Random searches by the police: They do happen.

[In Between Man]

I don't know if any of you guys seen this, but on the latest episode of one of my favorite programs: COPS, I seen something I had only seen once before on the show in several years of viewing.

A total random stop on a civilian for no good reason.

If the public is calling the police and complaining about high crime, I see nothing wrong with the police patrolling the area, and questioning people loitering around. I don't have a problem with those types of random checks.

But on this latest episode of COPS, two police officers stopped two guys WALKING thru a parking lot minding their own business. Purely, the stop was based on how the dudes were dressed and how they had their hair groomed.

In fact, that's what the officer who initialized the stop stated as his REASON for questioning: "I noticed your haircut there, pretty interesting." (the guy had a mohawk).

Unfortunately, these chumps weren't aware of their rights, that or they had no balls. From there the officers just worked the questions till they could talk 'em into allowing a search:

"Where ya guys heading?"

"Where ya coming from?"

"Ever been arrested?"

"What for?"

"Ya wanna keep your hands outta your pockets, please?"

"You don't have anything on ya I should know about do ya?"

"Mind if I search?"

"OH! What do we have here?" (totally got busted for possession of X)

This was a total random search. There was no call from 911, no complaint about shady characters loitering. Just pure bully tactics against younger people who happen to dress different!

:x:x:x

 

[In Between Man]

Glad to see you guys are outraged too! Lets all go get mohawks!

 

[VanIsle]

I don't know if any of you guys seen this, but on the latest episode of one of my favorite programs: COPS, I seen something I had only seen once before on the show in several years of viewing.

A total random stop on a civilian for no good reason.

If the public is calling the police and complaining about high crime, I see nothing wrong with the police patrolling the area, and questioning people loitering around. I don't have a problem with those types of random checks.

But on this latest episode of COPS, two police officers stopped two guys WALKING thru a parking lot minding their own business. Purely, the stop was based on how the dudes were dressed and how they had their hair groomed.

In fact, that's what the officer who initialized the stop stated as his REASON for questioning: "I noticed your haircut there, pretty interesting." (the guy had a mohawk).

Unfortunately, these chumps weren't aware of their rights, that or they had no balls. From there the officers just worked the questions till they could talk 'em into allowing a search:

"Where ya guys heading?"

"Where ya coming from?"

"Ever been arrested?"

"What for?"

"Ya wanna keep your hands outta your pockets, please?"

"You don't have anything on ya I should know about do ya?"

"Mind if I search?"

"OH! What do we have here?" (totally got busted for possession of X)

This was a total random search. There was no call from 911, no complaint about shady characters loitering. Just pure bully tactics against younger people who happen to dress different!

:x:x:x

You don't know for sure that it was random. There could have been a report even from a day or so before regarding people or a person of that description, committing a crime. There doesn't have to be a 911 call or a complaint regarding loitering. You do not know it had a thing to do with how they were dressed. You are surmising and calling the police bullies without proof of anything. It is you who is guilty on something you know nothing about. They did turn out to be guilty of possession of something so no matter what - the verdict is still guilty. Like it or not, since they were in possession, the police did their duty. I don't know about where you live but at least 3/4 of the kids I see today are dressed like that or worse so if the police were going to stop them for the way they were dressed - they would be stopping almost everyone.

 

[Scott Free]

The police asked to search and the people should have said no. I could ask to search someone too and if they let me I'd be doing nothing wrong either.

In Canada refusing a search is not grounds for probable cause. That doesn't mean the police can't then search you anyway but it does mean if they find anything your probably not going to be charged. But if you consent and they find something you're in big trouble. I'm not sure what the laws are in the USA.

I remember once when I was pulled over I lowered my window a crack. The cop told me to roll my window down. I complied but from that moment on if he had found anything it would have been an illegal search. The search began when he told me to lower my window and I had not consented nor given any cause for a search. I had nothing to hide but just wanted to exercise my rights. I think it's important to do that so we don't lose them.

 

[In Between Man]

You don't know for sure that it was random. There could have been a report even from a day or so before regarding people or a person of that description, committing a crime. There doesn't have to be a 911 call or a complaint regarding loitering. You do not know it had a thing to do with how they were dressed. You are surmising and calling the police bullies without proof of anything. It is you who is guilty on something you know nothing about. They did turn out to be guilty of possession of something so no matter what - the verdict is still guilty. Like it or not, since they were in possession, the police did their duty. I don't know about where you live but at least 3/4 of the kids I see today are dressed like that or worse so if the police were going to stop them for the way they were dressed - they would be stopping almost everyone.

If it wasn't random, I'm sure there would have been some clarification, even to the suspect. When the police have reasons, they let you know.

Generally I don't think of the police as bullies. I actually like the police, and find most people to be more anti-cop than myself. Yet, let the chips fall where they may. Police corruption should not be tolerated. From what I seen and heard, this was completely random, with the goal of "search" in mind, and that's not allowed.

 

[Unforgiven]

There are two things you say to police.
Before I tell them to you I should point out that the police have a job. It is to build a case against you. Let that sink in a bit.

The first thing you say to the police when stopped is a question.
"Am I free to go?" No discussion or anything else. There are two answers to that question. Yes you are free to go or no you are under arrest. So unless you get one of those answers, repeat the question.

If you are free to go, then do so. Git and make it snappy.

If you are in fact under arrest, then there is the second thing you say to the police. "I want to make a phone call." That's it. No clearing things up, no name rank and serial number or anything.

The police have one job and that is to build a case against you.
The reason they question you is to get you to reveal information that can be used to build a case against you. Lying to you isn't a problem for the police so don't expect the truth or for the police to make sure your rights are protected.

Am I free to go?
I want to make my phone call.
And call someone to get you a lawyer.
The police can hold you for 48 hours without charge.
Then they have to let you go.

You can't resist arrest, arguing law with a cop is just stupid so don't do it. Shut up and you will be better off in the end. Do as you are asked, agree to nothing, and remember that the scary psychology is part of the play they put on to build a case against you.

The police have the right to stop you and ask you questions. You have the right not to answer them.

 

[Nuggler]

Glad to see you guys are outraged too! Lets all go get mohawks!

I don't have enough hair for a Mohawk.

Or I would..........;-)

Likely.

"Cops".......That had to be in the U.S. Up here they would have tazered the sh#t out of them first, then asked if the "minded" being searched.

 

[Unforgiven]

I don't have enough hair for a Mohawk.

Or I would..........;-)

Likely.

"Cops".......That had to be in the U.S. Up here they would have tazered the sh#t out of them first, then asked if the "minded" being searched.

We Canadian do love to laugh! :lol:

 

[Colpy]

There are two things you say to police.
Before I tell them to you I should point out that the police have a job. It is to build a case against you. Let that sink in a bit.

The first thing you say to the police when stopped is a question.
"Am I free to go?" No discussion or anything else. There are two answers to that question. Yes you are free to go or no you are under arrest. So unless you get one of those answers, repeat the question.

If you are free to go, then do so. Git and make it snappy.

If you are in fact under arrest, then there is the second thing you say to the police. "I want to make a phone call." That's it. No clearing things up, no name rank and serial number or anything.

The police have one job and that is to build a case against you.
The reason they question you is to get you to reveal information that can be used to build a case against you. Lying to you isn't a problem for the police so don't expect the truth or for the police to make sure your rights are protected.

Am I free to go?
I want to make my phone call.
And call someone to get you a lawyer.
The police can hold you for 48 hours without charge.
Then they have to let you go.

You can't resist arrest, arguing law with a cop is just stupid so don't do it. Shut up and you will be better off in the end. Do as you are asked, agree to nothing, and remember that the scary psychology is part of the play they put on to build a case against you.

The police have the right to stop you and ask you questions. You have the right not to answer them.

Exactly correct.

Thanks for that one.....all too few people understand their rights.

 

[TenPenny]

There is a great video on line somewhere of a law professor and a cop explaining why you should never, ever, talk to the cops without a lawyer. Never. Never 'try to be helpful', or clear things up, or anything.

Just keep quiet. If you're in their sights, they will lots of things to try to make you talk, but never say anything.

 

[Said1]

The value of having a lawyer present is enormous. Just having someone present, who knows the law, and can act as a buffer in a stressful situation is priceless.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Random searches by the police: They do happen

This generally ensures that I get waved past the check stops. It's worked
four years in a row now. Maybe just a coincidence, maybe not....

 

[VanIsle]

There are two things you say to police.
Before I tell them to you I should point out that the police have a job. It is to build a case against you. Let that sink in a bit.

The first thing you say to the police when stopped is a question.
"Am I free to go?" No discussion or anything else. There are two answers to that question. Yes you are free to go or no you are under arrest. So unless you get one of those answers, repeat the question.

If you are free to go, then do so. Git and make it snappy.

If you are in fact under arrest, then there is the second thing you say to the police. "I want to make a phone call." That's it. No clearing things up, no name rank and serial number or anything.

The police have one job and that is to build a case against you.
The reason they question you is to get you to reveal information that can be used to build a case against you. Lying to you isn't a problem for the police so don't expect the truth or for the police to make sure your rights are protected.

Am I free to go?
I want to make my phone call.
And call someone to get you a lawyer.
The police can hold you for 48 hours without charge.
Then they have to let you go.

You can't resist arrest, arguing law with a cop is just stupid so don't do it. Shut up and you will be better off in the end. Do as you are asked, agree to nothing, and remember that the scary psychology is part of the play they put on to build a case against you.

The police have the right to stop you and ask you questions. You have the right not to answer them.

This is a silly post. You can be held for 24 hours - not 48 and the police must have reasonable and probable grounds for holding you. It cannot be "random". The poster is obviously posting from Vancouver Island and not the USA. Let's get real regarding the taser. There is no z in taser either.

 

[VanIsle]

This generally ensures that I get waved past the check stops. It's worked
four years in a row now. Maybe just a coincidence, maybe not....

You are trying to be funny - right? Do you truly believe for one split second that having your dog in the car scares off the police?

 

[Unforgiven]

This is a silly post.

What's silly about it?

You can be held for 24 hours - not 48 and the police must have reasonable and probable grounds for holding you. It cannot be "random".

Except for emergency or exigent circumstances, the consent of the Attorney General was required beforehand. Even in emergency situations, this consent was required after the fact in accordance with the delay prescribed by the ATA. In all cases, an initial judicial hearing had to be held within 24 hours, or, if a judge was not available, as soon as possible thereafter. The maximum period a person could be detained after the initial judicial hearing was 48 hours. The purpose and effect of the provision was not to allow for indefinite detention, but to permit a judge to impose reasonable conditions considered necessary, for example, to prevent a terrorist activity from being carried out (e.g. a recognizance to keep the peace and be of good behaviour). As with the investigative hearing provision, the recognizance with conditions provision was subject to annual reporting requirements to Parliament by the Attorney General and the Minster of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.


quote] The poster is obviously posting from Vancouver Island and not the USA. Let's get real regarding the taser. There is no z in taser either.[/quote]

What does it matter where someone posts from?
Ok let's get real, you go first.

As for spelling, if you could understand it, then what's the problem? Everyone else was able to manage to get through the day without getting hot and bothered by a spelling mistake. This is dialog, not some classroom. If we're to sit here holding court over all the grammatical errors we can forget any discussion.:roll:

 

[lone wolf]

If you've nothing to hide, talk all night. Somebody just might thank you. If you do ... shut up. Simple, eh....

 

[Nuggler]

This is a silly post. You can be held for 24 hours - not 48 and the police must have reasonable and probable grounds for holding you. It cannot be "random". The poster is obviously posting from Vancouver Island and not the USA. Let's get real regarding the taser. There is no z in taser either.

Holy ****!! I made another spelling mistake. Sorry.

taser taser taser taser taser taser taser taser taser taser

Hows'at, teach? That's 5 so far this yeer.

You must realize that by calling something silly and pointing out others' errors, you are setting yourself up for a good'un, soon as the opportunity presents itself. If you don't mind that, carry on.

Some can pitch and some can catch. Some do both. Hope you're one of them.
Getting real about the taser means realizing that it is way overused, overpowered, and mostly unnecessary. Normal people usually recognize humour.

Maybe you're just having a bad day.

;-)

 

[Ron in Regina]

Random searches by the police: They do happen

You are trying to be funny - right? Do you truly believe for one split second that having your dog in the car scares off the police?

I apologize if an attempt at humor offends you. Not everyone has a blind
faith in anything law enforcement orientated. What also helps me avoid
traffic stops is the fact that I wear my seat belt, don't speed, stop behind
the stop signs, signal before I turn, don't drink & drive, etc...

The role I play in the transportation industry is as a Safety Supervisor and
Compliance Officer for an international transportation firm. My job is to
teach commercial drivers how to stay within the boundaries of the law,
state to state, province to province, and internationally as rules and laws
change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I also have to ensure that if a
commercial driver is charged with an offence, that he/she is not falsely or
incorrectly charged with an offence, or a non-applicable offence. It happens.

Law Enforcement Officers are just like everybody else. They to have good
and bad days, and when a short cut presents itself, they'll take it as often as
the rest of us. I've seen the good and bad sides of that, both professionally
and personally. Law Enforcement Officers are as fallible as anyone else, in
enforcement of the law, or following the rules of law. People will question
that. Get use to it, as blind faith is a dead issue for most of the population.

 

[lone wolf]

Karma?

 

[gopher]

White cops do that to minorities here in Minnesota all the time and nothing is ever done about it.

Strangely, when the Feds did that to Ruby Ridge and the Branch Dravidian cult, the far right wingnuts were all up in arms about it. In act, they asserted that people need to have rifles and other weapons under the Second Amendment in order to insure that they could go along without government intrusion.

As for those two with the Mohawks haircuts, the marijuana the cops found (that is, if they found it and did not plant it as they often do) would not be admissable evidence in court. At least in theory it wouldn't be.