'13 AR RB Altee Tenpenny (Alabama Verbal)

[woolybug25]

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.

touche'.... iphone autocorrect, my man. Pretty sure everyone knew what I meant.

 

[Emcee77]

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.

Man, that is a great idea.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

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

Nor do I. I only ask because it would seem less likely that an African American officer would "racially profile" an African American teenager and same goes for Caucasians, Latinos, etc. Generally one would think that if Racial Profiling is occuring, it is Caucasian on AA or vice versa.

 

[woolybug25]

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.

But you are 100% okay with an officer doing the exact same thing as long as they can say that they didn't use their turn signal or their license plate was covered with snow?

 

[woolybug25]

Nor do I. I only ask because it would seem less likely that an African American officer would "racially profile" an African American teenager and same goes for Caucasians, Latinos, etc. Generally one would think that if Racial Profiling is occuring, it is Caucasian on AA or vice versa.

I don't believe racial profiling is okay regardless of the race of the person doing it.

 

[Emcee77]

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.

There's a reduced expectation of privacy in an automobile, but it is absolutely illegal to pull someone over for no reason. You have to have reasonable suspicion that a crime is occurring or imminent.

To illustrate, in this case, the Supreme Court said that you cannot pull someone over just to check to see if they have a valid driver's license.

Delaware v. Prouse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[irishtrooper]

But you are 100% okay with an officer doing the exact same thing as long as they can say that they didn't use their turn signal or their license plate was covered with snow?

What? Pulling a car over and searching a car are two different things. I fail to see what you are trying to get at here.

 

[irishtrooper]

There's a reduced expectation of privacy in an automobile, but it is absolutely illegal to pull someone over for no reason. You have to have reasonable suspicion that a crime is occurring or imminent.

To illustrate, in this case, the Supreme Court said that you cannot pull someone over just to check to see if they have a valid driver's license.

Delaware v. Prouse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Or a violation of the vehicle and traffic law. Or as part of a recognized traffic safety check point. In NY

 

[Emcee77]

Nor do I. I only ask because it would seem less likely that an African American officer would "racially profile" an African American teenager and same goes for Caucasians, Latinos, etc. Generally one would think that if Racial Profiling is occuring, it is Caucasian on AA or vice versa.

Trust me, it isn't. I see same-race profiling against African-American kids and Latino kids all the time. I know of one Latino cop who coerced the confessions of numerous Latino kids and intimidated witnesses to secure their convictions:

David Protess: Police Scandal Eludes Media Radar
Editorial: Check out all abuse claims against one cop - Chicago Sun-Times

That's a slightly different issue from profiling resulting in an auto stop, but the core logic is the same. He thought these kids were guilty just because they were Latino kids from gang-infested neighborhoods.

 

[woolybug25]

What? Pulling a car over and searching a car are two different things. I fail to see what you are trying to get at here.

Ok. Let me rephrase, you are okay with profiling a person to pull over as long as they can say that they didn't use their turn signal or their license plate was covered with snow?

 

[Emcee77]

Or a violation of the vehicle and traffic law. Or as part of a recognized traffic safety check point. In NY

Well, the Fourth Amendment is the same everywhere, and by "crime" I meant to include minor crimes like traffic violations. That's a good point about DUI checkpoints though. The Supreme Court has said they are fine. Kind of an exception.

Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[irishtrooper]

Ok. Let me rephrase, you are okay with profiling a person to pull over as long as they can say that they didn't use their turn signal or their license plate was covered with snow?

What do you mean profiling? I think it is ok to pull someone over (and all the courts agree) if i observe a violation. I don't understand your line of questioning. "As long as they can say." Either i see violation or not. There is no need to cloud the issue.

 

[irishtrooper]

Well, the Fourth Amendment is the same everywhere, and by "crime" I meant to include minor crimes like traffic violations. That's a good point about DUI checkpoints though. The Supreme Court has said they are fine. Kind of an exception.

Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With what I do for a living, I hope I would know what I am talking about.

 

[woolybug25]

What do you mean profiling? I think it is ok to pull someone over (and all the courts agree) if i observe a violation. I don't understand your line of questioning. "As long as they can say." Either i see violation or not. There is no need to cloud the issue.

It means exactly what I said. Do you believe that its okay for an officer to pull over someone they don't like (for whatever reason) as long as they found a reason like a license plate out.

I didn't write in greek... it's pretty simple.

 

[Emcee77]

With what I do for a living, I hope I would know what I am talking about.

With what I do for a living, I'm quite certain I do.

I didn't mean to challenge you though. I was merely trying to clarify and supplement so as to provide a fuller explanation to the question T Town Tommy asked in his post.

 

[irishtrooper]

It means exactly what I said. Do you believe that its okay for an officer to pull over someone they don't like (for whatever reason) as long as they found a reason like a license plate out.

I didn't write in greek... it's pretty simple.

I guess what I am asking is, how do you know the officer doesn't like a person? Are you a mindreader? Why does the stop have to be for profiling instead of the violation? That is my point. People like you jump to a conclusion that it is a bad stop just because of race. Who is to say that is the reason? Why are you the authority on why certain officers pull people over? Because you have deemed a law not worthy of being enforced? Because the driver is black, or a woman? To answer your question... No I do not think it is right for an officer to pull somebody over because they don't like them. As I said before, these actions make all officers look bad.

 

[Emcee77]

nvm

 

[irishtrooper]

With what I do for a living, I'm quite certain I do.

I didn't mean to challenge you though. I was merely trying to clarify and supplement so as to provide a fuller explanation to the question T Town Tommy asked in his post.

Defense attorney??

 

[Emcee77]

Defense attorney??

No. But I am a lawyer and I do criminal law.

 

[woolybug25]

I guess what I am asking is, how do you know the officer doesn't like a person? Are you a mindreader? Why does the stop have to be for profiling instead of the violation? That is my point. People like you jump to a conclusion that it is a bad stop just because of race. Who is to say that is the reason? Why are you the authority on why certain officers pull people over? Because you have deemed a law not worthy of being enforced? Because the driver is black, or a woman? To answer your question... No I do not think it is right for an officer to pull somebody over because they don't like them. As I said before, these actions make all officers look bad.

I believe that to be the case because I generally believe that silly laws like license plate lights, missed turn signals, etc are not laws that should serve as reasoning to pull someone over. I believe that most of the time they use them as an excuse to pull the person over, not because they think their time is best served investigating it or because they feel it is the best way they can protect the public safety.

They are scapegoats for the real reason they pulled the person over, which could be anything. But whatever the reasoning, its obviously not against the law, otherwise they wouldn't have to manufucture an infraction by pulling them over for whatever they can drum up.

 

[irishtrooper]

No police officer can or would pull over EVERY violation they see. I am friends with a trooper from Virginia, he works on a very busy highway pulling over dozens of cars every day for speeding and/or reckless driving. He obviously cannot pull over every tail lamp violation he sees due to his situation. I also know other officers that are not nearly as busy that may have the time to pull over a tail lamp at 3am due to the lack of traffic and calls at that particular time and place. Police discretion is part of the job. I can stop 17 cars in a day and only write 3 citations. Other days I may stop 6 cars and write 6 citations. I tend to be quite lenient with my ticket-giving and the like. i would think that speeding through a school zone would be less likely to give warnings than say a tail lamp. This however, does not mean that stopping that tail lamp is wrong or immoral. If, when that vehicle is stopped AND there is probable cause to search, I may do so. I would be less likely to allow a person that has drugs and a tail lamp violation go with a warning than I would somebody with only the tail lamp violation. Of course this is generally speaking, every situation is unique and it is treated thusly.

 

[irishtrooper]

I believe that to be the case because I generally believe that silly laws like license plate lights, missed turn signals, etc are not laws that should serve as reasoning to pull someone over. I believe that most of the time they use them as an excuse to pull the person over, not because they think their time is best served investigating it or because they feel it is the best way they can protect the public safety.

They are scapegoats for the real reason they pulled the person over, which could be anything. But whatever the reasoning, its obviously not against the law, otherwise they wouldn't have to manufucture an infraction by pulling them over for whatever they can drum up.

You should write the legislature and try to get some laws changed then. For instance in Pennsylvania a seatbelt violation is considered a secondary offense and can only constitute a stop if coupled with another primary violation. As I said before, some people just lack the understanding. Under your thoughts, sooooo many drunk drivers would be allowed to endanger the lives of innocent people. Look, I am not saying It is perfect the way it is, but I think your argument is wrongheaded. I am not changing your mind and you aren't changing mine.

 

[woolybug25]

You should write the legislature and try to get some laws changed then. For instance in Pennsylvania a seatbelt violation is considered a secondary offense and can only constitute a stop if coupled with another primary violation. As I said before, some people just lack the understanding. Under your thoughts, sooooo many drunk drivers would be allowed to endanger the lives of innocent people. Look, I am not saying It is perfect the way it is, but I think your argument is wrongheaded. I am not changing your mind and you aren't changing mine.

I'll let it go, but it seems that most people have agreed with me.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

I don't believe racial profiling is okay regardless of the race of the person doing it.

And I certainly was suggesting you did, I was just curious as to the original thought reating to race of officer and kids involved.

Trust me, it isn't. I see same-race profiling against African-American kids and Latino kids all the time. I know of one Latino cop who coerced the confessions of numerous Latino kids and intimidated witnesses to secure their convictions:

David Protess: Police Scandal Eludes Media Radar
Editorial: Check out all abuse claims against one cop - Chicago Sun-Times

That's a slightly different issue from profiling resulting in an auto stop, but the core logic is the same. He thought these kids were guilty just because they were Latino kids from gang-infested neighborhoods.

Interesting.

 

[irishtrooper]

I'll let it go, but it seems that most people have agreed with me.

Can't we just be friends? Most people here also voted for Romney, we saw how that reflected the views of this country. Here, I am surely outnumbered. None of these agruments make me wanna take my ball and go home, I just wanted some to realize that all police aren't as evil as some may argue. Even some of the anti-police here may actually not hate me if given the chance to know me.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Can't we just be friends? Most people here also voted for Romney, we saw how that reflected the views of this country. Here, I am surely outnumbered. None of these agruments make me wanna take my ball and go home, I just wanted some to realize that all police aren't as evil as some may argue. Even some of the anti-police here may actually not hate me if given the chance to know me.

I was lucky enough to be introduced to a police chief and get to learn a little about how they handle their work (specifically marijuana enforcement). It's a tough situation.

 

[TDHeysus]

its either a massive coincidence, or it actually happens, but if your young (under 25) you are more likely to get the attention of police while driving. Now add the fact Tenpenny is young AND black, I think his likelihood of getting the attention of police increases. The not so funny joke can be he was pulled over for DWB (driving while black)

IMO, to say a certain percentage of police officers do not look for a reason to pull over someone they think is suspicious, is disingenuous. I was pulled over quite a bit(and ticketed for anything and everything) until I was about 26, 27 and since that time I have been pulled over a grand total of 3 times(in 13-14 years), and only getting a seatbelt ticket when the local police were promoting their 'click it or ticket' campaign. I grew up with black and latino friends, they were pulled over even more.

True or not, that is the perception.

 

[irishtrooper]

its either a massive coincidence, or it actually happens, but if your young (under 25) you are more likely to get the attention of police while driving. Now add the fact Tenpenny is young AND black, I think his likelihood of getting the attention of police increases. The not so funny joke can be he was pulled over for DWB (driving while black)

IMO, to say a certain percentage of police officers do not look for a reason to pull over someone they think is suspicious, is disingenuous. I was pulled over quite a bit(and ticketed for anything and everything) until I was about 26, 27 and since that time I have been pulled over a grand total of 3 times(in 13-14 years), and only getting a seatbelt ticket when the local police were promoting their 'click it or ticket' campaign. I grew up with black and latino friends, they were pulled over even more.

True or not, that is the perception.

People under the age of 25 tend to drive faster, more recklessly and also typically would have cars that may be more prone to have equipment defects. You should certainly get pulled over less as you age. Your driving abilities increase with experience and you tend to not be out at all hours like you may have been at 22 years old. I don't think anybody here mafe the argument that some of this "profiling" doesn't go on. I admitted that it likely happens and makes all police look bad when it does.

 

[Rhode Irish]

You should write the legislature and try to get some laws changed then. For instance in Pennsylvania a seatbelt violation is considered a secondary offense and can only constitute a stop if coupled with another primary violation. As I said before, some people just lack the understanding. Under your thoughts, sooooo many drunk drivers would be allowed to endanger the lives of innocent people. Look, I am not saying It is perfect the way it is, but I think your argument is wrongheaded. I am not changing your mind and you aren't changing mine.

If a person is that drunk, wouldn't they do something that actually warranted pulling them over (speeding or steering erratically)? Why would you need to resort to things like not using a turn signal when nobody is around or a license plate light or a broken tail light or whatever to pull someone over? That just seems like fishing for someone who had three or four beers. Which again, to me, seems like trying to screw with people for the sake of it without any real benefit to the public.

 

[irishtrooper]

If a person is that drunk, wouldn't they do something that actually warranted pulling them over (speeding or steering erratically)? Why would you need to resort to things like not using a turn signal when nobody is around or a license plate light or a broken tail light or whatever to pull someone over? That just seems like fishing for someone who had three or four beers. Which again, to me, seems like trying to screw with people for the sake of it without any real benefit to the public.

You may be surprised to hear this,but sometimes bad people do not use their turn signal. I can't believe how people actually think. It is not just people being bullies when they pull someone over. Why don't you just make it so nobody gets pulled over for anything. Your viewpoints seem to be extremely out of touch. You have no idea that a great deal of actual criminals would not be caught if you had your way. I am done arguing this with you. People that think like me will always be wrong in your opinion. You should read the story of the wolf, the sheep and the sheepdog. If a person you loved was hurt by these drunk drivers you think should have to be speeding for the police to stop, you might have a different opinion. My life has been touched personally in a negative way due to their actions. I am not saying there should be a roadcheck at every bar or anything, but if we did things your way it would greatly endanger the public. Again, I am through arguing this as people with your persuasion will always be at odds with me.