'13 AR RB Altee Tenpenny (Alabama Verbal)

[irishtrooper]

So everybody they see on the road with a dim license plate light or obstruction hanging from their rear view mirror are pulled over?

Are you saying that police don't use the myriad of possible "violations" as an excuse to pull over people they think look "suspiscious"?

For instance, a young black kid driving a nice car in Arkansas during spring break?

First of all, it is difficult to know the specific law in Arkansas. I can tell you that in NY your license plate light must only be visible from 50 ft away. Regarding your example of an obstruction hanging from the mirror. Here, it actually must obstruct the driver's view. I already stated that there may be a few officers that profile. I just really enjoy when that is the immediate conclusion some jump to without knowing the specifics or the parties involved. It seems like some automatically side with the person breaking the law and are automatically against the person trusted by society to enforce the law. By the way, not every police officer is racist.

 

[irishtrooper]

This is only my opinion, obviously, but in the big picture it is wrong because it is a huge waste of everyone's time and money. What value does making that stop and that arrest bring to society? Zero. It just potentially makes a kid's life much more difficult than it needs to be and costs a bunch of people a bunch of money, and results in absolutely no benefit to anyone.

There is literally nothing more infuriating to me than the "it is wrong because it is illegal" argument. Is the law your default moral compass or something? There are a lot of morally reprehensible behaviors that are technically legal and lots of illegal behaviors that are at worst morally neutral.

I said WHY is it wrong to stop somebody or arrest them for actual violations. I was also stating that the kid knew the rules and broke them anyway. I was not trying to imply if it is illegal then it is wrong. For instance, it may be illegal to jaywalk yet I wouldn't say it is wrong. That is not my argument here sir. Opinions vary on these types of arrests and I can certainly see both sides of that debate. Making the police out to be the bad guy because he or she was doing their job seems a bit crazy to me. Police can't always be chasing bad guys through alleys and preventing terrorist attacks. Sometimes they must perform tasks like this, that they are paid to perform. Law broken, arrest made.

 

[woolybug25]

First of all, it is difficult to know the specific law in Arkansas. I can tell you that in NY your license plate light must only be visible from 50 ft away. Regarding your example of an obstruction hanging from the mirror. Here, it actually must obstruct the driver's view. I already stated that there may be a few officers that profile. I just really enjoy when that is the immediate conclusion some jump to without knowing the specifics or the parties involved. It seems like some automatically side with the person breaking the law and are automatically against the person trusted by society to enforce the law. By the way, not every police officer is racist.

I didn't imply nor believe that every police officer is racist. So let's not baselessly accuse me of such.


I'm sorry, there are tons of real crimes going on that police don't have the time or resources to address. Even if we assume that the police officer in this case was on duty for traffic, let's not act like there wasn't a speeder somewhere that he could have been addressing instead. When I hear of a policeman pulling someone over for something like this I think one of two things: 1) They are profiling or 2) they aren't doing their job of addressing the myriad of more important issues directly in front of them.

Spin it how you will... but I don't buy that the police officer pulled him over for nothing more than a license plate light being out. I wasn't born yesterday.

 

[Cackalacky]

There is a huge difference between morality and law. They are not one and the same nor are they bound to each other.

 

[irishtrooper]

I didn't imply nor believe that every police officer is racist. So let's not baselessly accuse me of such.


I'm sorry, there are tons of real crimes going on that police don't have the time or resources to address. Even if we assume that the police officer in this case was on duty for traffic, let's not act like there wasn't a speeder somewhere that he could have been addressing instead. When I hear of a policeman pulling someone over for something like this I think one of two things: 1) They are profiling or 2) they aren't doing their job of addressing the myriad of more important issues directly in front of them.

Spin it how you will... but I don't buy that the police officer pulled him over for nothing more than a license plate light being out. I wasn't born yesterday.

It is not spin. I just think you are misguided. Agree to disagree.

 

[woolybug25]

I said WHY is it wrong to stop somebody or arrest them for actual violations. I was also stating that the kid knew the rules and broke them anyway. I was not trying to imply if it is illegal then it is wrong. For instance, it may be illegal to jaywalk yet I wouldn't say it is wrong. That is not my argument here sir. Opinions vary on these types of arrests and I can certainly see both sides of that debate. Making the police out to be the bad guy because he or she was doing their job seems a bit crazy to me. Police can't always be chasing bad guys through alleys and preventing terrorist attacks. Sometimes they must perform tasks like this, that they are paid to perform. Law broken, arrest made.

So you are ok with a police officer ticketing a jaywalker, when the real reason they are ticketing them is because they are different race or gender that they don't like? You don't see an issue with that, especially when real crimes are going on all over the place and they are busy with finding "laws" people they don't like are breaking?

I have issue with it because its delegation of duty, which police officers are sworn to "protect and serve", how is profiling someone and using meaningless laws as justification, doing either?

 

[irishtrooper]

There is a huge difference between morality and law. They are not one and the same nor are they bound to each other.

I agree with this. They do intersect frequently, but they are not the same.

 

[woolybug25]

It is not spin. I just think you are misguided. Agree to disagree.

You're the one claiming that there is nothing wrong with an officer of the law racially profiling someone as long as they can find a legal (regardless of how insignificant) reason to do so.

Funny... yeah, i'm the one that jaded...

 

[gkIrish]

I agree with this. They do intersect frequently, but they are not the same.

Are you a state trooper?

 

[irishtrooper]

So you are ok with a police officer ticketing a jaywalker, when the real reason they are ticketing them is because they are different race or gender that they don't like? You don't see an issue with that, especially when real crimes are going on all over the place and they are busy with finding "laws" people they don't like are breaking?

I have issue with it because its delegation of duty, which police officers are sworn to "protect and serve", how is profiling someone and using meaningless laws as justification, doing either?

I am having a hard time understanding what you are talking about. I never said anything about ticketing a jaywalker. I was using jaywalking as an example about moral vs. lawful. Is it possible you either do not like the police? Or maybe have had a bad experience? How do you know the reason that each officer tickets somebody? Are you a mindreader? If a woman or person of a different race are ticketed and broke a law, does it necessarily have to be because the officer was profiling? That seems to be what you are implying?

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I don't necessarily think just blaming the individual cops is the answer. A lot of it is our systems.

Whether it's ticket quotas, publicity for big drug busts, a Police Chief or Mayor wanting to appear "tough on crime", or a maze of Police Union disciplinary procedures, there are just too many incentives to over-enforce and no incentives for leniency or common-sense crime prevention.

For example, if I ruled the world, I wouldn't even allow an "inoperable license plate light" to be a pull-overable offense. If the cop thinks it's too unsafe, he or she should write it down, and the owner should get a fine in the mail. That's the way parking tickets, toll booths, registrations work, etc., and it works pretty well.

 

[irishtrooper]

Are you a state trooper?

I am. I also think I may be outnumbered on this site regarding feelings about policing.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I said WHY is it wrong to stop somebody or arrest them for actual violations. I was also stating that the kid knew the rules and broke them anyway. I was not trying to imply if it is illegal then it is wrong. For instance, it may be illegal to jaywalk yet I wouldn't say it is wrong. That is not my argument here sir. Opinions vary on these types of arrests and I can certainly see both sides of that debate. Making the police out to be the bad guy because he or she was doing their job seems a bit crazy to me. Police can't always be chasing bad guys through alleys and preventing terrorist attacks. Sometimes they must perform tasks like this, that they are paid to perform. Law broken, arrest made.

My first paragraph was in response to you. My second was a general statement addressing what others have said in the thread. I didn't want to post multiple times so I just tacked it onto the end.

Regarding what you've said here, when cops aren't chasing bad guys or arresting people who've committed crimes with actual victims, then they are just wasting their time and our money. WHY must they "perform tasks like this"? Who is it helping? Why are we paying them to do it? It may be "part of the job," but for that reason I question the type of people who become cops. If your job mostly consists of busting people's balls and being a grown up hall monitor then you are adding nothing to society. The best is that these guys pat themselves on the back for being the "real heroes" when there is no real sacrifice involved with their jobs and they really just make normal people's lives worse. They treat licensed bullying and harassment like it is a public service and then they turn around participate in the kind of commonplace quiet corruption where you are buddies with this guy's cousin so they don't get speeding tickets and all of that shit, show up at college parties with riot gear on and beat on teenagers because they dared to consume some alcohol, etc. The whole thing makes me nauseous.

OK got that out of my system. Moving on.

 

[woolybug25]

I am having a hard time understanding what you are talking about. I never said anything about ticketing a jaywalker. I was using jaywalking as an example about moral vs. lawful. Is it possible you either do not like the police? Or maybe have had a bad experience? How do you know the reason that each officer tickets somebody? Are you a mindreader? If a woman or person of a different race are ticketed and broke a law, does it necessarily have to be because the officer was profiling? That seems to be what you are implying?

I was using the example you used in the comment I quoted?

I like the police fine, my brother in law is a state trooper. My whole point is simple, just because an officer can find a legal excuse to pull someone over they want to profile, doesn't make it morally or ethically responsible. Not is it a responsible way to spend my tax dollars. You seem to believe that if a law is broken, regardless of whether it's an insignificant one, that should give an officer a green light to profile someone. Which by the way, is illegal in its own right.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I am. I also think I may be outnumbered on this site regarding feelings about policing.

Lol. You are being a pretty good sport here. I don't have anything against Troopers per se, but the profession does have a perception problem: every single interaction with a State Trooper is always negative. (Unless you're in a bad accident or something.) You don't see the good things Troopers do, you only remember your personal interaction when you're the one pulled over.

 

[IrishLion]

For example, if I ruled the world, I wouldn't even allow an "inoperable license plate light" to be a pull-overable offense. If the cop thinks it's too unsafe, he or she should write it down, and the owner should get a fine in the mail. That's the way parking tickets, toll booths, registrations work, etc., and it works pretty well.

But how can they write down the license plate if they can't see it?

 

[irishtrooper]

My first paragraph was in response to you. My second was a general statement addressing what others have said in the thread. I didn't want to post multiple times so I just tacked it onto the end.

Regarding what you've said here, when cops aren't chasing bad guys or arresting people who've committed crimes with actual victims, then they are just wasting their time and our money. It may be "part of the job," but for that reason I question the type of people who become cops. If your job mostly consists of busting people's balls and being a grown up hall monitor then you are adding nothing to society. The best is that these guys pat themselves on the back for being the "real heroes" when there is no real sacrifice involved with their jobs and they really just make normal people's lives worse. They treat licensed bullying and harassment like it is a public service and then they turn around participate in the kind of commonplace quiet corruption where you are buddies with this guy's cousin so they don't get speeding tickets and all of that shit, show up at college parties with riot gear on and beat on teenagers because they dared to consume some alcohol, etc. The whole thing makes me nauseous.




OK got that out of my system. Moving on.

I can see that you generally do not approve of the police. That's ok because they will still serve and protect you even if you don't like them. Hate to break it to you, but there isn't always a victim for every crime. I would bet you are against guns. Just a guess, but wouldn't that be a crime without an actual victim that you would support the stringent enforcement of? You may just have different feelings about drugs, and that's ok. I agree that showing up in riot gear at a college party is ridiculous. I have never seen or heard of this.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Don't have a problem with the arrest because weed is still illegal in most states. But to state the police do not profile - and not simply racial profiling - is not true either. Most of us attended college and the police in our respective college towns are notorious for profiling college kids. Some are doing illegal things... most get pulled over for simply being college kids.

Tenpenny should get whatever he deserves according to the law. Then let the school handle him in their way.

edit: Not dogging the police as I am a huge supporter of what they do every day. And thanks to those that serve and protect every day.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I don't dislike cops and am not generally against police. They are obviously necessary to have a functioning society. And if I am ever robbed or assaulted, bet your ass I will be calling the police to take care of it. In my mind, THAT is what police are for. I am against the kind of police and policing involved in the incident we are talking about here with the Alabama player. I just think it unnecessarily intrusive and to nobody's benefit. Nobody was protected or served by that kid getting pulled over and arrested.

I guess my main point is that we would be better off if policing in general (and the kind of things we as a society want to police) were dialed way back.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Arkansas marijuana laws (Norml)

Less than 4 oz (first offense) misdemeanor 1 year $ 2,500
1 - 4 oz (subsequent offense) felony 6 years $ 10,000
4 oz - 10 lbs felony 6 years $ 10,000
10 - 25 lbs felony 3* - 10 years $ 10,000
25 - 100 lbs felony 5* - 20 years $ 15,000
100 - 500 lbs felony 6* - 30 years $ 15,000
* Mandatory minimum sentence

 

[irishtrooper]

Lol. You are being a pretty good sport here. I don't have anything against Troopers per se, but the profession does have a perception problem: every single interaction with a State Trooper is always negative. (Unless you're in a bad accident or something.) You don't see the good things Troopers do, you only remember your personal interaction when you're the one pulled over.

You are very correct here. People can't stand us until they need us. That is fine because I knew that going in and that is part of why I get paid. Generally people dont see al, the work I personally do with all of our local schools. This isnt an assignment I was given. I do it because I feel it needs to be done. I have 3 superintendents and 2 principals that call me personally when they have a problem. I will say that all of the people I arrest are treated with dignity. I have charged one guy so many times that I have all of his nfo memorized. This guy still respects me and says hello to me when he sees me. He helps me out sometimes. He understands that I am just doing my job to the best of my ability. I can also say that I personally have arrested people for stolen cars, felony warrants(with an actual victim) and prevented some crimes by stopping people for these silly traffic rules. I am not some bully or whatever that other guy said I was by doing my job. It is admittedly hard to understand why police do what they do until you have walked in their shoes.

 

[irishtrooper]

I don't dislike cops and am not generally against police. They are obviously necessary to have a functioning society. And if I am ever robbed or assaulted, bet your ass I will be calling the police to take care of it. In my mind, THAT is what police are for. I am against the kind of police and policing involved in the incident we are talking about here with the Alabama player. I just think it unnecessarily intrusive and to nobody's benefit. Nobody was protected or served by that kid getting pulled over and arrested.

I guess my main point is that we would be better off if policing in general (and the kind of things we as a society want to police) were dialed way back.

I am just curious though, what if you replaced drugs with guns? Does that change your stance on victimless crime? Not trying to be a pain, I am just curious.

 

[woolybug25]

I am just curious though, what if you replaced drugs with guns? Does that change your stance on victimless crime? Not trying to be a pain, I am just curious.

Do you agree that an officer shouldn't be able to simply search anyone they choose at their discretion without just cause?

 

[Emcee77]

I absolutely HATE getting pulled over, i am also a BIG SUPPORTER of legalization of marijuana ...but a lot of times they are preventing things from happening....look a maurice clarrett who had an arsenal of weapons and was pulled over...what was he going to do w/ all those guns?? so it's a double edged sword to me

Exactly, I agree. By enforcing traffic laws, officers prevent a LOT of crime.

The Clarett situation was mostly dumb luck, but I have worked on cases where the officer had knowledge based on some source of questionable reliability, such as an anonymous tip, that a person in a particular car was drunk or dangerous or about to participate in a drug deal, and he will hedge against the possibility that the court will suppress any evidence gained from the arrest due to the questionable reliability of the source by waiting to observe a traffic violation, such as an inoperable license plate light. There should be nothing wrong with that. It's just good, diligent police work, entirely within the bounds of the Fourth Amendment.

So you are ok with a police officer ticketing a jaywalker, when the real reason they are ticketing them is because they are different race or gender that they don't like? You don't see an issue with that, especially when real crimes are going on all over the place and they are busy with finding "laws" people they don't like are breaking?

I have issue with it because its delegation of duty, which police officers are sworn to "protect and serve", how is profiling someone and using meaningless laws as justification, doing either?

But I'm with wooly here, and I don't see what's hard to understand about this. If the officer really feels strongly about the importance of having working lights to illuminate the license plate, and he stopped Tenpenney's car purely for the purpose of writing that citation, that's fine. I suppose it's possible. It's also possible that he had a quota of traffic tickets to meet, I suppose. But it's such a piddling offense that I think it's fair to presume, unless the officer demonstrates otherwise, that the inoperable license plate light was a pretext for stopping the car to investigate whether these black kids were using drugs (which of course he can't do without reasonable suspicion). I mean, that's just the real world. I had a similar case a couple weeks ago, in which the officer stopped a car for failing to signal. On the South Side of Chicago. Is traffic safety really your biggest concern there? The judge I was working with told me that he is always suspicious of failure to signal or any similar basis for a stop. At the suppression hearing he didn't believe the cop and he ended up granting the kid's motion to suppress evidence. And I don't think there is anything wrong with that either.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

So everybody they see on the road with a dim license plate light or obstruction hanging from their rear view mirror are pulled over?

Are you saying that police don't use the myriad of possible "violations" as an excuse to pull over people they think look "suspiscious"?

For instance, a young black kid driving a nice car in Arkansas during spring break?

Curious on what your initial thought was on the race of the officer? Did you (and do others reading this article) presume he is white?

 

[T Town Tommy]

Do you agree that an officer shouldn't be able to simply search anyone they choose at their discretion without just cause?

I believe the Supreme Court has been more lenient on searches of automobiles. They have stood much firmer against search and seizure when it comes to dwellings. With all the lawyers out here on IE, maybe they could help us laymen out.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I am just curious though, what if you replaced drugs with guns? Does that change your stance on victimless crime? Not trying to be a pain, I am just curious.

In this case? Probably wouldn't change my opinion that much. I'm not stridently anti-gun, nor am I pro-drugs. I'm just pro-privacy. You probably could imagine a scenario where a gun could be considered a threat to public safety before it was actually used and I just don't believe that can ever be said about drugs, especially the drug in question here. If a guy was just driving down the highway with a gun or a bag of weed in his glove box, I think in either case society isn't being threatened. However, if one of those things is taken into a mall there is only one that could harm another person if used.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Curious on what your initial thought was on the race of the officer? Did you (and do others reading this article) presume he is white?

Never really crossed my mind what race the officer was. And don't really care either way.

 

[connect the dots]

So you are ok with a police officer ticketing a jaywalker, when the real reason they are ticketing them is because they are different race or gender that they don't like? You don't see an issue with that, especially when real crimes are going on all over the place and they are busy with finding "laws" people they don't like are breaking?

I have issue with it because its delegation of duty, which police officers are sworn to "protect and serve", how is profiling someone and using meaningless laws as justification, doing either?

Would that be dereliction of duty(willful neglect)? Delegation of duty would be finding a third party to perform a portion of or complete a contract.

 

[irishtrooper]

Do you agree that an officer shouldn't be able to simply search anyone they choose at their discretion without just cause?

Yes I agree with you here. I can tell you that in NY, we can't. Search and seizure procedures are very important and all rules should be followed. Improper searches bother me probably more than you because it makes all of us look bad.