Do You Have To Talk To Police?

Tbo

You're beating a dead horse. MikeTx is obviously an anarchist, blinded by hate, and sits around reading the "Anarchist's Cookbook" while thinking that Timothy McVey is his hero.
 
lillysdad, are you trying to provoke mike? Thats not right.

Me & TBO have bumped heads in the past. He (and I) have both been stubbornly blunt about our respective positions and it wasn't pretty. Over time we've both (accidently?) made reasonable stated points and realized that wording is everything to communication and edification of each other and progressing to a point where hostility is not the word of the day.

Cops may have a hard time seeing things from a citizens point of view and vice versa. I notice TBO has toned down some from how he was in the past, and consequently, actually taught me the why of a few things and I'm a better man because of it. I used to hate that guy, pure JBT in my mind. I now hold a certain amount of respect for him because his effort is apparent.

I see you and mike as an earlier version of me & TBO. Perhaps Mike needs to tone down a little, but perhaps you do too. Provoking someone does nothing but widen the gap and encourage the us vs them attitude. Why don't you try seeing behind the bluntly stated bitterness, and communicate accordingly in an intelligent manner and be a credit to your uniform instead of making yourself look bad? We're all on the same side. We just need to establish effective communication. You missed with your provocation. :( Lighten up!
 
I do concur that the communication has often broken down, and I do provoke at times when I shouldnt. I, however, feel that that provocation was on his part this time.....although I will not deny the opposite is true in other cases.

Then they will start with street justice, and it appears that just what todays JBT deserves, becasue they have litle respect for rights anymore.
Click to expand...
 
Well two wrongs don't make a right. Mike seems intelligent, you seem intelligent. Anyone can have a bad day or get up grouchy. There's a bigger more important issue at hand than posturing though. We'd all do well to remember that and make an effort to talk reasonably.

My hats off to a few LEO's who can do this on this and other boards. I'm not sure what they think of me, but I've grown to respect a few of the ones I used to butt heads with because they make an effort to address the issue instead of the emotion. Thats progress which is what the boards are all about. :) It takes time, hang in there.
 
Being detained

I work private security, and I have had the police treat me as a criminal in front of suspects. I have had them interupt me in my job, even after I identified myself, and provided credentials. 2 of them will insist on verifying everything about me, instead of one just getting the information from another. As I said before the courts have routinely upheld that a LEO can detain you until he feels there is no longer a reason to detain you.
Oh and that dept. called Bureau of Professional Standards, or Internal Affairs, seems to be just another way for one cop to cover another one. I will allways maintain that a LEO department should answer to a citizen council of the people they are suppose to work for.

Not every cop I have dealt with is bad, but if I get hit by 4 cars, and 3 of them are red, I am going to stay away from red cars.
 
I have had them interupt me in my job, even after I identified myself, and provided credentials. 2 of them will insist on verifying everything about me, instead of one just getting the information from another.
Click to expand...

I arrested a uniformed security officer a while back for warrants out of an adjacent county, so I have no issues with that.

There are two issues to every coin. For every good, decent security guard I know, I can name 5 who arent. They range from wannabe cops to downright criminals who havent been caught yet. However, for me, the few decent ones I know overshadow the rest, and I have an overall good feeling towards security guards. I judge them, like people, on a case by case basis, as I deal with them.
 
I can agree with that. I used to work security in columbus, and the other guys were as lillysdad describes. We lost the ABF account because some of the other guards cut into a pallet of ammo and took about a five gallon bucket of ammo (that they were supposed to be guarding!)

OTOH, the day I clocked a big guy in the forhead with my PR-24 (Big no-no), I was sure they would get me in trouble for it, the CSPD guys were cool about it when I started to explain how I 'missed' and cut me off to say ' don't worry, you don't have to be anyones punching bag, calm down'... :)
 
Butch50, Dallas has a very good Internal Affairs Division. You should have gone to them. Cops under investigation by IA are prohibited from having contact with a complainant, and were they to do what they threatened, it would be intimidation of a witness, which is a felony.
Click to expand...

It was 5 or 6 years ago. I was so steaming mad at the (illegal aliens) that hit me, and then at the cop who refused to do anything, and then again at the other cops that came to the scene to stonewall, that I just got my little report and went on about my business. I don't say intelligent things when I get mad. When I get mad I am far better off keeping my mouth shut. Later I should have filed a complaint, but honestly it never occurred to me.

I have heard that Dallas police are getting better, although about 6 months ago I got a ticket for 7mph over the speed limit when not endangering anyone or anything.
 
As I said before the courts have routinely upheld that a LEO can detain you until he feels there is no longer a reason to detain you.
Click to expand...

Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know what you're talking about. When you can post the case law to support what you're saying, I'll eat crow. In the meantime, are you telling me that if I pull you over because an unidentified person called and said you have a kilo of cocaine in your trunk, I can detain you for an hour until the judge says I don't have enough probable cause for a search warrant?

Or what if I stop you for speeding and think you have drugs in the trunk but have no probable cause to search. Have the courts upheld that I can detain you for an hour until the drug dog gets there, or have the courts said I can only detain you long enough to write you the ticket and run you through my computer? Or have the courts said that I can run the drug dog around the outside of your car without probable cause as long as I DON'T detain you longer than it would ordinarily take to write the ticket and check you for warrants?

My BS meter pegged on this one. In reality the plolice can hold you if they feel like it and the only way you can do anything without coming to violence is file a suit.
Click to expand...

We're talking about what police are ALLOWED to do. They CAN do anything they want. They can plant dope on you and arrest you, they can shoot you and plant a gun on you, they can rummage through your wife's underwear while checking out your burglary.........If you've been the victim of rogue cops and don't want to do anything about it, whether that means making a complaint or filing a suit, that's YOUR decision. The fact that you don't want to do anything about it doesn't make their actions any less prohibited. And the police can absolutely not hold you "as long as they feel like it" whether it's on a traffic stop or a Terry stop.
 
"Quote:
As I said before the courts have routinely upheld that a LEO can detain you until he feels there is no longer a reason to detain you.



Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know what you're talking about. When you can post the case law to support what you're saying, I'll eat crow. In the meantime, are you telling me that if I pull you over because an unidentified person called and said you have a kilo of cocaine in your trunk, I can detain you for an hour until the judge says I don't have enough probable cause for a search warrant?"

Just my way of showing how some LEOs can violate thier authority. And yes they have the right to detain you to determine if you are a person of interest so long as they can articulate that there was suspicion. How long is relevant to thier mood. Don't believe me. call you local PD, and inquire about this. I know from first hand knowledge. This is not case law, it is pre-emptive justice. Just as the courts have widely accepted the us of Radar units. There was no case law just a history and acceptability.
 
This whole thing is starting to piss me off. I suggest we (cops) leave all these threads alone and ignore them from now on.
We are here because we are shooters not because we are social workers and we don't have to be apologists because some fanny has got a bee in his bonnet. That's what I think anyhow.
 
Blue Heeler said:
We are here because we are shooters not because we are social workers and we don't have to be apologists because some fanny has got a bee in his bonnet.
Click to expand...
Blue-
You are absolutely correct. But neither do you need to take these posts personally. The percentage of posters here with an ax to grind against ALL cops is actually pretty small. What most object to is individual actions and Unconstitutional Laws....to deny they exist or twist that into "cop-bashing" is to ignore the issue at hand.

Just as there are cretins in the non-badged population, there are those who abuse and disregard the laws on the LEO side. I NEVER see the Non-Cops on TFL take it personally when we point out a an action of a CCW holder as either stupid or illegal. They don't take it personally when we focus on the brittle edge of the "militia" movements.

Similarly, there is no need for you to assume we're pointing at you (or even your department) when a bad law or bad stop is discussed. Sure, there are those who wish to judge based on less than complete knowledge of the circumstances....but this happens in every thread, not just the LEO threads. Can't be helped.

Also, there are one or two here who seem to delight in the "law is on my side; I just enforce it.....vigorously. Talk to your Congressman" attitude. Nothing good can come from that.....not if you're trying to win hearts and minds.
Rich
 
Just my way of showing how some LEOs can violate thier authority. And yes they have the right to detain you to determine if you are a person of interest so long as they can articulate that there was suspicion. How long is relevant to thier mood. Don't believe me. call you local PD, and inquire about this. I know from first hand knowledge. This is not case law, it is pre-emptive justice. Just as the courts have widely accepted the us of Radar units. There was no case law just a history and acceptability.
Click to expand...

Your way of showing how some cops can violate their authority is to make blantantly untrue statements about what the law allows?

1. The police can not detain you as long as they want to determine if you are a "person of interest" even if they can "articulate suspicion".

2. It has nothing to do with their mood.

3. I don't need to call my local PD, as I am pretty familiar with the law as it relates to Terry stops.

4. There certainly IS case law with regard to radar units, and the case law is part of the reason the courts take judicial notice with some aspects of radar technology.
 
This whole thing is starting to piss me off. I suggest we (cops) leave all these threads alone and ignore them from now on.
Click to expand...

As you can tell from my threads I have had several minor but very irritating interactions with leo's. I also have had 18 months of personal experience on the inside watching. I think I am pretty objective though. Here are some generalizations that I think are as accurate as generalizations can be:

1. Our society could not continue to exist if we did not have a means of "forcibly" enforcing our laws. Hence leo's are necessary to our very survival. Without them we would have some form of chaos.

2. There are different layers of leo's. There are different layers of citizens. The layer of most commonly encountered leo's are the ones who enforce the traffic laws, and they grind up against the layer of citizens who are honest everyday joes just out taking care of their own business. So for the most part us average Joes get ticked off at the rolling meter maids who hassle us and cost us money over what are typically (typically not always but typically) minor "infractions" that posed no real threat to anyone much less to society as a whole.

3. There are other layers of real police officers who deal with the layer of citizens who are real criminals. Most of us citizens only see that stuff on TV.

4. Joe citizen "perceives" the rolling meter maids typically as people who felt inadequate in themselves and were driven to put on uniforms and obtain authority over others in order to feel adequate. This is often reinforced by the way that they have been treated for violating traffic laws of a very minor nature.

5. Joe citizen also has it in the back of his mind that once you get past that layer of rolling meter maids that the leo's that deal with actual criminals deserve respect, for the most part.

6. I point you to the rules of engagement that I posted earlier in this thread. It is good advice if Joe citizen has to interact with leo's. It is also respectful advice as well.

7. It is a given that one bad experience, from either side of the fence, can color a persons perspective for life. Most of us Joe citizens who have had experience with leo's has been at the hands of the rolling meter maids who do nothing but cruise the streets all day long looking for minor infractions in order to hassle (and cost hard earned money) law abiding citizens who have not committed a crime. I bet that most leo's had to put in their time being a rolling meter maid with a quota to meet and found quickly that Joe Citizen did not appreciate them one bit for being pulled over and hit with a $100+ fine for some BS thing when they are struggling just to pay their bills, and taxes.

Now here I offer a constructive suggestion that would make relations between the public and leo's far better: Lets say that each rolling meter maid has to write "good" tickets that equal the "bad" tickets. In other words for every $100 fine they write they have to pull over a citizen that they "catch" obeying the traffic laws and issue a $100 certificate that can be cashed in. The idea being that they balance exactly the fines taken in with rewards going out. That would definitely cause a big shift in attitude on everyones part, for the better.

It would also end the belief that us Joe Citizens have that those rolling meter maids are out there to enrich the municipality they work for, and that what they do isn't about law enforcement but actually about Legally Robbing Joe Citizen of Hard Earned Money.
 
Now here I offer a constructive suggestion that would make relations between the public and leo's far better: Lets say that each rolling meter maid has to write "good" tickets that equal the "bad" tickets. In other words for every $100 fine they write they have to pull over a citizen that they "catch" obeying the traffic laws and issue a $100 certificate that can be cashed in.
Click to expand...

Well, you'd have to change the 4th Amendment and maybe make an exception to the search warrant rule. You could call it the "Contraband Found After Stopping Motorist To Issue 'Good Ticket'" Exception. What would you do when you pull someone over to give them a good ticket and find a body in the back seat? You had no reasonable suspicion to stop them, other than the fact that they were obeying the law so well, so the body would be inadmissible.

As far as your disdain for traffic stops: Can you tell me the number of "real policework" arrests made as the result of traffic stops?

People should absolutely NOT be able to be detained by the government in the interests of public relations. I thought you were a pro-citizens-rights kind of guy. Now, it's "Why'd you stop him officer?" "Because he was speeding 26 in a 25 zone judge." Your plan would give us even MORE tools for a pretextual traffic stop! I like it. "Why'd you stop him officer?" "Because he was driving so well judge! I was gonna give him one of those new 'good tickets' redeemable for $100.00 worth of Chicken Nuggets, and that's when I noticed the cloud of dope smoke coming from his window..."
 
I have never complained to anyone about being given $100. Why would you? If a cop pulled you over for obeying the law and you were in too big of a hurry to accept the money you could just say thanks but I have to keep moving, give that money to someone else......

I see nothing wrong with issuing citations that balance. If you see that as a problem then how about the citation money goes to a non-profit charity instead?

As far as your disdain for traffic stops: Can you tell me the number of "real policework" arrests made as the result of traffic stops?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that it is OK to stop people for going slightly over the speed limit in order to "fish" for a criminal? Is that why the cops pull people over and write tickets? Fishing expeditions? That sounds unconstitutional to me.
 
I have never complained to anyone about being given $100. Why would you?
Click to expand...

You'll complain about it when they pull you over to give you a hundred bucks and then arrest you when they find out you smell like booze and blow a .08. Instead of costing you $1500.00, because of good driving, it will only cost you $1400.00.
 
Hey, I like that idea.

If you don't get any tickets, get arrested, or thrown in jail then the local Police shop gives all that did this for a year $100 (cash is better than coupons for fried chicken parts).

Money can be used as an incentive both ways. But knowing that you'd get cash back at the end of the year is better then knowing that it's going to cost you if you get caught.

:)

Wayne
 
You'll complain about it when they pull you over to give you a hundred bucks and then arrest you when they find out you smell like booze and blow a .08. Instead of costing you $1500.00, because of good driving, it will only cost you $1400.00.
Click to expand...

There is a point there, except they won't find me in violation because I don't drive and drink, don't do or carry drugs, don't have bodies in my trunk, etc....But I can see how it could give cops an excuse to pull over people that they just want to check out. So, on the other hand they could simply write down the license number of someone they catch obeying the law and mail a check to their home address. Yeah, I like that idea a lot better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top