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.
With the anti- police "mood' today thy are on edge ALL the time , EVEN for a routine traffic stop.
It has nothing to do with the mood, it's a reality that police officers have always faced. Let's face it, not everyone is cut out to be a police officer. Some have no problems performing a simple traffic stop, while others shake in their boots. The latter should never get the job.
One of my good friends from way back when I lived in the USA was a sergeant. For fun, I did a ride along. He gave me a bullet proof vest, and I happened to be wearing a shirt the same color as their uniforms (but wasn't wearing their uniforms).
We pulled over a car full of males for not having tags on their car. I was excited to play officer, got out and walked to their window and demanded to see their licenses. I noticed he was well behind me, but eventually he got there. He later told me not to do that and it was dangerous.
At the end, we're having coffee with the other cops and they're asking how the ride along went. He laughed and said he would rather have me as his partner than X, Y, and Z who never leave their car on traffic stops.
^^This story is over a decades old, well before this climate. I wondered then how people could make the force and be too scared to do simple traffic stops? In reality, those are the most dangerous officers (even more dangerous than the guys who go on power trips) because they will shoot you in a heart beat. There is no reason for them to be police officers. The USA needs to screen police officers better.
Half the states have Stop and Identify statutes. Refusal to comply is a crime.
Arizona is one of 25 states that require officers to ask and driver’s to comply.
It appears that for whatever reason, this driver chose to not comply.
No State has a law which requires a person to identify themselves UNLESS the officer has Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that the person had committed, was committing or was about to commit a CRIME and has a reasonable belief that the person stopped may be armed and dangerous. That is the minimum standard by which a person can be detained by law enforcement, established in the US Supreme Court case from 1968, Terry v Ohio along with the court's decision in Hiibel v the 6th Judicial District Court of Nevada which authorizes law enforcement officers to demand identification IF the officer has RAS that the person had committed, was committing or was about to commit a CRIME. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio
In EVERY stop and ID State the law has RAS of a CRIME written in the statute.
It's been all over the local news here since last weekend when ABC15 broke the story. The big issue was the fact that the passenger was stuck in the seatbelt when the officers tried pulling him out of the car and he couldn't get out. I am certainly of the belief that some cops just go too far and it is not right. I am also of the belief that someone shouldn't be in possession of meth, especially in the presence of children. That last item of info (the meth) was something that GMA decidedly kept out of their report when they first reported on this story earlier in the week.
The meth they found shouldn't matter as the officers had ZERO RAS to believe there was meth present nor any weapons present. Further, there isn't ANY State statute that says "officer safety" in it. The officer questioning the passenger had ZERO RAS to demand ID nor did he have any RAS to indicate suspicion that the passenger was armed and dangerous.
This was a fishing expedition where the LEOs caught a fish. The fishing expedition itself was unconstitutional and unlawful but I doubt these people can afford the kind of attorney it would take to overthrow the undoubted conviction they'll receive based upon society's indoctrination that drugs are bad, therefore anything that is done to a person who possess, uses, buys or sells drugs is fine with them, the law and the Constitution be damned.
Some reports in the media and responses in this thread sound like this was just a nice family on its way for ice cream. These "people" were a couple tweekers out in their car getting high with their kids in the back seat. The cop should have shot them for the sake of the kids. Society would have been better off.
The meth they found shouldn't matter as the officers had ZERO RAS to believe there was meth present nor any weapons present. Further, there isn't ANY State statute that says "officer safety" in it. The officer questioning the passenger had ZERO RAS to demand ID nor did he have any RAS to indicate suspicion that the passenger was armed and dangerous.
This was a fishing expedition where the LEOs caught a fish. The fishing expedition itself was unconstitutional and unlawful but I doubt these people can afford the kind of attorney it would take to overthrow the undoubted conviction they'll receive based upon society's indoctrination that drugs are bad, therefore anything that is done to a person who possess, uses, buys or sells drugs is fine with them, the law and the Constitution be damned.
He will soon have enough money to get a real lawyer.
It has nothing to do with the mood, it's a reality that police officers have always faced. Let's face it, not everyone is cut out to be a police officer. Some have no problems performing a simple traffic stop, while others shake in their boots. The latter should never get the job.
One of my good friends from way back when I lived in the USA was a sergeant. For fun, I did a ride along. He gave me a bullet proof vest, and I happened to be wearing a shirt the same color as their uniforms (but wasn't wearing their uniforms).
We pulled over a car full of males for not having tags on their car. I was excited to play officer, got out and walked to their window and demanded to see their licenses. I noticed he was well behind me, but eventually he got there. He later told me not to do that and it was dangerous.
At the end, we're having coffee with the other cops and they're asking how the ride along went. He laughed and said he would rather have me as his partner than X, Y, and Z who never leave their car on traffic stops.
^^This story is over a decades old, well before this climate. I wondered then how people could make the force and be too scared to do simple traffic stops? In reality, those are the most dangerous officers (even more dangerous than the guys who go on power trips) because they will shoot you in a heart beat. There is no reason for them to be police officers. The USA needs to screen police officers better.
Cool story bro but no police officer would ever allow someone, not trained, to approach a vehicle. I can't stand when people fabricate stories about police officers just to further their agenda.
Ya know, I have been pulled over a few times in my life, and have NEVER been tazed. Maybe it is because I don't act like a jerk, or one of those stupid Sovereign Citizens, and I fully comply with what they need to do their job.
This could have all been avoided, all he had to do was show them his license, as he is required to do when asked. But, the way our stupid legal system is, he will probably hit the lottery here.
I'm having trouble verifying the meth under the seat story.
I'm beginning to suspect it to be "fake news."
In searching for it, I did however find a couple of other interesting follow-ups on the case.
Apparently there was an investigation done;
"However, a police investigation after the incident shows officer Schneider and the entire traffic stop may have been in the wrong. Police stopped the car, parked at a Motel 6 parking lot, for not using their blinker. According to the investigative report, Schneider told his partner he didn't see a blinker. But Schneider's partner told investigators he did not recall seeing Wheatcroft's car before Schneider pointed it out. Investigators tested the scene, lining up their car with where Schneider's patrol car was. They concluded it's unlikely that officer Schneider could have seen them turn into the parking lot. But the department appears not to have followed up on that. Instead Schneider was only disciplined for one of the 11 taser hits -- and it wasn't even this one."
Mr. schneider's personel file shows he was suspended in 2017 for a stun gun incident, & disciplined 3 other times (destroying property in a case, not following orders);
The case was sent to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, which declined to prosecute any of the officers involved because there was not a "reasonable likelihood of conviction."
Ya know, I have been pulled over a few times in my life, and have NEVER been tazed. Maybe it is because I don't act like a jerk, or one of those stupid Sovereign Citizens, and I fully comply with what they need to do their job.
This could have all been avoided, all he had to do was show them his license, as he is required to do when asked. But, the way our stupid legal system is, he will probably hit the lottery here.
I don't know why people (you) continue to make claims that one knows are false. Does it make you feel good about something in particular? Explain it to me.
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.
