Reasonable Suspicion/Reasonable Cause

[Guest canynracer]

I understood that. My point is that simply exercising one's rights is not acting "like an ass." If I say to an officer, "Am I free to go?" there is no implication of disrepect or of being a "smartass." I worry that a request like this could become generally thought of as such, and would find that to be a diminution of the letter and spirit of the fourth amendment.

If you are as polite as you seem, then why worry? has anything happened while you were being so polite?

You statement seems to be based on Worry's and what ifs, and not as actual happening or fact.

You are right, POLITELY excersising the 4th is well within your right, and you should have no issues and the politeness should be returned.... BUT, having the smartass tone as some of the videos that have been posted here, and actual engaging in SOME form of communication other than "am I free to go?" "am I being detained" everytime the officer speaks, is disrespectful, therefore, being an "ass"

[Guest canynracer]

When the general consensus among citizens is that they should voluntarily give up their rights, then laws and regulations, which diminish and render impotent these rights, are not far behind. .

See but I dont think me telling an officer that I have a permit, and a gun is giving that up....as a matter of fact, I am making the CHOICE to speak out, which is excersising my 1st

Most of what I've read can be boiled down to this:

Be polite.

But many folks are mixing being polite with exercising one's rights. They are two different issues.

I agree....but I also think that you have the choice on "when", and for me, "When" depends on the situation at hand.

[The Rabbi]

Wow, this has turned into a cop bashing thread that I cannot stand. It seems to me that Rabbi is twisting DaveTN words around to make a point and frankly, it is not working.

DaveTN posted a "scenario" in which he finds a bag of weed or the likes and depending on the demeanor of the citizen he pulled over, that would determine his response.

How Rabbi can twist that around to infringing on his rights is beyond me and quite disgusting. Personally, If I were travelling down the road and saw Rabbi pulled over, I would pull over myself just to watch him excercise his "rights", be a dick and get hauled off. I would even go as far as to shake the hand of the arresting officer.

In that case you're part of the problem:D.

Why should the demeanor of the citizen determine the officer's response?

Please show me where I twisted DaveTN's words. I quoted the whole paragraph. A few other posters saw the same thing. When I posted to DaveTN that this is what I saw and others saw the same thing, and invited him to clarify, he gave his usual gruff response. This told me I was absolutely accurate in my assessment.

[Guest tlondon]

Has this gone on long enough???? We all will just have to agree to disagree, move on and still be friends . Cant we just end this conversation

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

[Guest DrBoomBoom]

If you are as polite as you seem, then why worry? has anything happened while you were being so polite?

You statement seems to be based on Worry's and what ifs, and not as actual happening or fact.

You are right, POLITELY excersising the 4th is well within your right, and you should have no issues and the politeness should be returned.... BUT, having the smartass tone as some of the videos that have been posted here, and actual engaging in SOME form of communication other than "am I free to go?" "am I being detained" everytime the officer speaks, is disrespectful, therefore, being an "ass"

I am as polite as I seem. I don't know how to be more or less polite without seeming so Many bad things have happened to me, in my life, while being polite, but none of them "for" being polite.

My statement is indeed based on a worry and a what if. What if gradually our society just sheepishly accepts that it is better to never exercise our rights. Or that the impolite deserve whatever they get.

No, I didn't watch the videos, but I know how poorly some folks can act. It's never a good idea, but it's not against the law to be an idiot.

I, personally, believe that exercising ones rights is never wrong, no matter, and perhaps especially, if it is difficult to do so.

It is not illegal to be impolite or unpopular. Of course people who are rude tend to be treated rudely. Also, I understand that, being human, the folks we hire to uphold the law will often treat rude people differently that they do people who are polite. It's human nature. But again, you're right, I do worry. I worry that a mindset that says we must not merely obey the laws, but also be compliant in proving before the fact that we are obeying the laws, will erode the rights that our founders so wisely crafted.

Edited June 12, 2008 by DrBoomBoom

[Guest canynracer]

I am as polite as I seem. I don't know how to be more or less polite without seeming so Many bad things have happened to me, in my life, while being polite, but none of them "for" being polite.

My statement is indeed based on a worry and a what if. What if gradually our society just sheepishly accepts that it is better to never exercise our rights. Or that the impolite deserve whatever they get.

No, I didn't watch the videos, but I know how poorly some folks can act. It's never a good idea, but it's not against the law to be an idiot.

I, personally, believe that exercising ones rights is never wrong, no matter, and perhaps especially, if it is difficult to do so.

It is not illegal to be impolite or unpopular. Of course people who are rude tend to be treated rudely. Also, I understand that, being human, the folks we hire to uphold the law will often treat rude people differently that they do people who are polite. It's human nature. But again, you're right, I do worry. I worry that a mindset that says we must not merely obey the laws, but also be compliant in proving before the fact that we are obeying the laws, will erode the rights that our founders so wisely crafted.

WOW!!! BoomBoom for Prez!!!

Well said!

Now....the What if? well what if a lot of things happen....we have to approach them as they show thier little heads....we cant go through life on What if

Edited June 12, 2008 by canynracer

[einnor1040]

Has this gone on long enough???? We all will just have to agree to disagree, move on and still be friends . Cant we just end this conversation

Not clicking on a thread I disagree with works for me.

[Guest slothful1]

If you are as polite as you seem, then why worry? has anything happened while you were being so polite?

It has to me. Not on a traffic stop (I've never been pulled over), but when I reported a hit-and-run accident.

[Guest tlondon]

Not clicking on a thread I disagree with works for me.

This thread has become kinda like a train wreck, you dont want to look but you just can't help it JK. All I was saying is most posts are just repeating everything that has been said.

[Guest canynracer]

This thread has become kinda like a train wreck, you dont want to look but you just can't help it JK. All I was saying is most posts are just repeating everything that has been said.

well if they didnt....it wouldnt be TGO!!!

[DaveTN]

make the judgment YOU feel is necessary during the time of the stop....

I think have read those exact words on this forum before.

[DaveTN]

IMy statement is indeed based on a worry and a what if. What if gradually our society just sheepishly accepts that it is better to never exercise our rights. Or that the impolite deserve whatever they get.

I, personally, believe that exercising ones rights is never wrong, no matter, and perhaps especially, if it is difficult to do so.

I worry that a mindset that says we must not merely obey the laws, but also be compliant in proving before the fact that we are obeying the laws, will erode the rights that our founders so wisely crafted.

I am typing this verrrrrrry slowly and I am trying very hard to choose my words very carefully so that Rabbi can both understand them and not try to twist them around.

I gave a specific scenario where you might want to think about how you answer the big question of “Will you give me permisiion to search your vehicle?†As I have said before I never did ask for permission to search unless I already had PC to do so. It was simply polite conversation to what kind of a reaction I got. If the person would ask “Am I free to go?†the answer would have been a polite “NO, not until I search your vehicle.â€

Okay… the kid has a small bag of pot in his car. I now (because I have discretion on a misdemeanor) need to make a determination if I label this guy a criminal or let him drive away. What do I base that decision on???? He isn’t a concerned citizen exercising his rights; he’s committing a crime and is trying to use his rights to keep me from finding his dope.

Do I let him go?? He just asked me if he was free to go. If I let him off without charges am I going to be called in on a citizen’s complaint or a civil rights violation? Why in the world would I risk that?

I still stand by what I said people need to understand that there are no pat answers and you need to think about what you say. If there was no down side to refusing a search or invoking Miranda; it would be a well know fact and everyone would do it. If you are squeaky clean you have nothing to worry about. But if you aren’t, choices you make are pretty important to your future; make them wisely.

The fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not say that cops need a warrant to search your car. It also contains the word “Unreasonable†which many people like to forget. Our founding Fathers were trying to protect innocent citizens from unreasonable searches; not protect criminals hauling dope.

Not one word I have posted can be construed as infringing on anyone’s rights. You may not like it that I had that discretion, or that Police Officers make decisions on how they use that discretion based on peoples attitudes, demeanor, and what they say. If that is the case; get the law changed, have the discretion removed. Make it like a felony; if there is reasonable suspicion you go to jail.

But I hope you can’t get it done until I’m to old to drive. Because I haul azz and if I get stopped and the cop wants to search my car…. have at it Officer. And I’ll be BSing with him the whole time if I think he may give me a break on a ticket. Giving up my rights…. You have got to be kidding me.

[Guest DrBoomBoom]

Dave, I would not want an officer's discretion removed. Nor have I ever said asking someone to voluntarily give up their rights was illegal or even wrong. There's an element of a "game" to questioning, which, played correctly, can help an officer to make the determination that someone is indeed a criminal or just someone who made a dumb mistake. I've understood that, and have thought of it as an important law enforcement tool, for many years.

What I question is the idea that a law abiding citizen, for any reason, who denies a search is thought of as "wrong," a "smartass," or possibly suspicious. Not by an LEO in a specific instance, but by society in general. This is how it appears to me that many folks think, based on my reading of some of the posts in this thread. Let's say when you are pulled over for hauling azz, you are late for an appointment. This has happened to me. In my case, already I was going to be trimming it close and when pulled over, not for speeding, but for staying in the left hand lane without passing (in Kentucky), I was going to be even later. The officer asked if he could search my vehicle and I said no, I was in a hurry and I needed to just get a ticket and leave. He gave me a warning certificate and let me on my way. Now, was I wrong? And if I was not wrong, is it wrong for anyone to simply say "no?"

Edited June 13, 2008 by DrBoomBoom

[Guest darkstar]

I am typing this verrrrrrry slowly and I am trying very hard to choose my words very carefully so that Rabbi can both understand them and not try to twist them around.

I gave a specific scenario where you might want to think about how you answer the big question of “Will you give me permisiion to search your vehicle?†As I have said before I never did ask for permission to search unless I already had PC to do so. It was simply polite conversation to what kind of a reaction I got. If the person would ask “Am I free to go?†the answer would have been a polite “NO, not until I search your vehicle.â€

Okay… the kid has a small bag of pot in his car. I now (because I have discretion on a misdemeanor) need to make a determination if I label this guy a criminal or let him drive away. What do I base that decision on???? He isn’t a concerned citizen exercising his rights; he’s committing a crime and is trying to use his rights to keep me from finding his dope.

Do I let him go?? He just asked me if he was free to go. If I let him off without charges am I going to be called in on a citizen’s complaint or a civil rights violation? Why in the world would I risk that?

I still stand by what I said people need to understand that there are no pat answers and you need to think about what you say. If there was no down side to refusing a search or invoking Miranda; it would be a well know fact and everyone would do it. If you are squeaky clean you have nothing to worry about. But if you aren’t, choices you make are pretty important to your future; make them wisely.

The fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not say that cops need a warrant to search your car. It also contains the word “Unreasonable†which many people like to forget. Our founding Fathers were trying to protect innocent citizens from unreasonable searches; not protect criminals hauling dope.

Not one word I have posted can be construed as infringing on anyone’s rights. You may not like it that I had that discretion, or that Police Officers make decisions on how they use that discretion based on peoples attitudes, demeanor, and what they say. If that is the case; get the law changed, have the discretion removed. Make it like a felony; if there is reasonable suspicion you go to jail.

But I hope you can’t get it done until I’m to old to drive. Because I haul azz and if I get stopped and the cop wants to search my car…. have at it Officer. And I’ll be BSing with him the whole time if I think he may give me a break on a ticket. Giving up my rights…. You have got to be kidding me.

Last night you stated that it might help a kid learn a lesson if you end up taking them in. Well, which one is it? And don't give me the cop bashing routine or that I'm disrespectful to LE 'cause I'm not. I know your talking if you already have PC, if you saw the bag of weed etc, etc not just if someone is refusing a search.

It can't be both ways. If you have PC and you feel it's a good bust why mess around? Last night it's all about teaching a kid a lesson, tonight it's worrying about liability of letting a kid with a bag of weed go. It's that kind of duplicity that tarnishes the image of law enforcement.

[The Rabbi]

+1.

Also anyone worth his salt should be able to determine within about 30 seconds or less what the attitude of the suspect is, even without asking for a search.

[DaveTN]

Last night you stated that it might help a kid learn a lesson if you end up taking them in. Well, which one is it? I know your talking if you already have PC, if you saw the bag of weed etc, etc not just if someone is refusing a search.

No, it wasn’t about me being vindictive and teaching a kid a lesson. And now it’s not about me being liable for letting a kid with a bag of weed go; that was perfectly legal for me to do. An uncooperative suspect making an unjustified complaint could be a concern. And Sorry if that’s how you took it; some took it that way, some understood what I was saying.

It can't be both ways. If you have PC and you feel it's a good bust why mess around? Last night it's all about teaching a kid a lesson, tonight it's worrying about liability of letting a kid with a bag of weed go.

When a cop has discretion; he can have it however he likes. That does not sit well with some people; I understand that. But how you interact with the cop truly does matter. Some people want to think they can say whatever they like without consequences. Sorry, life doesn’t work that way. You can say what you like, you can stand behind any right that you have. But asking you for permission to search, asking you to submit to a BAC test, Mirandizing you and asking if you want to make a statement are all questions where your answers will have consequences.

If you think that refusing a search and reaming silent 100% of the time is the best thing for you; then that is what you need to do. The Officer is going home that night and the situation will have no further impact on him or his career. You will either drive away or go to jail. You have a window of a few seconds where you will be required to make decisions that could impact the rest of your life. Having asked those questions and seen the results I just think people need to know that.

And don't give me the cop bashing routine or that I'm disrespectful to LE 'cause I'm not.

It's that kind of duplicity that tarnishes the image of law enforcement.

I don’t care if you are disrespectful to cops or not. That’s on you; not me.

You can disagree with me on any point of law or Police procedure you like and I will be more than happy to discuss my thoughts and feelings about it.

But I will not stand silently by while my words are twisted and someone says they are sure I have violated more people’s rights than they have. That was a personal attack and was unnecessary.

No where in my posts have I said anything that violates anyone’s rights, and I have not posted anything that tarnishes the image of law enforcement. Sorry you feel that way.

[DaveTN]

+1.

Also anyone worth his salt should be able to determine within about 30 seconds or less what the attitude of the suspect is, even without asking for a search.

Now see, that’s just a cheap shot at me; I would expect no less from this guy.

Sure rabbi, maybe we could talk about the weather. Because I certainly wouldn’t want to ask about the situation at hand or start asking any questions that would require someone to have to think about what they are going to say.

[Guest slothful1]

You try to teach people to always say no. I have tried to (on several occasions) to point out to them that there is no pat answer ... I do not offer people legal advice, but I’m going to say that I am (by far) more qualified than you are to offer possible scenarios on how a traffic stop will end.

You could solidify these statements by describing a scenario (a counterpart to the one you already shared) where the person in question should deny a search request.

[The Rabbi]

Now see, that’s just a cheap shot at me; I would expect no less from this guy.

Sure rabbi, maybe we could talk about the weather. Because I certainly wouldn’t want to ask about the situation at hand or start asking any questions that would require someone to have to think about what they are going to say.

You certainly seem to be going down that route. I gave you ample opportunity to clarify your earlier remarks and you responded similarly.

Now you simply act miffed, like my point was inconsequential. It isn't. It is the essence of the issue.

There are many ways to determine the attitude and bearing of the suspect without asking to search. If so, why ask to do it?

Your explanation is not panning out. Other posters here have questioned your obvious contradictions and the clear implications of what you have posted. And you act like it's simply a personal attack.

It isn't. Your responses are not different from what I have seen other officers express. And they are disturbing in the extreme. And the most disturbing part is that you seem to show no self-awareness of this or even comprehend what the problem is.

[Guest DrBoomBoom]

Dave,

I've got to run now, on my way to Virginia (thank God for reciprocity ).

Quick question, would there ever be a time (for example, running late, obviously rookie LEO etc.) where you yourself would refuse a request for a search?

I'll read when I next get to a computer.

Thanks.

[einnor1040]

You could solidify these statements by describing a scenario (a counterpart to the one you already shared) where the person in question should deny a search request.

Waiting on the answer to this question.

[Guest darkstar]

No personal attack Dave, just questioning why you seemed to change your stance from day to day, and pointing out that when LE acts in a duplicitous manner it makes society question their methods.

[The Rabbi]

No personal attack Dave, just questioning why you seemed to change your stance from day to day, and pointing out that when LE acts in a duplicitous manner it makes society question their methods.

Darkstar, why do you hate America?

[Guest darkstar]

Darkstar, why do you hate America?

'cause the Man is tryin' to keep me down brother!