Irish Houstonian
New member
- Messages
- 2,722
- Reaction score
- 301
1.) Arguing apples and oranges, "rights" or "duties" is irrelevant, the point is that cops have been afforded grounds by the state because of their position to "stop" people and also have "right" or "duties" to contact people
2.) In another article, in reference to this same kid, there is also a report that over 20 people called in on this individual which more than merits a "stop" and the officer never infringed on his rights in fact the officer was probably too leniant. I have been an officer for 7 plus years and I am also a field training officer and I can guarantee you that I would have been more firm with this kid about "stops" and "providing identifying information" to police officers doing there job. The only issue is Maine allows open carrying, most states do not so if he pulled that in Denver that wouldnt have flyed and he certainly would have had to give his name and date of birth or risk being charged with obstruction.
That's sort of the whole point of the video -- regardless of what powers cops think they have, they still have to follow the Constitution. No city, state, ethical code, experience, judgement, badge, etc., can give any cop powers beyond that.
And it doesn't matter if there's a million calls about the kid. If what he's doing is legal, and there's no reasonable suspicion he's in the process of committing a crime, then you can't stop and/or frisk him. Period.
If you're saying that in another state he would have been breaking the law, and you would have stopped him, then that's not totally relevant but I commend you. On the other hand, if you're saying that you think your own reasonableness and experience in law enforcement takes precedent over peoples' Constitutional rights, then you're proving my very thesis. The whole "I'm a cop and would have taken a much tougher stance" thing is the very attitude by which cops break the law.