06-27-2011, 06:34 PM
Keep poking the bear. Don't be surprised when they bite back.
"In highly volatile or dangerous situations, a LEO's authority to require compliance is much higher than in non-threatening contexts. The Supreme Court has ruled (with Terry v. Ohio being one of the primary cases) that the police are allowed to protect themselves from potentially dangerous people or situations. Under the umbrella of "concern for safety" or "search for weapons" the police have wide latitude to do what they want and to order citizens to comply with their demands.
The Terry v. Ohio case created the "weapons search", "terry search", or "terry pat" exception to the 4th Amendment 'probable cause requirement' for searches. The court ruled that if a police officer "[has] reasonable cause to believe that [someone] might be armed" they can require they submit to a quick patdown. What this has meant is that it is now standard practice to pat down anyone that a LEO wants to, without the need for arrest, probable cause, or even suspicion of a crime.
Many police use weapons pats as a way to intimidate and harass citizens, since it is a power the courts have allowed them to use with little justification. Often a LEO will find something during their patdown which is clearly not a weapon which they would like to see, but this is beyond their Court-approved authority ( see below ).
Also under the 'concern for safety' umbrella, police are given wide latitude by courts to ask individuals to comply with simple non-intrusive commands such as "stand over there" or "wait here for a moment", but the line between order and request becomes very fuzzy when an officer starts telling people where to go unless the situation is volatile / dangerous. There are many stories of two (or more) individuals confronted by police whom the police intentionally separate to try to intimidate or to compare stories. This is generally a 'fishing' maneuver which would not fall under the 'concern for safety' umbrella."
All Americans should know their rights and where their personal rights end. Arresting a black man is dangerous. I didn't make it that way and the police didn't make it that way. Black men did. Then they want to fucking bitch about. Grow the fuck America. If you act right, you get a LOT more respect.
Stupid bitches are stupid bitches. Even when they make the news and other stupid bitches agree with them. It doesn't make it right. It is just more bullshit piled atop more bullshit.
Just sayin'.
"In highly volatile or dangerous situations, a LEO's authority to require compliance is much higher than in non-threatening contexts. The Supreme Court has ruled (with Terry v. Ohio being one of the primary cases) that the police are allowed to protect themselves from potentially dangerous people or situations. Under the umbrella of "concern for safety" or "search for weapons" the police have wide latitude to do what they want and to order citizens to comply with their demands.
The Terry v. Ohio case created the "weapons search", "terry search", or "terry pat" exception to the 4th Amendment 'probable cause requirement' for searches. The court ruled that if a police officer "[has] reasonable cause to believe that [someone] might be armed" they can require they submit to a quick patdown. What this has meant is that it is now standard practice to pat down anyone that a LEO wants to, without the need for arrest, probable cause, or even suspicion of a crime.
Many police use weapons pats as a way to intimidate and harass citizens, since it is a power the courts have allowed them to use with little justification. Often a LEO will find something during their patdown which is clearly not a weapon which they would like to see, but this is beyond their Court-approved authority ( see below ).
Also under the 'concern for safety' umbrella, police are given wide latitude by courts to ask individuals to comply with simple non-intrusive commands such as "stand over there" or "wait here for a moment", but the line between order and request becomes very fuzzy when an officer starts telling people where to go unless the situation is volatile / dangerous. There are many stories of two (or more) individuals confronted by police whom the police intentionally separate to try to intimidate or to compare stories. This is generally a 'fishing' maneuver which would not fall under the 'concern for safety' umbrella."
All Americans should know their rights and where their personal rights end. Arresting a black man is dangerous. I didn't make it that way and the police didn't make it that way. Black men did. Then they want to fucking bitch about. Grow the fuck America. If you act right, you get a LOT more respect.
Stupid bitches are stupid bitches. Even when they make the news and other stupid bitches agree with them. It doesn't make it right. It is just more bullshit piled atop more bullshit.
Just sayin'.