JayC

Patton, I don't think you need to carry around a judge in your back pocket... I just think you need to be doing a lot of different things day to day... Lets talk about traffic stops, what percentage of your traffic stops result in a person being written a ticket and sent on their way? What is the ratio between criminal traffic stops and administrative stops? Now take away all the administrative stops... no more speeding tickets, broken tail lights, expired tags, etc... We let a computer and a camera handle all of those automatically. If you see a crime you can stop and arrest somebody for a crime that you see committed. You don't need a judge in your back pocket... you arrest the person... In the process of that investigation you get probable cause to search the vehicle... sit down in your patrol car, type out a search warrant and hit submit, wait 5 or 10 minutes for a judge to read and approve or deny your request for a search warrant.

Patton, if I were king? I doubt you would recognize police work First, I think we should move away from police officers performing traffic enforcement and use technology more. It's a lot less expensive, and a lot safer for officers. Second, I believe that arresting a person you see commit a felony, it is perfectly constitutional. You can take that person before a judge or magistrate and they issue a warrant/order to hold that person on your oath to the acts you witnessed. That standard meets the smell test on both the 4th and 5th amendments. But, I think there should be a firewall on searches... police officers need to be able to search people being arrested for their protection, I just don't think they get to use that as evidence against somebody at the same time. So you can take my wallet and place it in a bag, but you can't look through it just because you're arresting me. The same goes for papers, cell phones, computers etc. And even firearms... anything you see is fruit of the poisonous tree... Yes I'm aware more bad guys will go free in a system like that. And I think exigent circumstance exception needs to be tossed out the window in the dead of winter and left for dead. Officers have a moral responsibility to protect life... you want to break down a door because you hear a kidnap victim in a house... you should have legal protections to allow you to do that, but just know anything you see or find, gets tossed and can never be used in a court of law. Truth is, the right balance is probably somewhere in between where we are today and where it was 160 years ago... The real issue is to get rid of stupid laws which don't work, will never work, and reduce the number issues police officers are having to deal with... Just think if all you had to do was respond to real calls? You'd probably be doing a lot fewer searches anyhow, and have the time to really do investigations and find people who are committing real crimes.

Dave, I completely agree, the 4th amendment protects us from unreasonable searches, but that is just the first part of the amendment, it also outlines, that you must have a warrant, that warrant must be based on probable cause, the person making the claims on probable cause must swear or affirm to the truth of the claims, and the warrant must document exactly where the search is to take place, whom or what is to be seized. The first part, it a protection against unreasonable warrants... In the late 1700's there was no other type of search permitted under English common law. Before the revolutionary war (and during it) British soldiers would write their own search warrants, even the British soldiers understood to search a mans home or his person you needed a warrant. The 4th Amendment was put in place to protect against what the founders saw as a tyrannical government run amuck... by those standards our current government is far worse. I understand that current case law does allow for a lot of exceptions to the 4th amendment, that doesn't make the exceptions moral, or not a violation of a persons God given rights, just a form of tyranny. My world view is far different from yours... I see a government that creates a huge mess, then over reacts and creates a bigger mess... and a bunch of police officers trying to do the best they can to clean the mess up. It's a Sisyphean response to a self created problem. Focus on the root causes, the mess will become manageable, and we won't need such drastic police powers to resolve the remaining mess. For example, realize we've failed to win the war on drugs, we can never win the war on drugs, and we're creating more problems in society than the drugs would on their own. Allow the corner drug store to sell whatever adults want to put in their bodies, and a vast majority of the searches police officers need to do today go away over night. Gang bangers are there because we're trying to outlaw drugs, and people want drugs so bad they're willing to do anything to get them... when was the last time you saw 2 liquor store owners do drive by shootings on the competition? Take away costs associated with smuggling drugs into this country and avoiding confiscation, the cost of the drugs gets really cheap, as inexpensive as tobacco or alcohol ... While there will be some criminal activity still surrounding the use of drugs, it will drop to a much more manageable level, and would make police work much safer. Focus police efforts on real crimes, where somebody is physically hurt, or has something stolen. More of your police force is doing detective work, the amount of 'preventative' policing goes way down... although traffic investigations might go up slightly do to a slight increase in DWI cases for a couple of decades... truth is technology is going to solve DWI in the next 20-30 years anyhow, and traffic units are going to go away. At the same time you'd see a drastic decrease in petty theft... since the costs of the drugs would go way down. It won't be some utopia, good people will still be killed by stupid criminals from time to time... somebody's child will get hooked on drugs and ruin lives all around them... these things are happening today, they will continue to happen whether we legalize drugs or not.

Patton, I'm very familiar with case law, I just don't think it's a good legal theory We once had 300 years or more of case law that said it was perfectly legal to own other humans, we now realize that is an immoral act and a violation of the slaves God given rights. Case law is being abused to continue to erode Constitutional protections, it's a flawed legal theory when applied to criminal law.

Dave, In all fairness, we don't see eye to eye politically So I won't bring Presidential politics into this If we'd just follow the constitution it would solve a lot of things. The 4th amendment means what it says... unless you have a written warrant signed by a judge you can't search or seize any item. No probably cause, RAS, terry stops, exigent circumstances.... The reason police officers need a law degree today is because the courts have made so many exceptions to the constitution... take the exceptions away and it's pretty easy that everybody with a 5th grade education knows... here is a car, need a signed warrant to search it... Here is somebodies backpack, need a signed warrant to search it... etc. We have few exceptions (ie violations) to the Constitution, then it would be much simpler for everybody involved... including police officers, who I personally think the vast majority want to respect citizens rights, but there is so much BS that is 'case law' they make human mistakes. Make the process much simpler for the police officers, and we'd see fewer human mistakes happening. Now as for my comment about a group outside the DAs office to investigate and prosecute public servants.... I stand by that idea... Think of a Grand Jury with their own Prosecutors who work for them. You'd still have your day in court, but the lawyer prosecuting you wouldn't be in an office that works with your agency on a regular basis.

How? (I already know the answer, my point is that highlights yet something else the government shouldn't be doing). If that is the real concern, pass a law that says the government won't spend any money on somebody injured while not wearing a seat belt. Then people are free to do what they want, and we don't have yet another useless law on the books.

And why is it against the law for an adult to not wear a seatbelt to begin with? You can jump out of a plane, or go mountain climbing in the dead of winter... yet somehow you're not responsible enough to choose whether to wear a seatbelt or not? How exactly does you not wearing a seatbelt cause me physical harm?

I bet he already has a job working at another law enforcement agency/department. But the point is the guy was clearly in the wrong, how many nights did he spend in jail? None. How much did he have to pay out of his pocket for violating the law? Not a single penny. I believe you were talking earlier about Altoids containers, and how a lot of officers bend the rules on those, but you don't... How many would do that if your first offense for performing an illegal search was a life time loss of your POST certification and 10 years in state prison? Today those officers bend the rules, have no skin in the game if they get caught... maybe a druggie gets off... but they don't loose their career, have no risk of loosing their house from civil law suits, and won't spend a night in jail. This is my broken window theory of law enforcement, because we allow public servants to violate small rights, with no punishment, bigger rights end up getting violated... place harsh punishments on small violations and you'll rarely see the big ones happen. But, the truth is, we need to move investigation of government employees out of the DAs office and create a completely separate group who is not beholden to any other agency or department.

Why would they think twice? What do they have to loose? Perfect example of the OH issue where the office threatened to murder a detained man on video. While most of us are happy after 6 months of being paid to ride a desk, he was finally fired... where are the criminal and civil charges? The issue here is that public servants have little 'skin' in the game... If they violate somebodies rights, most likely the worse thing that happens is they get a paid vacation until the media looses interest and they go right back doing what they were doing before... Maybe if they are really un lucky, they'll loose their job, and 2 weeks later show up working for another government agency... Just how often do they stand trial for violating somebodies rights? They don't have any skin in the game... no loss of income, no loss of their house, and no jail time... So, whats the downside of violating the law and the constitution?

Well, I've carried there a number of times, never seen a sign prohibiting carry and never had a problem

The key to the SCOTUS plain view is probable cause of a crime... If officers are using the logic of a plain view exception, to run firearm serial numbers because all firearms possession is a crime, and therefore they have probable cause... I think we can all agree we should push the legislature to change the current law by a single word, changing the word defense to exception, which would seem to remove the probable cause to run firearms unless there is some other reason to run them. And I agree, both at the state and federal levels of government, we have a necessary evil which has run amuck and turned itself into a tyrannical evil... Hopefully we can wake more people up to the fact that the government doesn't follow the restrictions that we the 'sovereigns' placed on it. And we must start electing people to office that take their oath to protect the contitution above all others... and we might feel a little less 'safe' with less government, but we'll be a lot more free and wealthier. Tennessee violates the state Constitution daily... The ammo tax is unconstitutional, TICS is unconstitutional, and the HCP permit system is unconstitutional, any 5th grader can read our constitution and understand that the state may only regulate the manner in which we carry, not where or if we do. This happens because of horrible public education, and progressive notions that the government is there to help us... because people are too stupid to do for themselves. Once people wake up to the fact that our government violates rights which are part of our humanity, that when they violate those rights, even a little bit, and turn a blind eye to those violations, they are no better than many of the oppressive governments which we routinely condemn on these very forums. The thing to keep in mind, it was perfectly legal for Stalin to kill over a million members of his military and citizen during the great purge, doesn't make the act any less evil. Just because a tyrannical government passes a law which violates God given rights, doesn't absolve that said government of their actions or make them any less wrong. I know sometimes I'm seen as tilting at wind mills on here... I'm standing on my soapbox trying to get people to think, in hopes that before it's too late we can change course via the ballot box... and my ammo box can stay in the closet

Just one point, your right to keep and bear arms does not come from the constitution... It comes from your creator or your humanity, and the constitution is there to protect that right from the government which our founding fathers saw as a necessary evil. While most doesn't understand the different, if our rights come from the Constitution, then government can change the constitution and take those rights away... if rights come from our creator or humanity, then no law can take them away only infringe illegally and immorally upon them. It's an important difference.

Fallguy, Using that logic the police wouldn't need a search warrant to seize a weapon in your home, since it's illegal to posses all weapons, and we only have defenses to the possession. We both know that wouldn't hold water in any court here in TN.

RS is the level you need for a Terry Stop, not for running serial numbers of items carried by a person stopped, that still requires PC.

At the same time I'd never carry a firearm with a manual safety f I need my firearm, I want it to go bang everytime I pull the trigger no matter what I forget to do I can't count the number of times I've seen guys pull firearms in training, and pull the trigger and nothing happens... I'd HATE to have it happen to me when I really needed my gun... I'm assuming from this stance you wouldn't carry a revolver either?

If you're a guard member, you likely have a standing order not to carry weapons. If you're not a guard member, the site must be posted like any other state building. If it's not posted, then it would be legal to carry there. I've carried at a number of NG sites here and in other states without any problems.

How is the entire disarm for "officer safety" not a violation of the 4th Amendment in and of itself? At the end of the day, many departments run the s/n of ever firearm they come in contact with as a standard operating procedure. The check is recorded in a database which is shared national between law enforcement agency's, and has created a backdoor computerized national gun registry, which the ATF is prohibited by law from creating through purchase records. Ask yourself this question... Even if a police officer has a valid 'officer safety' reason to disarm you... why would they have any reason to believe your firearm is stolen? Which is the only reason to run the s/n? There is no good reason that a permit holders or hunters firearm is ever ran as a possible stolen firearm unless the officer has PC to believe that firearm is stolen. We need a law which does one of the following: 1. Prohibits all law enforcement officers within the borders of TN from running s/n of firearms without specific PC to believe the firearm is stolen. The PC must be documented in writing as part of the process of running the s/n. With criminal and civil penalties for violating the law. or 2. A law which prohibits the storing or submitting to an external company/agency the s/n of any firearm unless it matches that of a stolen firearm when ran. Again with both civil and criminal penalties for violations. Neither of those laws would be unreasonable restrictions on LEO in finding truly stolen firearms, and would protect law abiding citizens from having their firearms documented by the government.

In the example you're giving the officer has no duty to protect you.... you still have that duty for yourself. Second, the officer may well be a trouble magnet... Just because a police officer is standing next to you, doesn't really change whether stuff goes sideways or not... At the end of the day, I'm the only personal obligated to protect myself and my family... I'm not going to volunteer anything until we get a law which prohibits officers from checking the s/n on firearms of otherwise law abiding citizens, and creating a backdoor gun registry with that information.

The real question is how many of us have called our Legislators and requested they change carry laws involving schools for adults? Very few would be my guess. The reason they won't change the law, is because we won't force them to.. or elect somebody who will change the law.

Welcome to the wonderful world of crappy TN firearm laws.... Call your local Legislators and complain Why there isn't a clear exception for HCP holders in the law is beyond belief... for sure it doesn't meet the requirements of the TN Constitution.

Now ask yourself why DC is still violating the order, and getting away with it.

No, no no! The police can't just stop you if you're driving... We have a right to travel unimpeded in this country, that is the right of a freeman (or woman) it's been with us for hundreds of years. Only in the last 100 have we managed to add a bunch of rules to traveling on public right of ways.... The result? Mostly more laws that do absolutely nothing. How did the founding fathers get around? If I use that mode of travel all of a sudden I don't have to worry about being stopped? How does the mode of travel impact my God given rights? The problem here is a lack of education (public schools) on the part of most grown adults. Traffic laws are largely a waste of effort, there is little we can do to enforce them, and temporary safety we give up for that little bit that can be impacted, isn't worth it. Think about how silly most of our traffic laws are... speed limits, which are generally violated by everybody every day of the week... and largely they are a cash cow for local cities and their police departments... so we keep speed limits low... so low that by default the vast majority of drivers drive 5-10mph over the limit at all times. Now, ask yourself this question... why aren't speed limits going up? We had 65-70 mph speed limits 60 years ago, those cars didn't have seat belts, no air bags, braking systems were much less effective then, the cars were designed poorly to survive impacts, and drivers were largely not trained at all. Now we have cars which are much more safe, yet the speed limit hasn't increased... ask yourself why? Drunk driving laws are just as nuts... I've seen guys who blew .2 BAL drive much better than I do at .06... yet I'm perfectly legal, and they're going to jail? We need to get back to sensible laws... when somebody has a wreck that was caused by alcohol... throw them in jail... don't let them out for a very long time... we've gotten the level of a DUI down so low that it is now impacting responsible casual drinkers... and if the progressives at MADD get there way, you wouldn't be allowed to have any alcohol and still be able to legally drive. As for checkpoints, unless I'm committing a crime, a police officer has no business stopping me, and wasting my valuable time... and my right to travel is much more important to me than the statistical la la land MADD lives in where lots of people get killed by first time offenders. If somebody hurts somebody else while drunk, lock them up and throw away the key. Otherwise it's not a real crime, and it's a waste of our efforts to try and stop it.

Just curious, grant from whom? Federal or State? And I believe those grants cover overtime pay for the officers at the checkpoint, along with any other costs associated with running the checkpoint? Trust me, there is a monetary reason for the checkpoints... it;'s just not the tickets you are issuing but there is money involved. Ask yourself this, if it was so important to do these checkpoints, how come your department never pays for one?

I have a spare handgun in my Go Bag, it sits in the passenger seat with the shoulder strap over the headrest. Inside the 'secret' compartment I keep a Glock 19, it's much easier to get to that firearm while seated, instead of the one on my hip or my BUG.

Yeah because a guy who shoots 4 people... then while running from that crime, shots and kills a ranger will be stopped because of the no firearm signs at the gate he ran through at high speed.