Not only is it against not against the law, it is the foundation of good police work. RACIAL profiling is against the law.

HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

BrownsMan wrote: It does, and every good cop does it. Every citizen should demand that they do so.

37179 wrote: It's called profiling -

It works - - -

From the Constitution Of The United States Of America

Amendment IV

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.

Which means you need a better reason than you didn't like the look of someone to stop and detain them.

AMENDMENT XIV

Section 1. (commonly known as the Equal Protection Clause)

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Which means everyone has the same right to be left alone and protected equally under the law, whether they are black, Arab, has a marijuana bumper sticker, out of state plates, long hair, tattoos.   Anything.

And, if you happpen to believe that it's OK to fudge our constitutional rights to get the "bad guys" and the "undesirables", well one of our most revered Founding Fathers had a very definite opinion on that...


Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

--Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

33Tennessee wrote:

37179 wrote: It's always a good day for some country music -

Wish that I was on ole Rocky Top
Down in the Tennessee Hills.
Ain't no smoggy smoke on Rocky Top,
Ain't no telephone bills.

Once I had a girl on Rocky Top,
Half bear the other half cat;
Wild as a mink as sweet as soda pop,
I still dream about that.

CHORUS

Rocky Top, you'll always be,
Home sweet home to me.
Good ole Rocky Top,
Rocky Top Tennessee.

Once two strangers climbed ole Rocky Top,
Lookin' for a moonshine still.
Strangers ain't come down from Rocky Top,
Reckon they never will.
Corn won't grow at all on Rocky Top,
Dirt's too rocky by far.
That's why all the folks on Rocky Top,
get their corn from a jar.

CHORUS

I've had years of cramped up city life;
Trapped like a duck in a pen.
All I know is it's a pity life,
Can't be simple again.

CHORUS

"I hate that f****** song." -Rachel Phelps

 topdawg29 wrote: You're kidding, right?



---------------------------------------------
--- peeode wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- topdawg29 wrote:

He'd be an idiot? You are misinformed. A picture of a pot leave is not probable cause to make a traffic stop. I'd hope they had some other violation to make the stop.

Attornies make a living on probable cause cases, so I'm not sure what you are talking about.

---------------------------------------------
--- CaryNCBrownsBacker wrote:

Dawgfather wrote: Regardless, even if it was a pot leaf, that's not enough reason to pull someone over. I would be on the phone with my lawyer and sue their ass.

Your lawyer is an F ing idiot if he takes your case. 

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Yeah, I'm sure there would be a huge settlement associated with the major, life altering trauma of being pulled over for a few minutes...

---------------------------------------------

HarleyD wrote:

BrownsMan wrote: It does, and every good cop does it. Every citizen should demand that they do so.

37179 wrote: It's called profiling -

It works - - -

From the Constitution Of The United States Of America

Amendment IV

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.

Which means you need a better reason than you didn't like the look of someone to stop and detain them.

AMENDMENT XIV

 

Section 1. (commonly known as the Equal Protection Clause)

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Which means everyone has the same right to be left alone and protected equally under the law, whether they are black, Arab, has a marijuana bumper sticker, out of state plates, long hair, tattoos.   Anything.

And, if you happpen to believe that it's OK to fudge our constitutional rights to get the "bad guys" and the "undesirables", well one of our most revered Founding Fathers had a very definite opinion on that...


Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

--Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

But every citizen should demand profiling from their law enforcement. 

Right.

That has to be one of the most self serving, butt-ignorant assertions I've ever seen someone try to pass off.

topdawg29 wrote: Any form of profiling is neither probable cause or reasonable suspicion.  I'm not sure where you are getting your information.

BrownsMan wrote: Not only is it against not against the law, it is the foundation of good police work. RACIAL profiling is against the law.

HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

BrownsMan wrote: I got my information from 32 years in law enforcement. Criminal profiling, i.e. stopping and questioning people involved in articuably suspicious activity, is profiling, it works, and it is an essentiail part of the law enforcement function.

topdawg29 wrote: Any form of profiling is neither probable cause or reasonable suspicion.  I'm not sure where you are getting your information.

BrownsMan wrote: Not only is it against not against the law, it is the foundation of good police work. RACIAL profiling is against the law.

HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

bwwyyyy wrote: COP FIGHT!!!

Concurrence: (Harlan, J.) An officer must have constitutional grounds on which to insist on an encounter, to make a forcible stop. The right to frisk must be immediate and automatic if the reason for the stop is an articulable suspicion of a crime of violence.

Concurrence: (White, J.) A policeman can address questions to anyone on the streets, but citizens are not obliged to answer, and answers may not be compelled. A refusal to answer is no basis for an arrest, but it may be a basis for continued observation.

Critical summary: This case represents a delineation between a reasonable belief and a reasonable suspicion. Probable cause= reasonable belief. Stop and Frisk = reasonable suspicion backed by articulable facts.

Criminal profiling is the use of legitimate law enforcement knowledge, training, and experience to narrow a field of suspects during a criminal investigation. Factual information, patterns of activity, and motives are some of the aspects considered when using criminal profiling to develop a suspect.

Bias-based profiling is more than just racial profiling.  It is the use of not only race but ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, economic status, background, age, appearance or culture as the sole basis for police activity. The absence of facts, suspicious activity, or specific criminal information is what separates bias-based profiling from legitimate criminal profiling.

Having a bumper sticker that depicts a marijuana leaf, a crack pipe or a heroin syringe does not rise to the level of facts, suspicious activity, or specific criminal information.  Nor does having valid out of state plates on an interstate highway. 

dmnc94 wrote:

BrownsMan wrote: I got my information from 32 years in law enforcement. Criminal profiling, i.e. stopping and questioning people involved in articuably suspicious activity, is profiling, it works, and it is an essentiail part of the law enforcement function.

topdawg29 wrote: Any form of profiling is neither probable cause or reasonable suspicion.  I'm not sure where you are getting your information.

BrownsMan wrote: Not only is it against not against the law, it is the foundation of good police work. RACIAL profiling is against the law.

HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

I agree and will add racial profiling is the problem. You can not pull over someone because they are black, white, hispanic, asian or whatever. You can and should be able to pull over a car full of teen/young adults that is dubbed out in a very well to do neighborhood. That profiling is just good cop work.

BrownsMan wrote:  good police work.

FestivusRules wrote: I know that if I were transporting pot I would surely have a sticker of a pot leaf on my car.  Maybe even flashing lights and a big sign reading something like "Pot on Board".

HarleyD wrote:

dmnc94 wrote:

BrownsMan wrote: I got my information from 32 years in law enforcement. Criminal profiling, i.e. stopping and questioning people involved in articuably suspicious activity, is profiling, it works, and it is an essentiail part of the law enforcement function.

topdawg29 wrote: Any form of profiling is neither probable cause or reasonable suspicion.  I'm not sure where you are getting your information.

BrownsMan wrote: Not only is it against not against the law, it is the foundation of good police work. RACIAL profiling is against the law.

HarleyD wrote: It's called profiling.

It's against the law.

I agree and will add racial profiling is the problem. You can not pull over someone because they are black, white, hispanic, asian or whatever. You can and should be able to pull over a car full of teen/young adults that is dubbed out in a very well to do neighborhood. That profiling is just good cop work.

You can't stop them just for passing through.  Now if they are observed circling the block, slowing and checking out individual homes, etc. that is a pattern of behavior that could be used to justify reasonable suspicion.

bwwyyyy wrote: COP FIGHT!!!

topdawg29 wrote: The driver of this van is clearly a pedophile.  He should be pulled over and arrested on the spot.

olecowboy wrote:

bwwyyyy wrote: COP FIGHT!!!

sez the guy who hasn't read Terry vs. Ohio. . .

dmnc94 wrote:

topdawg29 wrote: The driver of this van is clearly a pedophile.  He should be pulled over and arrested on the spot.

If that was some secret code for pedophiles and he was driving in an area where pedophiles were know to be then yes he should be pulled over and questioned. For the same reason you can not carry a realistic toy gun into a bank.

FestivusRules wrote:

dmnc94 wrote:

topdawg29 wrote: The driver of this van is clearly a pedophile.  He should be pulled over and arrested on the spot.

If that was some secret code for pedophiles and he was driving in an area where pedophiles were know to be then yes he should be pulled over and questioned. For the same reason you can not carry a realistic toy gun into a bank.

His point is spot on.  Let's go back to my post where I sarcastically note that if I were smuggling pot I would surely have a sticker of a pot leaf on my car.  Are you really saying that drug smugglers advertise their intent?  This is what gets me about this whole thing.  Even if I didn't recognize the buckeye leaf and thought it was a pot leaf, would I pull this car over?  I think not.  Probably the last car I would pull over.  This car might contain 1/4 ounce of pot for personal use but I can tell you with 99% certainty that it won't contain a pound or more being smuggled across state lines.

I hate the drug war anyway so I'm really biased against this stuff.  Pot?  Really?  Certainly less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, maybe even less so than caffeine.  But looking past that, these cops were either stupid or they were looking to bust only a casual user.  Hardly worth the time IMO even if I were looking to try to stop pot smuggling.

Your tax dollars at work.