Just got a ticket for this.

[sqcomp]

It seems that what you want is the police to be everywhere and nowhere at the same time. You're pushing the fact that the police did nothing for you when your property was stolen yet if an officer wants to make the relatively minor annoyance of a tertiary stop you cry foul. I'm not going to stop you for no reason. The reason might not be apparent to you...I will tell you what I'm stopping you for.

Which is it?

When the bad guy rolls up on your car, smashed the window out in the middle of the night, and takes all your stuff...an hour later he's rolling down the road, 2 am, creeping slowly around the neighborhoods...I decide to stop him.

There are two factors that I have going for me. Probable cause and reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion tells me that it is not normal for a vehicle to be creeping along residential street at 3am. I am going to get in close and see what I see. I stop the car for creeping around...and look! What do I see after running the plates, looking at the info on my MDT? I walk up on the person in the vehicle. I've got to look at EVERYTHING going on, his movements, his attitude, demeanor, what the car's condition is, what's in the car...I don't have the luxury of trusting people. Just because I walk up on you after checking your plates, seeing that whoever this vehicle is registered to is clean; this doesn't mean YOU are. Heck, it doesn't mean you're the owner. You may have just stolen the vehicle. You may be driving around trying to goad me out of my car to set me up for an ambush. I CANNOT assume that you are a nice person. When that happens, I die. That will NOT happen.

The burden of proof is not an issue; I'm working off PC and RS. Simply because you have a clean car doesn't mean you're innocent or guilty. It simply means you've got a clean black car. I'm working on different parameters than what kind of car you drive.

Don't try to play the innocent and scared person. If you're doing something suspicious, I'll stop you. If you've got illegal eyelids...I'll stop you. Who knows what else is in the vehicle, perhaps it's the stolen audio equipment, perhaps it's a gun sitting on the seat, perhaps there's a smell of alcoholic beverages coming from you and your vehicle.

Every fiber of Democracy...don't feed me that line. YOU pay me to try to keep you safe. If you're breaking the law, YOU pay me to investigate. You've got some illegal modification I have the option to stop you. The question for you is, what is "reasonable"? Is it reasonable to stop boy racer for illegal modifications to his car? Is it legal to ask him to search the car? Both answers are yes. Now, when you refuse, I have two options. I can let him go or I can (within a reasonable amount of time) get a dog to see if it gets a hit on your vehicle.

If the dog hits on your car, I have probable cause.

I LOVE the BF quote, it is actually one of my favorites. You have to ask yourself, at what point is reasonable. It seems to skew when someone does you wrong, yet when I'm stopping someone for a tertiary reason, I'm the bad guy. You are waffling. Don't change the rules of the game to suit your wants.

Next time you get stopped break this out, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

I know what you're talking about when you say you feel that you're being violated. I'll give you this to think about, what is a reasonable expectation of privacy? What is a reasonable search? What would give me cause to ask you to search your vehicle? I cannot search your vehicle without probable cause. If you have illegal eyelids...that problem is solved. You've already broken the law.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

It seems that what you want is the police to be everywhere and no where at the same time. You're pushing the fact that the police did nothing for you when your property was stolen yet

Don't misrepresent what I've said. From my post, which you are responding to:

Originally Posted by sbergman27

I've chosen not to address your questions about the stereo thefts in order to avoid diverting the conversation from the important points and principles into relatively trivial matters. Except to say that if recovering the equipment involved these kinds of groundless searches, I would not approve.

That should settle that. I'm not interested in pressing this point because it is not the important one. Let's not go off in the weeds.

Don't try to play the innocent and scared person.

I'm hardly scared. I think your implication that I was not innocent is interesting. It is certainly quite reasonable to be apprehensive when those given authority start abusing it so obviously and unashamedly, right in front of one's face.

YOU pay me to try to keep you safe.

If it were my decision, the composition of the police forces would be somewhat different. Resulting in rather different state, city, and county employee payroll files. Plato may have gotten some things wrong, but he also had a few things right.

Your post sounds very defensive, BTW.

-Steve