Respect our DPS and Troopers

[chuck j]

I am certainly not advocating terry searches but I understand the amount of criminal things going on out there . I would be willing to be searched several times a day if it would thin the bad guys out . I drive a 4 cylinder SUV , usually wear overalls I don't look like I have two nickles to rub together and got two spoiled house dogs with me . I hand them a CHL and commercial DL they go back to the cruiser and background check me . Then they just tell me to have a nice day . I honestly don't think they stop many people just for fun .

Not me! I find this statement very disturbing.
If you believe this, why don't you flag down the police several times a day and volunteer to be searched?

When they have probable cause, it's part of their job to stop certain people. I don't think LEOs stop people "for fun."
I am not an LEO, but I wouldn't think it would be a "fun" thing to do.

I don't think you read the whole thing Bill .

[WildBill]

I am certainly not advocating terry searches but I understand the amount of criminal things going on out there . I would be willing to be searched several times a day if it would thin the bad guys out . I drive a 4 cylinder SUV , usually wear overalls I don't look like I have two nickles to rub together and got two spoiled house dogs with me . I hand them a CHL and commercial DL they go back to the cruiser and background check me . Then they just tell me to have a nice day . I honestly don't think they stop many people just for fun .

Not me! I find this statement very disturbing.
If you believe this, why don't you flag down the police several times a day and volunteer to be searched?

When they have probable cause, it's part of their job to stop certain people. I don't think LEOs stop people "for fun."
I am not an LEO, but I wouldn't think it would be a "fun" thing to do.

I don't think you read the whole thing Bill .

What part did I miss?

[chuck j]

I am certainly not advocating terry searches but I understand the amount of criminal things going on out there . I would be willing to be searched several times a day if it would thin the bad guys out . I drive a 4 cylinder SUV , usually wear overalls I don't look like I have two nickles to rub together and got two spoiled house dogs with me . I hand them a CHL and commercial DL they go back to the cruiser and background check me . Then they just tell me to have a nice day . I honestly don't think they stop many people just for fun .

Not me! I find this statement very disturbing.
If you believe this, why don't you flag down the police several times a day and volunteer to be searched?

When they have probable cause, it's part of their job to stop certain people. I don't think LEOs stop people "for fun."
I am not an LEO, but I wouldn't think it would be a "fun" thing to do.

I don't think you read the whole thing Bill .

.......................I am certainly not advocating terry searches .

[Abraham]

Perhaps, we should allow ad hoc LEO roadblocks/check points as exist in so many Middle Eastern/South American/Mexican etc., countries and hope (gulp) they don't find something we didn't know was illegal in our vehicles, like say a baseball bat (or planted) unless we offer a little Baksheesh.

Once our little stipend (or all you have in your wallet) is paid, we can about our merry way...

Sound O.K. to all who don't mind LEO's going on wily-nily fishing expeditions?

After all, what's wrong with a little police state tactics?

[chuck j]

Well you can run with it if you want to but I think your missing the intent . Go for it though , it will might make ya feel better .

[jmra]

Like I said earlier, pointless.

[Abraham]

If one doesn't mind police interference regarding going about one's business when they've not done anything wrong, well o.k. then.

By all means, the police should have the power to frisk/search/perhaps enter my house without invitation because, heck, I COULD be up to no good.

I won't complain because I'm not a criminal.

3:00 A.M. - Bam, Bam, Bam on my door. "Open up"

"We're the police and we want to inspect your home for anything you may have or do that's illegal."

"Warrant, Warrant, we don't need no stinkin warrant, dirtbag. Unlock the door, we're coming in, like it or not!"

Sure, just be compliant, because you're not a criminal, so go along to get along...

[srothstein]

I believe that there are two separate issues at play and one is not being discussed as it should. For an officer to stop a person against their will, the Constitution says they need probable cause. But there is this minor word in the Fourth Amendment that many people do not remember. Instead of making all searches forbidden without probable cause or a warrant, the Constitution forbids "unreasonable" searches. In interpreting this term, the SCOTUS has held that the police may stop someone without their permission if there is articulable reason to believe that they are committing or about to commit a crime (for the purposes of this discussion, there are other exceptions written that do not enter into the scenario being discussed).

So, for the police to stop you while driving on I-20 (or any other highway), they must have reason to believe you are committing a crime. Remember that in Texas, unlike some other states, traffic violations are crimes. It is illegal for the police to stop cars at random while they are driving in Texas. So the stop must be based on some traffic violation, even if they do not write a ticket. And I have seen DPS use what I believe to be flimsy reasons for stops, but they are strictly legal. For example, exceeding the posted speed limit by even one mile per hour is a valid reason for a traffic stop (legally, even if I would never do so).

This leads me to the question of what the stop was for. They must be able to tell you why they stopped you. If not, you could legally just drive away (not recommended but truly you can).

But the second half of the question is if the police may search your car. It does not harm anyone or anyone's rights if the police ask anyone for permission to search their car. The police may ask anyone they want to talk with them about anything and may ask anyone they want to waive their rights against unreasonable searches. But, where it crosses the line is if you say no to the search and they do anything to coerce or shame you into allowing it. If you are stopped for speeding and the police ask to search your car, they have the full authority to do so. Just as you have the full authority to say no. And when you say no, the police should say "OK, thank you for your time" and let you go. This is not a problem IMO and may result in more arrests (because as a general rule, criminals are stupid and do dumb things like consent to searches when they are carrying drugs). If I were chief, I would require my officers to have some reason, even if it does not reach the level of reasonable suspicion, to justify their asking, but I do not see a problem with asking for consent.

I do know of one officer who asked every single person he stopped for consent. He had more searches than any other officer on that department. And he had more drug arrests than most of them also. But he did not have as many arrests as one of the senior officers who was very good at determining who was more likely to have drugs and asked for consent rarely but had a near 100% hit rate on his searches.

My advice is to not give consent for a search, just as I do not advise speaking to officers more than necessary after a shooting. But it is just my opinion. I also note that in the real world it is often less trouble to consent or talk than it is to stand on your rights. I have problems with this but I recognize the real world and its implications.

[Jim Beaux]

Boiling it down to exactly what it is -

Mr. Citizen - In the U.S. there are over 50,000 laws on the books. I would like to determine your level of compliance just to see if I can find reason to revoke your freedom. Do you wanna gamble?

[Jumping Frog]

Within reason they can search my vehicle any time they like , total waste of time for them though . If it helps catch drug runners , illegals or criminals I'm all for it .

Actually, my single biggest issue with the entire so-called "war on drugs" is the rationalization that we must do this to stop illegal drug dealers has served as the trojan horse to justify a huge erosion in civil rights in my lifetime.

Now, there are searches and property seizures for things that have nothing to do with drugs that would have had American's up in arms 50 years ago.

Per srothstein's discussion, I am very aware of what police are and are not allowed to do. I fully understand that there are times where the police are going to search regardless of my opinion. But nowhere is it written that I have to consent to the search. I will comply with lawful orders, and the question of whether or not the search was legal will be decided in front of a judge, not at the side of the road.

[Jim Beaux]

Within reason they can search my vehicle any time they like , total waste of time for them though . If it helps catch drug runners , illegals or criminals I'm all for it .

Actually, my single biggest issue with the entire so-called "war on drugs" is the rationalization that we must do this to stop illegal drug dealers has served as the trojan horse to justify a huge erosion in civil rights in my lifetime.

Now, there are searches and property seizures for things that have nothing to do with drugs that would have had American's up in arms 50 years ago.

Per srothstein's discussion, I am very aware of what police are and are not allowed to do. I fully understand that there are times where the police are going to search regardless of my opinion. But nowhere is it written that I have to consent to the search. I will comply with lawful orders, and the question of whether or not the search was legal will be decided in front of a judge, not at the side of the road.

Regretfully, youre right. I wonder how many laws we cluelessly violate on a daily baseless.

He was sentenced to 17 months in prison.

THREE pickup trucks pulled up outside George Norris's home in Spring, Texas. Six armed police in flak jackets jumped out. Thinking they must have come to the wrong place, Mr Norris opened his front door, and was startled to be shoved against a wall and frisked for weapons. He was forced into a chair for four hours while officers ransacked his house. They pulled out drawers, rifled through papers, dumped things on the floor and eventually loaded 37 boxes of Mr Norris's possessions onto their pickups. They refused to tell him what he had done wrong. “It wasn't fun, I can tell you that,” he recalls.

Mr Norris was 65 years old at the time, and a collector of orchids. He eventually discovered that he was suspected of smuggling the flowers into America, an offence under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. This came as a shock. He did indeed import flowers and sell them to other orchid-lovers. And it was true that his suppliers in Latin America were sometimes sloppy about their paperwork. In a shipment of many similar-looking plants, it was rare for each permit to match each orchid precisely.

http://www.economist.com/node/16636027

[jmra]

Yep, better call swat when dealing with those flower importers. They're a dangerous lot.

[nightmare]

Within reason they can search my vehicle any time they like , total waste of time for them though . If it helps catch drug runners , illegals or criminals I'm all for it . I have never been searched before . I have only had one bad encounter with a Highway patrol in Archer county , everyone knew he was a complete jerk . He purposely tried to make you angry , he got a kick out of it . I simply turned the tables on him , he was mad because I was not even though he gave me a seat belt ticket . I even asked him to stay a second while I prayed for him . He was red faced .

Maybe I'm missing something, but how does searching a vehicle of a law abiding citizen help catch drug runners?

Think of all the lucky drug runners and coyotes who get to drive right past while the cops are wasting time searching the law abiding guy with long hair or whatever.

[pcgizzmo]

I neither look, nor smell like a rat. Actually, I am almost daily told that I look like Santa Claus. Under your ROE, a LEO is allowed to:

• Stop and search anyone with "hispanic" features, on the grounds that he might be smuggling cocaine in from Columbia.
• They can stop anyone wearing "tactical" type clothing on the grounds that they are gun-runners.
• They can stop and frisk anyone wearing a turban on the grounds that they might be a jihadist terrorist (never mind that it is mostly members of an unrelated religion that wear turbans).
• They can stop and frisk anyone with bad teeth on the grounds that they might be running a meth lab.
• etc., etc., etc.

I never said they were allowed to. I said I would probably profile. We all know it happens and if we were honest I believe most people if they were law enforcement would profile regardless if they were allowed to or legality. We are all guility of it in every day life. That person that doesn't dress just right, talk just right, look the way we would think a responsible citizen would look etc.. We make judgements and we are lying to ourselves we don't think law enforement does it on a regular basis. Since 9/11 I've been standing next to people that had turibns on and women with head coverings and I'll just be honest it makes me nervous. Not because they are bad people. Rationally I know that statistically they are probably not BUT because of the war on terror, my reading of media reports etc.. it's changed my view on things and while that may not be right its the way it is..

Now extrapolate that to people that deal with scum on a daily basis and I don't necessarily agree with it but I understand it. Not to mention I believe their are statistics that profiling in certain situations has a fairly high hit rate. On one had we want to get rid of crime, scum, drugs etc.. but on the other we don't want to be questioned, profiled, searched, etc.. I get it. I don't know what the answer is. How to give law enforment enough leeway to get the bad guy while still protecting the rights of good citizens?

[b322da]

Honestly I don't see the problem of allowing law enforcement to search your car... What is the harm in letting a law enforcement officer search your car if you don't have anything to hide?

Most respectfully, this is a prime example of how an innocent person can cause himself untold suffering. A similar example would be, "What is the harm in responding to law enforcement interrogation if you don't have anything to hide?" Time and again we have seen on this forum, for example, how one should generally keep his mouth shut if interrogated by law enforcement after he legally exercises his right of self-defense against an aggressor. The reasons for that advice should be known by all members here.

The Bill of Rights applies to everyone, not just those who have something to hide. Acquiescing in the transgression of one's right under the Constitution will lead inexorably to the end of that right.

Jim