Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I might be a dummy, but at least I'm doing it on purpose! :P
I'm still confused about what the difference is between a "lawful contact" and a "lawful stop"
Can anyone come up with some examples of "lawful stops" that would not also be considered "lawful contacts" and/or vice-versa?
Lawful contact you are approached and engaged by an officer. Lawful stop, you are driving/passenger in a vehicle and stopped by an officer.
I might be a dummy, but at least I'm doing it on purpose! :P
I'm still confused about what the difference is between a "lawful contact" and a "lawful stop"
Can anyone come up with some examples of "lawful stops" that would not also be considered "lawful contacts" and/or vice-versa?
I don't work in LE, so I'm just giving an educated guess here. "Lawful contact" could involve passing a cop on the street when you were out shopping, wating for the bus, walking to school, etc.. If the cop had reason to believe you were illegal, s/he could then ask you for ID. "Lawful stop" is stopping you for doing something the police have reason to believe is breaking the law, e.g. speeding in a car, suspicion of shoplifiting in a store, etc. There is another thread on this where I posted the difference between primary offenses, e.g. a "lawful stop" as I described above, and a secondary offense, e.g. getting stopped for speeding and then being asked for ID.
Lawful contact you are approached and engaged by an officer. Lawful stop, you are driving/passenger in a vehicle and stopped by an officer.
You can try to circumscribe "lawful contact" as only pertaining to vehicle stops until you are blue in the face but as undefined by the original bill, lawful contact under the previous statutory language could mean anything and everything. That is bad law!
As the statutes now reads, "For any lawful stop, detention or arrest". Now we have statutory language which is not open to individual interpretation but one based upon court precedent. We know the parameters of a Terry Stop, we have a clear judicial record of what can lead to detention and arrest, something absent from the term "lawful contact".
this law makes being in the country illegally a State Criminal Offence. It then requires you arrest them.
Now what do you do? Under the old law you would just turn them over to ICE for deportation.
Now they will have to get a hearing and possibly a stste provided lawyer.
They will sit in our jails by the thousands awaiting hearings because they can't make bail.
DUUUUUH
460,000 Baloney Sandwiches please?
Only for the second offense, as I understand it.
The first time you're caught, you still just get deported. So, unless they are serial border crossers, no harm, no foul.
this law makes being in the country illegally a State Criminal Offence. It then requires you arrest them.
Now what do you do? Under the old law you would just turn them over to ICE for deportation.
Now they will have to get a hearing and possibly a stste provided lawyer.
They will sit in our jails by the thousands awaiting hearings because they can't make bail.
DUUUUUH
460,000 Baloney Sandwiches please?
Wow, you've just described what we've been forced to do under the school lunch program for current children of Ilegals. How ironic.
How long are you going to keep these 460,000 people in jail?
How many guards and jails will that require?
If one were to use common sense one would know they will not arrest 460,000 in a day, some arrested, some deported, some more arrested, more deported...
And besides, I hear tent cities are quite affordable for the state.
If one were to use common sense one would know they will not arrest 460,000 in a day, some arrested, some deported, some more arrested, more deported...
And besides, I hear tent cities are quite affordable for the state.
boompa sees no reason why you can't hold 460,000 "right wing extremists" and tax protesters in jail, according to his other rantings with regards to secession, etc. so I would have assumed that could be extended to illegal immigrants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
