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.
...Grumpy, I agree with you 100% that this PKNopp is basically a very clueless person who has issues with law enforcement.
I have issues with people so willing to do away with our Constitutional rights.
Quote:
Yes, the police can talk to you WITH or WITHOUT reasonable suspension or probable cause. If they have either reasonable suspension or probable cause, you're not free to go and if you're foolish enough to listen to this PKNopp and try to leave, YOU are now subject to further detention for a field interview or arrest. And!! If you're stupid enough to resist arrest, reasonable force can LEGALLY be used against you in order to take you into custody.
There was NO probably cause. The guy was simply minding his own business. They had NO reason to touch him.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things ...
Quote:
I'm pretty sure that PKNopp watches way too much TV, but he might be semi-right to a single point. That point being, if the police contact is solely based on a consensual/casual contact with NO reasonable suspension or probable cause, you are not required to talk or answer any question(s)… But, very ill informed people often confuse this with a lawful and 100% legal police stop and questioning, causing them to get themselves into further trouble, due to their ignorance of the law.
What legal reason did they have to detain him?
Quote:
PKNopp, again, please tell us where you obtained your law degree since basically, you're wrong with every single reply you have made. Basically, you're just a $h!+house lawyer... Nothing more and nothing less.
"I" just hope that some "less than bright individual" reading your responses/replies doesn't think you're right or some kind of legal genius, cuz if they do, they're going to have a very bad day with their next contact with law enforcement.
Also, if you or anybody else isn't happy with your local law enforcement, why don't you step up to the plated and become an officer of the law and really make a difference in your community, by being that law enforcement officer that can make a difference.
Talk is cheap.
His family will end up with a very large settlement.
Walking down the street with a suspected gun, the cops have every right to question him about it!!!
Last weekend you idiots were protesting for more to be done to stop violence, this weekend that is done and they are wanting to protest a justifiable shooting??? LOL, no wonder these communities are so pathetic..
Walking down the street with a gun is a legal activity. They do not have the right to detain someone for a legal activity.
Yeah because that gun the perp had would have been used to kill a police officer, an innocent person or a fellow gang banger. Harassing a criminal with an illegal firearm. What part of illegal is so dam complicated? The cops just did society a great service by ridding it of a violent criminal.
He wasn't a criminal. Oh yeah, he was black so he was a criminal. He was a black man simply walking down the street.
Yes there was an offense. He was illegally carrying a firearm. So there is an actual offense. You have been proven wrong every single time on this issue!
This shows why your moniker is bogus. There are hundreds of thousands of people doing illegal things in their homes and on their persons everyday but there is NOTHING the police can do about it without just cause. They had none here.
He was a black man walking down the street with an illegal firearm! No sense of even arguing with you anymore. You are WRONG again!
They had NO way of knowing he didn't have a permit. They can not ask for it outside of an investigation. He was doing nothing to get stop and detained. His family will get a very large settlement, not that then things will be OK.
Location: Free State of Florida, Support our police
5,860 posts, read 3,297,839 times
Reputation: 9146
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
They had NO way of knowing he didn't have a permit. They can not ask for it outside of an investigation. He was doing nothing to get stop and detained. His family will get a very large settlement, not that then things will be OK.
Can I please have some of what you are smoking? The family wont get a dime. Nor should they!
He certainly implied that """""They spotted a man "who they thought might be armed" and approached him"""" was OK with him.
Later in the discussion, you honed in on the point I was trying to make. That is that for some (certainly not all), they apply their support for 2A inconsistently among people who look like them, and people who do not.
I don't think BB, or others are supportive of police approaching "all men who they think might be armed", only the ones that they would be suspicious of. Typically, it has borne out that those they'd be suspicious of are the ones that do not look or think just like them.
He certainly implied that """""They spotted a man "who they thought might be armed" and approached him"""" was OK with him.
No, he asked what was wrong with the statement. No one but I addressed it.
Quote:
Later in the discussion, you honed in on the point I was trying to make. That is that for some (certainly not all), they apply their support for 2A inconsistently among people who look like them, and people who do not.
I don't think BB, or others are supportive of police approaching "all men who they think might be armed", only the ones that they would be suspicious of. Typically, it has borne out that those they'd be suspicious of are the ones that do not look or think just like them.
See, you are doing the exact same thing the police did. You can think whatever you want. Maybe BB is unable to actually bring himself around to defending a minority having the same rights as himself, I do not know, but he is right, there is something very wrong in the statement he quoted.
Not knowing, he will have to speak for himself...........one might make leaps based upon him not.
I've pointed out what is wrong with the statement over and over and that does not mean I am OK with what happened.
They had NO way of knowing he didn't have a permit. They can not ask for it outside of an investigation. He was doing nothing to get stop and detained. His family will get a very large settlement, not that then things will be OK.
If the cops suspect a concealed weapon they definitely can detain him and pat him down.
And shockingly, the cops were right.
The family isn't getting a dime.
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.
