The need of suspicion to run for warrants

I think random warrant less checks on individuals and license plates are unconstitutional and violates the 4th a the right to feel secure in your person.

The claim is made that belief is absurd and anti libertarian.

In a libertarian society there wouldn't be unconstitutional proactive policing.

If a cop has a warrant he already has the name and pertinent information for whom he needs to get, if there happens to be a detention based on RS or PC and the name comes up in a check is a different beast then just randomly running people. Welcome to Big Brother Police state USA.

Warrants are public information. They are not private. It is not the obtaining of a list of warrants for a name that is the 4A invasion, but the obtaining of the name (if such obtaining is not lawfully authorized).

There is no point in having warrants if they cannot be matched with a person for execution.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

Warrants are public information. They are not private. It is not the obtaining of a list of warrants for a name that is the 4A invasion, but the obtaining of the name (if such obtaining is not lawfully authorized).

There is no point in having warrants if they cannot be matched with a person for execution.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

I am not saying Warrants are private, or that the person shouldn't be found.

Randomly running people to see if they have warrants seems to be a violation of the 4th, and a contradiction to our common law.

This is "proactive" policing which I find abhorrent. I don't think the "founders" would have approved of the Brits installing license plates on a ship and then randomly running them to see if the owner may have smuggled some goods in the past.

How many are warrants for illegal parking?

The cops can snap a photo of your LP. They can snap a photo of you behind the wheel. They can look up the "owner" of that plate, get his photo or a number of photos if the same name has multiple faces. If the face on a photo matches the face behind the wheel, well, tough toenails.....don't do things that will get a warrant issued with your name on it.

What i don't like is the accuracy of the name on the warrant. How many John Smiths are there in your jurisdiction. Does the warrant show Jon Smith (the wanted perp) as John Smith the LAC. Warrants are too easily issued is the problem. The execution of the warrant is usually not the problem in my view.

OC for ME said:

How many are warrants for illegal parking?

The cops can snap a photo of your LP. They can snap a photo of you behind the wheel. They can look up the "owner" of that plate, get his photo or a number of photos if the same name has multiple faces. If the face on a photo matches the face behind the wheel, well, tough toenails.....don't do things that will get a warrant issued with your name on it.

What i don't like is the accuracy of the name on the warrant. How many John Smiths are there in your jurisdiction. Does the warrant show Jon Smith (the wanted perp) as John Smith the LAC. Warrants are too easily issued is the problem. The execution of the warrant is usually not the problem in my view.

Click to expand...

Yes warrants are too easily issued, the justice system is supposed to be a check yet we see judges rubber-stamping warrants instead of being the check on police intrusions they are supposed to be. The statist judges are a huge part of the parasitic bottom feeder class of government living off of the people.

If you match the photo you match the photo, I don't have the problem with duly executed warrants especially ones that have gone through due process.

I have a problem with the intrusions of the right to be secure in your person, by proactive policing. The idea that you need no RS or PC to randomly run people is sick.

big difference between trolling to see if one person in a crowd is wanted for something and investigating every person in the crowd to see if they've broken a law.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

eye95 said:

Warrants are public information. They are not private. It is not the obtaining of a list of warrants for a name that is the 4A invasion, but the obtaining of the name (if such obtaining is not lawfully authorized).

There is no point in having warrants if they cannot be matched with a person for execution.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

The person being harassed then can ask to inspect such records ... after a few of those requests and the effort needed to comply with the law; the government will stop harassing one.

sudden valley gunner said:

Yes warrants are too easily issued, the justice system is supposed to be a check yet we see judges rubber-stamping warrants instead of being the check on police intrusions they are supposed to be. The statist judges are a huge part of the parasitic bottom feeder class of government living off of the people.

If you match the photo you match the photo, I don't have the problem with duly executed warrants especially ones that have gone through due process.

Can you cite the law that says you have to hang around after an unintentional discharge. I have a problem with the intrusions of the right to be secure in your person, by proactive policing. The idea that you need no RS or PC to randomly run people is sick.

Click to expand...

What warrants are you seeing rubber stamped.

With failure to appear or failure to pay warrants in the courts systems I worked with people were given plenty of opportunity to show up or pay their fines before a warrant was issued. Issuing a warrant for a low cost fine costs the courts more money then not, they would much rather see them paid or show up with out issuing a warrant.

It is amazing how many people refuse to paid a fine and well wait until they get arrested to do so.

Hers one of many examples I could tell about I stopped a fellow for speeding 20 some mph over the limit.

When I checked on is DL I found a FTP warrant from his last citation. His claim was I never knew about.

Well I know the court that issued the warrant sends out 3 notification letters and tries to make phone contact before issuing a warrant.

Off to jail he went where he took out his wallet and paid the fine and warrant costs.

I guess he was just banking oh well they well not arrest me for that.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

What warrants are you seeing rubber stamped.

With failure to appear or failure to pay warrants in the courts systems I worked with people were given plenty of opportunity to show up or pay their fines before a warrant was issued. Issuing a warrant for a low cost fine costs the courts more money then not, they would much rather see them paid or show up with out issuing a warrant.

It is amazing how many people refuse to paid a fine and well wait until they get arrested to do so.

Click to expand...

Well that was side conversation to the OP, but worth of discussion

I doubt many of the victims of no knock warrants had much opportunity to counter anything, and it is the practice of many judges rubber stamp these warrants.

I have first hand experience that FTA warrants aren't always afforded the opportunity to counter. (failure to appear can be issued for failure to pay, and this can be because of a mistake of the government you are paying for)

eye95 said:

Warrants are public information. They are not private. It is not the obtaining of a list of warrants for a name that is the 4A invasion, but the obtaining of the name (if such obtaining is not lawfully authorized).

There is no point in having warrants if they cannot be matched with a person for execution.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Dammit I agree again, anybody can run a warrant, not just police. Each state has a system/fee, but there are private agencies also. Eye is correct warrants are public information. Names are also public information as long as they are obtained legally. County tax records usually contain the names of property owners. With those two pieces of information all the residents of a home names can usually be found through public utility records.

There used to be a thang called the phone book at one time...

WalkingWolf said:

Dammit I agree again, anybody can run a warrant, not just police. Each state has a system/fee, but there are private agencies also. Eye is correct warrants are public information. Names are also public information as long as they are obtained legally. County tax records usually contain the names of property owners. With those two pieces of information all the residents of a home names can usually be found through public utility records.

There used to be a thang called the phone book at one time...

Click to expand...

I have no problem with the warrants, and looking for warrants.

The problem is the random running of names and plates.

One thing that is often lost is that, for private individuals what is not prohibited is allowed. This same rule doesn't necessarily apply to government officials, their actions when engaged in their official capacities are to remain limited, restricted and allowed by legislation.

sudden valley gunner said:

I have no problem with the warrants, and looking for warrants.

The problem is the random running of names and plates.

One thing that is often lost is that, for private individuals what is not prohibited is allowed. This same rule doesn't necessarily apply to government officials, their actions when engaged in their official capacities are to remain limited, restricted and allowed by legislation.

Click to expand...

Somewhere there is a ruling that what is in plain view is not protected. License plates and known persons in plain view do not have a expectation of privacy as to their character. Again warrants are public information, so there is no expectation of privacy. And again anybody can have a warrants check done on another person.

If the police are doing it to harass, such as the case of someone known to use a scanner, to irratate them. Then it would be a simple matter to get a RO. But RO's have consequences for the person requesting them. I have arrested the requesting party when they violate the RO that they asked for.

This is what frustrates some people, because A~they brought it on themselves, and B~there only recourse affects them more than it does the police.

FTP FTA warrants are two different things in Wis I can not speak about warrants issued in the state your from. Each state has different rules for warrants that are suppose to reflect their constitutions along with the US constitution.

I agree that certain types of warrants have be come to common thank the so called war on drugs for that.

WalkingWolf said:

Somewhere there is a ruling that what is in plain view is not protected. License plates and known persons in plain view do not have a expectation of privacy as to their character. Again warrants are public information, so there is no expectation of privacy. And again anybody can have a warrants check done on another person.

If the police are doing it to harass, such as the case of someone known to use a scanner, to irratate them. Then it would be a simple matter to get a RO. But RO's have consequences for the person requesting them. I have arrested the requesting party when they violate the RO that they asked for.

This is what frustrates some people, because A~they brought it on themselves, and B~there only recourse affects them more than it does the police.

Click to expand...

Yes, the problem comes in when a perfectly lawful and authorized activity is used by public officials to harass an individual.

I know some guys will hate this but I'll throw in this. We'll see if it remains respectful.

I personally run papers on just about everyone I meet on a call. I believe that a poster made a great explanation and said you must use discretion some times as in if there's a lady with her 6 kids then if you check her better be prepared to deal with it. So depending on the situation you may not. But again that's on calls. To boot we are required to check papers on persons involved in domestics. No discretion there.

As far as proactive policing I print out the warrant list every other week or so. You print said list and it provides name and dob of everyone who has a warrant under the parameters you set. Such as area or date range for the warrant. I then go find them.

SVG I know your referring to it as "proactive" policing but honestly I just see it as policing. Even running plates for warrants. Its not even a judgement call on the officer like most other charges. Its simply finding a person we were told to get. That's our job. At least as I see it.

I know this will sound crazy but I've actually had people thank me for being nice about it as we are leaving their house. The really nice guys usually thank me for grabbing them at their house because they didn't "know' they had one and if I caught them driving it would be more expensive/hassle on them.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

One last thing in the protectiveness of doing this. Its actually one of the few ways we can prevent crime.

Example. If a guy has a warrant for a whole litany of violent offenses. Say he skipped his court date. Well him roaming around is opportunity for him to hurt someone else which he may have a inclination of doing.

Take out violent offense insert say property crimes. I known breaker. Well if he skips and is on the run that's more houses and cars he's breaking into. He'd remain out there until someone either caught him on a call or pro actively looked for guys with warrants.

I think the disconnect is that I don't see many "dog license" warrants. Some are for petty charges and a person did forget to pay a fine or to appear. But the majority (and the ones I specifically "hunt" lol ) are for pretty serious crimes and are guys you don't want on the street.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

The problem is not in the course of duties. The problem is when it is done as a form of harassment, but then there are legal procedures to stop it.

Most people would not like it if there name is repeatedly being used for warrant search on the radio. It could be incriminating if your boss has a scanner and keeps hearing the employees name repeatedly. This would be a abuse, and the courts should step in.

But most police officers do not know who has a scanner and who does not and who gets their panties in a wad if their name is heard on it. This is where keep your big mouth shut comes in, don't advertise that you(general you) have a scanner and listen to police calls. And then broadcast it on the internet or other venues that it bothers you. Bullies look for insecurities to use them to their benefit, and sometimes bullies can be police, and most certainly the press is often a bully.

The old saying is "what goes around comes around".

I understand and often agree about police abuses, but most of us do not have problems with the police, while some of us have consistent problems with them. There are reasons for that, sometimes criminal, sometimes personal, and sometimes because the supposed victim stalks police. There comes a time when no matter what the law is, to use good common sense.

WalkingWolf said:

The problem is not in the course of duties. The problem is when it is done as a form of harassment, but then there are legal procedures to stop it.

Most people would not like it if there name is repeatedly being used for warrant search on the radio. It could be incriminating if your boss has a scanner and keeps hearing the employees name repeatedly. This would be a abuse, and the courts should step in.

But most police officers do not know who has a scanner and who does not and who gets their panties in a wad if their name is heard on it. This is where keep your big mouth shut comes in, don't advertise that you(general you) have a scanner and listen to police calls. And then broadcast it on the internet or other venues that it bothers you. Bullies look for insecurities to use them to their benefit, and sometimes bullies can be police, and most certainly the press is often a bully.

The old saying is "what goes around comes around".

I understand and often agree about police abuses, but most of us do not have problems with the police, while some of us have consistent problems with them. There are reasons for that, sometimes criminal, sometimes personal, and sometimes because the supposed victim stalks police. There comes a time when no matter what the law is, to use good common sense.

Click to expand...

I agree with your first paragraph.

I'm under the impression the OP does have a problem with it even when its in the course of regular duties. Not trying to state is own case that's just the impression I get from OP and his subsequent posts. Waiting for him to clarify if he wishes to do so.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

With all the predictability of unmonitored reform school kids, police have abused a privilege they were trusted with. Worse is the juvenile justifications for this abuse that violates anothers right to privacy and to be left alone. We are asked to believe we have no rights when we are targeted "in the interest f public safety".

When judges are held to account for the accuracy of the warrant then we may see more due diligence. Hand written warrants must never be submitted and if they are the judge needs to reject them out of hand. A e-copy must be retained. The only hand writing on the warrant should be the signature of the person requesting the warrant, and the judges signature. Oh, verbal go-aheads should never be issued with paperwork to follow latter.