Do I have to acknowledge a cop when I'm walking down my street??

[OldandTired]

You have the right as an American citizen to follow the lawful orders of any police officer that approaches you.

Oh foolish one. He has the right as an American citizen to walk down the street at any hour, without being molested by the police. When that particular amendment was written, there was no time of day stated as to when that particular protection was afforded to the citizen.

I DARE an officer to ever tase me. Not only would I make sure he lost his job, I'd be finding him afterwards and strumming on his head just for being an idiot.

 

[Peligroso27]

Oh foolish one. He has the right as an American citizen to walk down the street at any hour, without being molested by the police. When that particular amendment was written, there was no time of day stated as to when that particular protection was afforded to the citizen.

I DARE an officer to ever tase me. Not only would I make sure he lost his job, I'd be finding him afterwards and strumming on his head just for being an idiot.

I believe you are the foolish one here yet again. I never said he didn't have the right to walk down the street. I said he has the right to follow the lawful orders of the police officers in the service of protecting the public. If you refuse to comply or begin to try and evade an officer you should fully expect to be detained using sufficient force. I think you may overestimate the power and influence you have in this world, just like the OP. The final act you described is called battery and will be rewarded with some time in prison. The only upside to that is that your uneducated and worthless advice will not plaque this board for the extent of your sentence.

 

[OldandTired]

The final act you described is called battery

Yeah yeah yeah......whatever......all this does is let me feel better about why I quit in the first place. I wasn't going to be looked upon as one of the over-bearing, power-hungry idiots that do these things.

It's the apathetic people like you that cause this kind of injustice to continue. If every person that was unlawfully contacted by law enforcement would stand up and take action, there might actually be something done. People might actually be able to return to walking down the street at 3 a.m. without ever being contacted by the police.

The problem is, more people think like you do, and think that it's ok for the police to do these things, all the while trampling all over the Constitution that is supposed to protect the people from this kind of contact.

 

[Peligroso27]

Yeah yeah yeah......whatever......all this does is let me feel better about why I quit in the first place. I wasn't going to be looked upon as one of the over-bearing, power-hungry idiots that do these things.

You obviously have no regard for the laws of the land, maybe that is why you quit.

It's the apathetic people like you that cause this kind of injustice to continue. If every person that was unlawfully contacted by law enforcement would stand up and take action, there might actually be something done. People might actually be able to return to walking down the street at 3 a.m. without ever being contacted by the police.

No I am not apathetic. I respect and understand the difficult job that police officers have and respect their judgment. On the rare occasion that I might be out of my house at 3 a.m. I would be wary of any individual stumbling through my neighborhood. I would be more concerned if I saw a police officer pass right by that individual and do nothing. You imply that being stopped by the police is similar to being "molested" by jack booted thugs, which is not the case. Stopping an individual in a neighborhood at 3 a.m. is a reasonable and constitutionally sound action by the officer. How does the officer know that you are not some tweaker looking to burglarize a house? How does the officer know that you are not a murderer or rapist looking for your next victim? I guess people that have never been hurt or victimized by crimes like this would be apathetic to the safety of themselves and all those living around them.

The problem is, more people think like you do, and think that it's ok for the police to do these things, all the while trampling all over the Constitution that is supposed to protect the people from this kind of contact.

The problem is that more people like you have a false sense of empowerment that is very undeserved. We empower the police with a certain amount of latitude in making judgments to keep the public safe. The OP is simply an attention starved child that will likely grow up to be just like old and tired. The law is very clear and has been stated enough times to make this a dead issue.

 

[CdwJava]

The problem is, more people think like you do, and think that it's ok for the police to do these things, all the while trampling all over the Constitution that is supposed to protect the people from this kind of contact.

But it IS okay for the police to contact suspicious people with articulable reasonable suspicion ... and the Constitution (as interpreted by the USSC) permits such detentions. Absent no articulable suspicion, thus no reasonable suspicion, then the only form of contact remaining would be consensual. If Johnny Hatethecops wants to ignore this attempt at casual contact, he can do so. But, if the officer then decides to order him to stop (thus converting the contact to a detention) then he is legally obligated to do so. Failure to do so because he does no believe he should have to is a recipe for disaster (and would generally allow for the application of reasonable force to effect the detention). The place to argue the cause for the detention is in court, not on the street.

- Carl

 

[OldandTired]

and that is exactly my point. It's always after-the-fact, in court, where everyone decides whether or not the officer was within legal right to ever have made contact.

This is what I personally would like the people to stand up against. I am not anti-police. I am, however, anti-violate-citizen-rights.

If a person is walking down the street and law enforcement makes unlawful contact, and it gets escalated to the point that some force is used to stop the person walking, it's that officer's butt that I want to see fired and charged with violating the rights of the citizen under the color of the law. I am so sick and tired of seeing law enforcement given free-rein, only to have their actions questioned LATER in a court.

 

[CdwJava]

and that is exactly my point. It's always after-the-fact, in court, where everyone decides whether or not the officer was within legal right to ever have made contact.

Of course it is - because we can't afford to have roadside debating societies or Judge Dredd style law enforcement.

This is what I personally would like the people to stand up against. I am not anti-police. I am, however, anti-violate-citizen-rights.

That's fine. If the locals in the neighborhood don't want their police contacting suspicious folks wandering the street late at night, they can pressure the city council or the city manager to pressure the police chief. But, in my experience, this just is not going to happen.

And, if someone feels they were unlawfully detained, they can pitch one with the agency and even hire an attorney to see if they have won the unlawful detention lottery.

If a person is walking down the street and law enforcement makes unlawful contact, and it get escalated to the point that some force is used to stop the person walking, it's that officer's butt that I want to see fired and charged with violating the rights of the citizen under the color of the law.

And, if the detention was unlawful, or the force was unreasonable, it IS the officer's "butt" that would get hung out to dry.

I am so sick and tired of seeing law enforcement given free-rein, only to have their actions questioned LATER in a court.

Then the locals may take action to try and limit the proactivity of their local constabulary.

- Carl

 

[InsaneJane]

Just remember, Rodney King would probably still be in the big house if someone handn't used a video recorder and not released the tape until all the officers had already made statements under oath.

 

[CdwJava]

And after that, he was able to commit most any crime he could and got away with it. He had a "get out of jail free" card that was used three or four times after that. No law enforcement agency in the country wanted to touch him, so he got a free pass on a handful of future felonies.

As a result of all that, Los Angeles got a federal consent decree ... don't get me started on the damage THAT did to the city as a whole!

- Carl

 

[grndslm]

My last post in this thread... I promise.

The law is very clear and has been stated enough times to make this a dead issue.

Soo... the law is... ?? "articulable reasonable suspicion", right??

Let's run a few scenarios thru and see how you'd react in these situations...

(A) You're dressed up from a night of fun, carrying nothing in your hand & walking around the block, maybe 70 yards from door to door. At the end of the block, a cop shines his spotlight up and down your body, then keeps it in your face. He jumps out with the evil eye and shouts, "Where are you going?", and then he grits his jaw waiting for your response.
- (1) What do you do?
- (2) Let's say you answer, "Walking home." You don't stop because he didn't ask you to. He then says "Hey, Hey!" You turn around and say, "What's up?" and then he slams his door and chases you down with a taser in his hand, telling you to stop. So of course you stop, because he ordered you to do so. Do you file a complaint because he had no "articulable reasonable suspicion"?
- (3) Let's say you get smart, saying "I do not wish to speak with you officer as that is my right an American citizen."... and he detains you anyway. Can you do anything from that point on to help yourself out? Everybody believes this to be the "shady" response, but is there a way out?
- (4) What is "articulable reasonable suspicion" in your situation? Is it the sweatshirt you're wearing? ... the khakis? Does the time of night really make you that suspicious, even if you aren't carrying a thing? What if there's 3 separate groups of people walking... are you suspicious?

(B) You're in your friend's Chrysler Concord that just had a new motor dropped in is 100% legal in everyway, including seatbelts on passengers, and you're driving around town. You drive thru the "black part of town", turn on one of two major highways in this city. A cop pulls you over because the "tag belongs to a Chevy Astrovan", even tho this is a brand new tag just registered in the past week or two.
- (1) The cop asks your friend to step out, should he?
- (2) A second cop comes to your side and asks you to step out, should you?
- (3) Should you shut the doors? Do the doors being open mean they can search your vehicle?
- (4) The cops proceed to pat both of you down and search the front of the vehicle, and of course shining lights toward the backseat. Is there anything you can do to immediately stop this harassment?
- (5) After searching you and the vehicle, they tell you that you're both free to go even tho the "tag belongs to a Chevy Astrovan" and your buddy had a suspended license. What do you do after the fact to make sure that racial profiling like this doesn't happen again to someone else?

(C) It's your night off from working at the casino. You decide that you and your buddy are finally gonna go to the casino to see what the fun is all about. After having literally 2 1/2 beers, you go to another friend's house close by. You then decide to go to IHOP which is about 3 miles away. You eat an omelet, some pancakes, drink some water and shoot the crap for several minutes. You take a different road home that is windy, completely open, and deserted with a ditch running along one side. You decide that you see if your new 15" rims & tires can handle the road as well as your 17" rims could (BTW... 17" rims on a Corolla would be able to jerk a car from side to side doing 90mph on the Interstate. If you don't like to push the limits of your cars, or don't understand the effects of different size rims... don't assume this isn't a good enough reason or place to speed around this one corner). The tires can't grip and you spin into a muddy ditch. Unable to get enough traction, you both decide to walk 1.5 miles home. As you're a block away from your home, a cop flashes his lights and demands to know what you're doing, where you're going, to see your ID. You oblige because you think the cops are there to help. He confirms your belief that he will help by saying, "I'll help you get your car out of the ditch." As he's chauffeuring you to your vehicle, he asks, about your night. You say you went to the casino, so then his next question is "Have you had anything to drink tonight?" (Notice how he didn't jump straight to "How much did you have to drink tonight?") Thinking that it's not against the law to have a BAC less than 0.08%, you say, "Of course." He asks "How much..?" You say, "Two beers." You pull up to the vehicle, another cop asks why you don't have a hood on your car. You say, "Because I don't need it." After that, the cop that picks you up tells you to place your hands behind your back & that you're under arrest.
- (1) What would you have done differently (besides punching it around the corner... that was a one time test of the tire's capabilities)?
- (2) When you ask the cop how he knew you were drunk and he replies, "Because you were stumbling (1.5 miles of stumbling with an omelet still in my hand? Really?!?), slurring your words, etc."... How do you plan to fight these lies?
- (3) When you go on freeadvice.com, and everybody says that "you don't have a chance in hell" or "get a lawyer"... would you give up trying to fight this misdemeanor charge, even tho you know you weren't close to drunk?
- (4) When you are found not guilty, would you try to sue your municipality for wrongful arrest and/or perjury?!? I should have, but that would be more money out of my pocket that I shouldn't have to pay.

========

OldandTired is right. It's too much trouble to fight cops after they stop listening to you after they hear the words "two beers"... and then throw you in jail for approximately 20 hours because the computers don't work... and then you have to call one member of your family, that calls another family member at 4 or 5 am in the morning.... and then you have to pay a bondsman... and then you have to pay $200+ more to get your car out of the impound because it was there an extended time because the city's computers were down.... and then you have to go to arraignment... and then you have to go trial to prove your innocence... and then you decide rather it's really worth it to file a complaint after all that trouble.

If you guys aren't picking up on a pattern here, I feel sorry for you. Simply being out at 3 am is not "articulable reasonable suspicion". There needs to be something else more suspicious, like some stockings over my head. If I had something in my hands, *maybe*. An omelet, I can understand even... but nothing?? The procedure these cops use to "investigate" is unreasonable. At what point can I walk down the street at 3 am and not have to worry about running into a cop that DEMANDS I explain myself to him?!? In this country... NEVER!

I'd really love to hear how you'd handle my situations besides the obviously lame attempt to "not speed" or "obey his every command". How can I respectfully tell the cop that I would like to exercise my rights? Does doing so make me reasonably suspicious? Does he have the right to detain and search me for not answering his questions, other than what my name is? Does anybody know if I even have to present an ID in Mississippi?

I promise this will be my last post. I'm just trying to explain that I am a law abiding citizen (aka: kid), trying to figure out the best way to sidestep some unlawful (IMHO at least) stop & questioning without getting tased. And if you didn't catch on that I'm not going to shoot the crap with the police under any circumstance... again, I feel sorry for you. If I can assist a cop in solving a crime, I will flag one down or call 911. If a cop wants my help, he better make it known from the get-go that "somebody just pedaled away on a bike with a stolen pressure washer" or the like. I'll know his story is legit, and I'll point him in the right direction if I did see anything. It's not rocket science... these cops are wrong for what they do, and they're trained to act this way.

 

[CdwJava]

Simply being out at 3 am is not "articulable reasonable suspicion".

You're right ... but, couple it with either recent burglaries or auto break-ins, closed businesses, peering into windows,activity "so unusual" as to be outside the norm of activity, etc., and you have articulable reasonable suspicion. I'm sorry you do not like it, but no less than the USSC have said that this is sufficient to justify a detention.

The officer may very well have been outside the realm of reasonable suspicion. But, he is under no legal obligation to articulate his reason for the stop in the field, and you are legally obligated to stop if commanded to do so. Once again, the place to challenge the detention and the cause is later - either int he form of a personnel complaint or in a civil court.

The point that people have been trying to get across is that you have a legal obligation to comply with his order to stop. Whether you have to identify yourself depends on the laws in your state, but you cannot just keep going.

How can I respectfully tell the cop that I would like to exercise my rights? Does doing so make me reasonably suspicious?

By simply stating that. Perhaps, "Am I free to go? I don't wish to talk to you at all."

- Carl

 

[Alex23]

The OP has some serious issues. Like being an idiot.

 

[grndslm]

Care to elaborate, Alex? I'd say such a lacking response proves you are an idiot.

I have chosen to play dumb for legitimate reasons stated above, where I was treated unfairly. These cops are trained to do things that I was taught were unlawful.

 

[CdwJava]

I have chosen to play dumb for legitimate reasons stated above, where I was treated unfairly.

Play "dumb" at your own risk.

As has been said here numerous times, you do not have to speak to them, but you do have to stop when commanded to do so, and if the laws in your state require you to identify yourself during a detention, you are obligated to do so. You don't have to talk to them about the weather or even your plans for the evening, but you do have to comply with commands to stop.

- Carl

 

[Zigner]

Care to elaborate, Alex? I'd say such a lacking response proves you are an idiot.

I have chosen to play dumb for legitimate reasons stated above, where I was treated unfairly. These cops are trained to do things that I was taught were unlawful.

But, you said:

I promise this will be my last post.

What happened?