To Protect and to Serve II

#9,179
#9,179
InVOLuntary said:
Is there not a legal recourse to sue? Can one sue for punitive damages if the reasonable suspicion is determined unreasonable?
Click to expand...
of course there is, but the anti-police people will fail to point out that the vast vast majority of all police detainments are legal which is why no one wins lawsuits against the police unless ACTUAL misconduct occurs, which is rare
 
#9,180
#9,180
VolStrom said:
Yeah right, define reasonable suspicion. Its anything you want it to be.
Click to expand...

Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch'"; it must be based on "specific and articulate facts", "taken together with rational inferences from those facts", and the suspicion must be associated with the specific individual. If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained is armed and dangerous, they may "frisk" the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. However, if the police develop probable cause during a weapons frisk (by feeling something that could be a weapon or contraband, for example), they can then search you. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably suspect a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous.
 
#9,181
#9,181
Rickyvol77 said:
of course there is, but the anti-police people will fail to point out that the vast vast majority of all police detainments are legal which is why no one wins lawsuits against the police unless ACTUAL misconduct occurs, which is rare
Click to expand...
I'm no police hater, several really good friends who are cops, but I've seen a few instances where police didn't really have a reason to ask for ID but arrested because the person didn't present it. One case in particular a guy was taking pictures of a county building and some other stuff. It was cold outside so he had a mask on. He didn't produce ID and was arrested. He explained he was a journalist. I'll post a link....



In this case I think the cops overstepped and should be held accountable. The cops shouldn't have carte blanche to know who you are. That's what they do in China.
 
#9,182
#9,182
InVOLuntary said:
I'm no police hater, several really good friends who are cops, but I've seen a few instances where police didn't really have a reason to ask for ID but arrested because the person didn't present it. One case in particular a guy was taking pictures of a county building and some other stuff. It was cold outside so he had a mask on. He didn't produce ID and was arrested. He explained he was a journalist. I'll post a link....



In this case I think the cops overstepped and should be held accountable. The cops shouldn't have carte blanche to know who you are. That's what they do in China.
Click to expand...

I agree with these points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and InVOLuntary
#9,184
#9,184
Rickyvol77 said:
of course there is, but the anti-police people will fail to point out that the vast vast majority of all police detainments are legal which is why no one wins lawsuits against the police unless ACTUAL misconduct occurs, which is rare
Click to expand...
Who determines if an arrest was legal or not?
 
#9,185
#9,185
Rickyvol77 said:
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch'"; it must be based on "specific and articulate facts", "taken together with rational inferences from those facts", and the suspicion must be associated with the specific individual. If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained is armed and dangerous, they may "frisk" the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. However, if the police develop probable cause during a weapons frisk (by feeling something that could be a weapon or contraband, for example), they can then search you. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably suspect a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous.
Click to expand...
You just posted the key component in the very first line...

Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MercyPercy
#9,186
#9,186
Rasputin_Vol said:
Who determines if an arrest was legal or not?
Click to expand...
um...

-the officer who makes the arrest
-the County Commissioner who signs the warrant
-the D.A.
- The Judge and/or Jury, Grand Jury, etc.
-the local, state and federal statues and the U.S. Constitution
 
#9,189
#9,189
MercyPercy said:
Reasonable suspicion can be anything. Cop says you were behaving strangely walking down the sidewalk, becomes your word versus theirs. How often does the citizen win that scenario?
Click to expand...

This isn't true, I've never stopped to actually detain someone, ask for their ID for "just walking down the sidewalk" unless there were other mitigating factors involved.

I have said hello to people and talked with them in general as a community policing method and not demand their ID or some such silliness.

some of these may include:
-received a call of person matching that description doing something illegal in area
-I KNOW the person already and know their criminal history and motives
-they are in a high-crime area and truly are acting suspiciously, etc.
 
#9,190
#9,190
Rickyvol77 said:
This isn't true, I've never stopped to actually detain someone, ask for their ID for "just walking down the sidewalk" unless there were other mitigating factors involved.

I have said hello to people and talked with them in general as a community policing method and not demand their ID or some such silliness.

some of these may include:
-received a call of person matching that description doing something illegal in area
-I KNOW the person already and know their criminal history and motives
-they are in a high-crime area and truly are acting suspiciously, etc.
Click to expand...
Just because you claim to never harass a person means it probably happens 99% of the time that the Billy bad ass cops that look just like the ones kicked off the GA. state trooper force say the they had "reasonable suspicion". For every one cop that claims to be a good guy I'm thinking there are 3 that aren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange
#9,191
#9,191
VolStrom said:
Just because you claim to never harass a person means it probably happens 99% of the time that the Billy bad ass cops that look just like the ones kicked off the GA. state trooper force say the they had "reasonable suspicion". For every one cop that claims to be a good guy I'm thinking there are 3 that aren't.
Click to expand...
I think your numbers are WAY to high...put it this way:

I have worked in law enforcement for 22 years, I've been working with OR adjacent to officers and deputies from probably 20 something agencies from KPD/KCSO to FBI to UT Police to THP to every surrounding county. Of all those officers, I've worked with directly or seen in a professional setting during that time i'd estimate 88% were fine, normal everyday people, who wanted to do the right things and what you would expect from your officers. Another 10% were people had other negative work-related personalities like you would see in YOUR job (lazy, political, back-stabbing, jealous, etc) or just didn't have what it took to DO the job well (sometimes they were washed out, sometimes not depending on how small your department was).

the other 2% were the people that anti-police BELIEVE all police are, the liars, the criminals, the bullies, etc. And 99% of THOSE people never make it far and are washed out pretty quickly, especially in the more modern larger departments. Regular officers don't like them, don't want to work with them, and don't want legal issues because of them.

The only time I've EVER witnessed an officer purposefully being racist or bullying was a Union County jailer in the early 00's who had NO training or education. He was fired after we reported him for his statements.

It's just not what you think it is in the world of policing. There are ALWAYS going to be dumbasses in every profession, but the politics in certain departments is what's worse than actual officer behaviors on the streets. You get one bad Lieutenant/Captain/Sheriff, especially in the smaller rural counties, that's where the true issues are!
 
#9,192
#9,192
I love how if you disagree you’re automatically anti cop. You couldn’t possibly be against government overreach. The changes that have taken place in this country over the last 20 years has redefined America. It’s sad for those of us who choose to live our lives in peace. Government is in every aspect of our lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange and MercyPercy
#9,193
#9,193
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
I love how if you disagree you’re automatically anti cop. You couldn’t possibly be against government overreach. The changes that have taken place in this country over the last 20 years has redefined America. It’s sad for those of us who choose to live our lives in peace. Government is in every aspect of our lives.
Click to expand...

I never said if you disagree you are "anti-cop". I said that many who post that they don't understand simple legal concepts and what the law actually states, and who constantly misrepresent and generalize police tactics and procedures are anti-cop. I have been pretty down the middle in my views through this entire thread of why certain laws exist, what i personally would or wouldnt do as a police officer, and how things ACTUALLY are, not what some here perceive them to be.
 
#9,194
#9,194
Rickyvol77 said:
I think your numbers are WAY to high...put it this way:

I have worked in law enforcement for 22 years, I've been working with OR adjacent to officers and deputies from probably 20 something agencies from KPD/KCSO to FBI to UT Police to THP to every surrounding county. Of all those officers, I've worked with directly or seen in a professional setting during that time i'd estimate 88% were fine, normal everyday people, who wanted to do the right things and what you would expect from your officers. Another 10% were people had other negative work-related personalities like you would see in YOUR job (lazy, political, back-stabbing, jealous, etc) or just didn't have what it took to DO the job well (sometimes they were washed out, sometimes not depending on how small your department was).

the other 2% were the people that anti-police BELIEVE all police are, the liars, the criminals, the bullies, etc. And 99% of THOSE people never make it far and are washed out pretty quickly, especially in the more modern larger departments. Regular officers don't like them, don't want to work with them, and don't want legal issues because of them.

The only time I've EVER witnessed an officer purposefully being racist or bullying was a Union County jailer in the early 00's who had NO training or education. He was fired after we reported him for his statements.

It's just not what you think it is in the world of policing. There are ALWAYS going to be dumbasses in every profession, but the politics in certain departments is what's worse than actual officer behaviors on the streets. You get one bad Lieutenant/Captain/Sheriff, especially in the smaller rural counties, that's where the true issues are!
Click to expand...
I'm sorry man, but if 10% of your people suck and another 2% really suck, you have a really really bad problem. Of all of the people I've worked with I would guess that 1/10 of 1% sucked and 1/100 of 1% really really sucked. Your profession also has the responsibility of enforcing the law so everything you do wrong is under a magnifying glass. Think about if 1 out 10 of your people suck at their job and you owned your own company, you'd be bankrupt in no time.
 
#9,195
#9,195
VolStrom said:
I'm sorry man, but if 10% of your people suck and another 2% really suck, you have a really really bad problem. Of all of the people I've worked with I would guess that 1/10 of 1% sucked and 1/100 of 1% really really sucked. Your profession also has the responsibility of enforcing the law so everything you do wrong is under a magnifying glass. Think about if 1 out 10 of your people suck at their job and you owned your own company, you'd be bankrupt in no time.
Click to expand...
This sample size is out of literally 5k people from 20 something counties. I currently am an executive at a non-law enforcement company who employs about 7200 ppl and if you don’t think even with great hiring practices that people don’t fall through the cracks they do. And it doesn’t mean my company “sucks”. They are eventually weeded out when discovered. I guarantee that anyplace you worked has had about 5-10% problem employees
 
#9,196
#9,196
Rickyvol77 said:
This sample size is out of literally 5k people from 20 something counties. I currently am an executive at a non-law enforcement company who employs about 7200 ppl and if you don’t think even with great hiring practices that people don’t fall through the cracks they do. And it doesn’t mean my company “sucks”. They are eventually weeded out when discovered. I guarantee that anyplace you worked has had about 5-10% problem employees
Click to expand...
It depends on how much a company pays and benefits as to the quality of people they attract. Prove me wrong.
Oh and I was referring to police department employees, not private sector, but the same principle applies.
 
#9,197
#9,197
VolStrom said:
It depends on how much a company pays and benefits as to the quality of people they attract. Prove me wrong.
Oh and I was referring to police department employees, not private sector, but the same principle applies.
Click to expand...
This was kind of my point. Good agencies with well educated and well trained officers that pay well will have better candidates than say union county or Morgan county jail
 
#9,198
#9,198
Rickyvol77 said:
This was kind of my point. Good agencies with well educated and well trained officers that pay well will have better candidates than say union county or Morgan county jail
Click to expand...
I drove through Rockford many moons ago and got pulled over because a car was tailgating me and the cop wanted to know what I did wrong for him to tailgate me. Not long after they shut down that department when an off duty Knox county police officer was killed by one of their deputies in a traffic stop with a car vs motorcycle. It sounds like you admit that there are idiots employed in police departments with podunk budgets all over East Tennessee.
 
#9,200
#9,200
VolStrom said:
I drove through Rockford many moons ago and got pulled over because a car was tailgating me and the cop wanted to know what I did wrong for him to tailgate me. Not long after they shut down that department when an off duty Knox county police officer was killed by one of their deputies in a traffic stop with a car vs motorcycle. It sounds like you admit that there are idiots employed in police departments with podunk budgets all over East Tennessee.
Click to expand...
But my point is because there may BE some doesnt mean that all are
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top