Reasonable Suspicion/Reasonable Cause

[Guest vandutton]

If a LEO wants to search your vehicle and they claim to have RS/RC, can you legally ask what it is, and have them explain it BEFORE they search your vehicle?

Not a personal problem (yet), but it happened to a colleague who has his HCP. He told the officer his gun was between the driver's seat and the center console. The officer asked him to step out of the vehicle, and as he did, he shut the door. The LEO proceeded to reach for the handle claiming RC. He asked what it was and the LEO told him to shut up. Just wondering...

[Guest db99wj]

Not that I will be able to answer, especially since I am asking this question, but what is RS/RC?

[Guest vandutton]

Reasonable Suspicion/Reasonable Cause

[Guest db99wj]

Bahhh, I just reread the title to the thread.....Time to go home, my brain is dead!

[EMTRN]

We call it "probable cause," and yes I will tell them what I smell or see. I would never search a car based on someone holding a handgun permit, and I don't believe that would be a legal search. What else did your friend have in his car? What were the circumstances surrounding the stop?

[Guest bkelm18]

Maybe I'm wrong, but Probable Cause seems like a "blank check" when it comes to vehicle searches. The officer can say he "suspected" something and search your car, and in the end it's your word against his/hers. Just my thought process, don't hate me.

[TripleDigitRide]

How long before he was pulled over did he finish the doobie and beer?

[EMTRN]

An officer who uses it as a blank check will lose his credibility with his judges and his department quickly.

[Guest bkelm18]

An officer who uses it as a blank check will lose his credibility with his judges and his department quickly.

Fair enough. I'm not a cop so I know nothing about it.

[Guest vandutton]

Nothing in his car. He's pretty anal about keeping it clean. No trash, nada. Pulled over initially for speeding (40 in a 30). New model car, nothing screaming about it other than 'I work for a living' - typical American-made vehicle. Only thing in his car was softball equipment, and it was in the trunk, not able to be seen, anyway. LEO searched glove box, console, and trunk. Pack of Camel smokes in the driver side door was all he found, because there was nothing else to find.

[NuTcAsE]

We call it "probable cause," and yes I will tell them what I smell or see. I would never search a car based on someone holding a handgun permit, and I don't believe that would be a legal search. What else did your friend have in his car? What were the circumstances surrounding the stop?

But, if asked do you have to explain? If said "suspect" refuses then what happens?

[EMTRN]

Well, sounds like he made a mistake.

[Guest kwikrnu]

He needs to make an appointment with the sheriff or chief or at the very least make a written complaint and follow up on the complaint. From what I understand the officer must be able to articulate why he made the search.

[The Rabbi]

Well, sounds like he made a mistake.

I assume you mean the LE.

Nah, that never happens. The friend should have allowed him to search his vehicle anyway. It would make the officer's job easier after all.

[Guest c_o_jones]

The only mistake was not locking the car doors on the way out.

Got to secure that weapon, you know...

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

If a LEO wants to search your vehicle and they claim to have RS/RC, can you legally ask what it is, and have them explain it BEFORE they search your vehicle?

Not a personal problem (yet), but it happened to a colleague who has his HCP. He told the officer his gun was between the driver's seat and the center console. The officer asked him to step out of the vehicle, and as he did, he shut the door. The LEO proceeded to reach for the handle claiming RC. He asked what it was and the LEO told him to shut up. Just wondering...

It would have to play out in court, but I think a police officer would have a hard time justifying searching the entire passenger compartment when plainly informed by a vetted, licensed citizen that he was in lawful possession of a firearm.

Generally, as an issue of officer safety, SCOTUS allows the police to do just about whatever they want when you're outside the curtilage of your own private property. You essentially have no right to privacy in public anymore--or you have no means to receive redress of an injury. The police won't receive any meaningful punishment for abusing your right to privacy.

Maybe I'm wrong, but Probable Cause seems like a "blank check" when it comes to vehicle searches. The officer can say he "suspected" something and search your car, and in the end it's your word against his/hers. Just my thought process, don't hate me.

Probable cause is a blank check. That's exactly what it is. It's also a much higher standard than "reasonable suspicion".

An officer who uses it as a blank check will lose his credibility with his judges and his department quickly.

Maybe, maybe not. One thing's for sure, the police officer will most likely receive qualified immunity for just about whatever rights he violates.

But, if asked do you have to explain? If said "suspect" refuses then what happens?

If you refuse to cooperate with a police officer who has probable cause or reasonable, articulable suspicion to act against your liberty, you can be charged with many things, and those charges will stick. Things like obstruction of justice and resisting are common hooks in these situations. Be very careful. You'll probably take an ass whipping for your trouble too. It really depends on the officer and the department.

The best thing to do is to keep your hands at your sides, keep your voice calm, and to plainly assert your wish to maintain your privacy. Do so in an adult manner. No matter how they try to bully, shake, or needle you, remain calm. Gesticulating or getting loud can be used to justify reasonable suspicion. Don't make it easy for them.

He needs to make an appointment with the sheriff or chief or at the very least make a written complaint and follow up on the complaint. From what I understand the officer must be able to articulate why he made the search.

He also needs to speak with the local prosecutor. This cop, based on the info we have, acted very irresponsibly. Any evidence he may have secured in violation of the Fourth Amendment would be inadmissible. Prosecutors don't like watching people walk away from evidence that would've led to a conviction because a prick cop doesn't respect his own oath.

The only mistake was not locking the car doors on the way out.

Got to secure that weapon, you know...

I support any lawful action in which you wish to engage, but think about this. You've got a cop all wrenched up because you have a gun. Do you really want to spend the time and make the necessary movements to secure your car? A moment's thought might make this seem a bad idea. I'd simply step away from the car and say "Officer, I don't consent to searches." Then I'd ask to speak to his supervisor. I'd continue asking to speak to his supervisor. Then I'd ask again.

If you'd like to know more about how SCOTUS subverted the Fourth Amendment and legislated from the bench, read Terry v. Ohio. It lays out the ground work for the idea of "reasonable suspicion," which isn't even in the Constitution. In particular, the lone dissent is eloquent.

Also, keep this in mind with any research you do on the Fourth Amendment: though the Tennessee constitution contains a similar clause, the courts have long ago established the fact that Tennessee search and seizure law will follow SCOTUS decisions. Our state courts abdicated our sovereignty to the Feds.

[Punisher84]

Alot of times searches will be made, but then thrown out because of lack of evidence supporting the RC/RS. That's why it is in an officer's best interest to not just go willy nilly wanting to search everyone's vehicle on a wild goose chase. As EMTRN said, they will lose credibiity, with the department maybe not as much, but with the courts, definitely.

[Fallguy]

...and not really wanting to start the whole debate over again (see this & this thread), but this is exactly one of the reasons many choose not to inform an officer they are armed.

[The Rabbi]

...and not really wanting to start the whole debate over again (see this & this thread), but this is exactly one of the reasons many choose not to inform an officer they are armed.

But then they wouldnt be helping Officer Friendly do his job.

[Guest betobeto]

I always see the DWB probable cause happen where I live. It never fails on the drive home there will be a car with Black people getting searched. And when I say every day I mean every day....

[Guest tlondon]

It seems like alot of anamosity (sp) for the cops on this thread. Not all cops are bad cops. If you aint hiding anything why worry. let them have a look. Just my thoughts...

[Guest betobeto]

Are you Fing kidding me:mad: Its your rights your giving away. Cops have no right to search your car with out probable cause. If you don't use and protect your rights you loose them........... Keep that in mind.

[Guest tlondon]

no reason to get upset. I was just stating my opinion. Last I checked we all have one of those. I aint trying to ruffel feathers.

[Guest betobeto]

Giving away freedoms always gets me going. Just look at us now we have to ask the gov' to be able to carry a gun.......... what else would you like taken from you? Men and Women have died for your rights that you take for granted. Thats the harm in letting somthing go, because its the easy way out.

[Guest betobeto]

By the way Im 1 post away from 50:D