To Protect and to Serve II

#12,430
#12,430
How Pa. troopers use sweating, stuttering during traffic stops to launch vehicle searches | Spotlight PA

“If an individual who said they had nothing illegal in the vehicle says, ‘No, I don’t want you to search my car,’ it could be an additional indicator [of illegal activity],” the officer, who was not identified, said in the video.
Click to expand...

“Are the roads safer because you stopped someone because of an expired tag or an air freshener?” asked David Harris, a law professor at University of Pittsburgh who specializes in police training. “Traffic stops are the most common interaction police have with Americans and also they can be dangerous.”
Click to expand...

Troopers have also been trained in recent years to look for more than 50 “criminal indicators,” including high car mileage, if the car is a rental, any amounts of money in the car, audible sighs, or if the driver is being overtly cooperative, according to an unofficial form obtained by Spotlight PA.
Click to expand...
 
#12,431
#12,431
Rasputin_Vol said:
How Pa. troopers use sweating, stuttering during traffic stops to launch vehicle searches | Spotlight PA
Click to expand...

High car mileage and cash are criminal indicators? High mileage cars and cash are staples of the poor. Most poor people don’t use a bank or can afford a newer car. This sounds like more of an attack on lower income citizens who cannot hire an attorney to fight frivolous and trivial laws. By these standards I’m a criminal because my daily driver has 150k miles on it.

Tax collection at its finest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13, zeppelin128 and davethevol
#12,432
#12,432
MOOOOONEY said:
High car mileage and cash are criminal indicators? High mileage cars and cash are staples of the poor. Most poor people don’t use a bank or can afford a newer car. This sounds like more of an attack on lower income citizens who cannot hire an attorney to fight frivolous and trivial laws. By these standards I’m a criminal because my daily driver has 150k miles on it.

Tax collection at its finest.
Click to expand...

You said it.
 
#12,436
#12,436
lawgator1 said:
Do you understand qualified immunity? I've litigated the issue hundreds of times in every context you can think of, including shootings. I feel confident in saying that officers making the decision to shoot do not mull over qualified immunity as part of that process.
Click to expand...

Maybe they should start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#12,437
#12,437
Rickyvol77 said:
You could argue the no-knock warrant was unnecessary, but the officers shooting back when shot at is not
Click to expand...

When people's homes are broken into in the middle of the night, is protocol to ask for resumes and references first?
 
#12,439
#12,439
MOOOOONEY said:
High car mileage and cash are criminal indicators? High mileage cars and cash are staples of the poor. Most poor people don’t use a bank or can afford a newer car. This sounds like more of an attack on lower income citizens who cannot hire an attorney to fight frivolous and trivial laws. By these standards I’m a criminal because my daily driver has 150k miles on it.

Tax collection at its finest.
Click to expand...
Bingo.
 
#12,441
#12,441
Septic said:
Maybe they should start.
Click to expand...


When a cop has two seconds or less to make a decision on whether to use deadly force they are not thinking about the parameters of a lawsuit three years later.

What people do not get about qualified immunity is a) it is qualified, meaning it is not automatic; and b) it does not foreclose other kinds of lawsuits or actions. On the latter, even if a cop gets QI on a federal civil rights claim he and his city or agency can still be sued for all sorts of state law torts, negligence, battery, etc.

Folks that do not understand this (and that's most of them) incorrectly say it allows the officers to act with impunity, with no liability, with no repercussions. And that is flat out wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, Carl Pickens, Rickyvol77 and 1 other person
#12,443
#12,443
lawgator1 said:
When a cop has two seconds or less to make a decision on whether to use deadly force they are not thinking about the parameters of a lawsuit three years later.

What people do not get about qualified immunity is a) it is qualified, meaning it is not automatic; and b) it does not foreclose other kinds of lawsuits or actions. On the latter, even if a cop gets QI on a federal civil rights claim he and his city or agency can still be sued for all sorts of state law torts, negligence, battery, etc.

Folks that do not understand this (and that's most of them) incorrectly say it allows the officers to act with impunity, with no liability, with no repercussions. And that is flat out wrong.
Click to expand...
most people who speak on this topic are rather uneducated in the actual definitions, court cases, procedures and laws of WHY and HOW things are, they would rather focus on their feelz and that one bad cop that smarted off to them once
 
#12,444
#12,444
Rickyvol77 said:
most people who speak on this topic are rather uneducated in the actual definitions, court cases, procedures and laws of WHY and HOW things are, they would rather focus on their feelz and that one bad cop that smarted off to them once
Click to expand...


It is a discussion on that side of the issue led by the plaintiff's bar. By the lawyers who make money off of the cases and who (all too) loosely explain to people why certain kinds of claims will not be successful. And it is a hot topic in the civil libertarian crowd at the moment, see e.g. Justice Thomas' writings on the subject.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#12,445
#12,445
lawgator1 said:
When a cop has two seconds or less
Click to expand...
Granted, the cop in Ohio that shot the girl that had a knife had a no time to react. Chauvin had 8.5 minutes. The guy that shot Daniel Shaver had about as much time as Chauvin. The majority of these situations are instances where these cops run on the scene and they just react without looking over the scene and evaluating ETF is going on.
 
#12,446
#12,446
Rasputin_Vol said:
Granted, the cop in Ohio that shot the girl that had a knife had a no time to react. Chauvin had 8.5 minutes. The guy that shot Daniel Shaver had about as much time as Chauvin. The majority of these situations are instances where these cops run on the scene and they just react without looking over the scene and evaluating ETF is going on.
Click to expand...


And guess what?

Had it not settled and suit actually filed, Chauvin would not have gotten qualified immunity. The officer in Ohio would.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#12,447
#12,447
lawgator1 said:
And guess what?

Had it not settled and suit actually filed, Chauvin would not have gotten qualified immunity. The officer in Ohio would.
Click to expand...
I think you are missing the point. I'm not speaking necessarily about specific cases, only using them as examples of a general trend. The general trend is that most of these cops are not making split second decisions. I guess we can go back and forth over particular anomies or anecdotal situations, but most of the cases post in this thread are situations where cops had plenty of time to use a little bit of logic and figure out a reasonable outcome. That's all we're saying.
 
#12,448
#12,448
Rasputin_Vol said:
No, if the people breaking in announce themselves as the police, you are supposed to comply.
Click to expand...

I guess we have to take there word for it? If your door was kicked in at 3am and someone yelled "cops" and you threw your gun down - you'd feel pretty silly if'n it wasn't actually the cops but a home invasion wherein the bad guys saw your post about "supposed to comply" on VN PF.

ItZ dA RuL3z!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#12,449
#12,449
Rickyvol77 said:
most people who speak on this topic are rather uneducated in the actual definitions, court cases, procedures and laws of WHY and HOW things are, they would rather focus on their feelz and that one bad cop that smarted off to them once
Click to expand...

Based on everything I've seen, the most uneducated folks on the definitions, court cases and the law - are cops. And it's why we keep having this discussion, as evidenced by the fact that they keep ending up at the defendant's table.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and VolStrom
#12,450
#12,450
Septic said:
I guess we have to take there word for it? If your door was kicked in at 3am and someone yelled "cops" and you threw your gun down - you'd feel pretty silly if'n it wasn't actually the cops but a home invasion wherein the bad guys saw your post about "supposed to comply" on VN PF.

ItZ dA RuL3z!
Click to expand...
That's not me saying to do that. Its the Blue Lives Matter crowd in here saying you should just comply if you hear the people announce themselves as police.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and Septic
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top