Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-15-2014, 10:36 AM
 
4,983 posts, read 3,295,573 times
Reputation: 2739

Advertisements

Thank you Supreme Court. Thank you for continuing to let us know our "rights" are worthless and arent rights if our LEO believe they aren't "rights".

The same rights supposedly protected by the Constitution and you.


U.S. top court backs police in car brake-light confusion case

Only one Justice voted against this. The latest Obama appointee. So much for the "right" protecting our rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2014, 11:54 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,755 posts, read 9,660,995 times
Reputation: 13169
From the article:

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote on behalf of the court that the officer's mistake in believing that it was illegal to drive with one working light was not sufficient to violate Heien's right to be protected from an unlawful search under the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment.




I thought a driver's ignorance of the law is not a sufficient defense!

How can it be OK for a police officer to be ignorant of the law but not an ordinary citizen?

Wow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 12:23 PM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,795 posts, read 7,297,022 times
Reputation: 5194
The issue is that he consented to the search. No one should ever consent to a search regardless of the circumstances.
Police are required to have a warrant for a search unless they can demonstrate probable cause which normally requires something be in plain sight or some other obvious way of being noticed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,714 posts, read 31,205,294 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ih2puo View Post
Thank you Supreme Court. Thank you for continuing to let us know our "rights" are worthless and arent rights if our LEO believe they aren't "rights".

The same rights supposedly protected by the Constitution and you.


U.S. top court backs police in car brake-light confusion case

Only one Justice voted against this. The latest Obama appointee. So much for the "right" protecting our rights.
The decision was 8-1. What happened to the rest of the "left" group of the Supreme Court?

This case would have been more interesting if the driver did NOT agree to the search request. Why did he consent?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 12:27 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,376,385 times
Reputation: 11539
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
The decision was 8-1. What happened to the rest of the "left" group of the Supreme Court?

This case would have been more interesting if the driver did NOT agree to the search request. Why did he consent?
The would have just held him there until a dog could sniff the car.

Then if the dog alerted.........they would have probable cause.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 02:20 PM
 
13,308 posts, read 7,882,821 times
Reputation: 2144
Christian cops believe that everyone is born in crime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 02:36 PM
 
4,983 posts, read 3,295,573 times
Reputation: 2739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperthetic View Post
Christian cops believe that everyone is born in crime.
As an officer of the law they uphold the constitution not the Bible.

While adultery may be a sin. It isn't a crime. Unless you are in the military. Or maybe certain parts of the country?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 02:51 PM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,797,637 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
The issue is that he consented to the search. No one should ever consent to a search regardless of the circumstances.

Police are required to have a warrant for a search unless they can demonstrate probable cause which normally requires something be in plain sight or some other obvious way of being noticed.
Maybe my personal experiences are long out of date, but...

Young man with long hair and a beard driving from LA to Denver, December 1971, driving an old beat up car. Young man gets pulled over in Magdelena, New Mexico for no reason (no I was NOT speeding and NO there was no broken tail light) and cop tells me that a car of my description has been reported snugging drugs and he needs to search my trunk. Well, I figured I could sped a couple of days in a holding cell while things got sorted out (or maybe billy clubbed just for the hell of it) or I could open my trunk. Cop liked my attitude and looked into the trunk filled with my crap and decided I was not worth the effort. 4th amendment be damned but he went home feeling like a man and I was on my way.

I have been illegally stopped and search in New Mexico, Petaluma CA, San Rafael, CA, and Sunnyvale CA. The last one was because I was young, and driving my brother and my sister to 7-11 for a late night slurpee and the cop had some kind of bee up his bunwahs.

For a very long time, cops have felt themselves to be a law unto themselves.

The sad thing is that if they spent more time making friends in the communities they server, rather than hassling the citizens of the communities they serve, maybe there would be less of this nonsense and more success enforcing the law against the real criminals.

PS I am a conservative republican
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 03:34 PM
 
13,308 posts, read 7,882,821 times
Reputation: 2144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ih2puo View Post
As an officer of the law they uphold the constitution not the Bible.

While adultery may be a sin. It isn't a crime. Unless you are in the military. Or maybe certain parts of the country?
I've never even heard of a cop that read the constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 03:36 PM
 
13,308 posts, read 7,882,821 times
Reputation: 2144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ih2puo View Post
As an officer of the law they uphold the constitution not the Bible.

While adultery may be a sin. It isn't a crime. Unless you are in the military. Or maybe certain parts of the country?
Fight of the millennia, Lilith versus Eve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top