The need of suspicion to run for warrants

Primus said:

Warrants in ma are very specific. Have issue date court that issued it and the charges that the warrant is for. So by looking at it you know if its for a dog license charge or a murder charge. Even if you don't have the copy when u contact dispatch they can look it up and tell you. Also even based on charges it shows if its a default (didn't pay a fine maybe or missed a date) or a straight warrant meaning you never showed at all for first arraignment or it was applied for and granted . If its for a fine(court fees) it'll even show the amount. Also it has name dob social address etc. Etc



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Great news for the citizens of MA, their procedure should be SOP for all states.

Best regards

CCJ

Every warrant I had was very specific, in fact we were required to read it to them. Even warrants from other jurisdictions would have the info in the database. Even bond revocations or recovery warrants contained the original charge.

eye95 said:

A detention must occur to check for warrants? Really?

Cite please.

Click to expand...

If I had a name tag on that displayed my name and DoB to the casual observer no detention would be required to check for warrants. Some folks would think, and I tend to agree, that cops just don't stop folks for a warrant check out of the blue.

I have been checked. My son was a passenger in a fender bender. I came to retrieve him to take him home. I told my son to get permission to leave with me. Just as I was about to enter my truck to depart, the cop, politely mind you, asked for my ID to verify that I was my son's father. I asked if I would be permitted to leave with my son. The cop stated that their policy was to verify just to make sure, "You understand, we can't be too careful." I agreed with his explanation and displayed my DL.....big mistake. He promptly ran me for warrants.

I had a very difficult time containing myself. I let him know that I did not appreciate his act and reminded him that my son requested and received permission from him to go with me before he "requested" my ID.

Lesson learned: Cops run warrants on LAC at every opportunity, and no I was not detained. therefore my contention that you must be detained is false and I retract.

But, getting my kid back essentially was the device that cop used to compel my compliance. I have no doubt that if I refused and attempted to take my son the situation would have escalated into a very bad situation.

I have made my point regarding the op and respectfully withdraw from this discussion.

I see what you are saying. I thought you were talking about a legal requirement. You were talking about practicality. Still, it is possible to check for warrants on someone not detained if you have gotten his name somehow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Some departments are even automating it, with cameras mounted in patrol cars that can read license plates, run the plate and assumed the registered owner, and notify the cop in the car if any action needs to be taken.

Watched 'Parking Wars' one night, and even Detroit has the technology for parking enforcement. Drive down a street, the system checks all plates, and notifies them if a car has enough outstanding parking tickets to warrant booting the vehicle.

WalkingWolf said:

I heard the local cops also have run google searches on the OP... :lol:

Click to expand...

cops watch all my videos.

WalkingWolf said:

I heard the local cops also have run google searches on the OP... :lol:

Click to expand...

any police officer who reads the OPs threads without probable cause a proactive jack booted thug who hates puppies and the constitution.....

EMNofSeattle said:

any police officer who reads the OPs threads without probable cause a proactive jack booted thug who hates puppies and the constitution.....

Click to expand...

Report personal attacks. I love puppies

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

Report personal attacks. I love puppies

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

How is it possible to have "aw feared fer ma life", "Failure to comply failure to comply", and "personal attack" all tattooed on the insides of just one person's eyelids?

Fuller..... shhh..... pretty sure emn new I was joking.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

XD40sc said:

Some departments are even automating it, with cameras mounted in patrol cars that can read license plates, run the plate and assumed the registered owner, and notify the cop in the car if any action needs to be taken.

Watched 'Parking Wars' one night, and even Detroit has the technology for parking enforcement. Drive down a street, the system checks all plates, and notifies them if a car has enough outstanding parking tickets to warrant booting the vehicle.

Click to expand...

And that is what I call unconstitutional proactive policing. Not only are they doing that they are holding the information whether a warrant was found or not, wish they would hold complaints against them for any length of time.

meh.

Again, warrants are public information.

Also, if a warrant has issued, then either the protections of the Constitution have already been considered and applied, or there is a problem with the way the courts are issuing warrants--and that would be the problem to address, not the techniques for matching up warrants with the people to be arrested.

Warrants for arrest are basically orders to LE to find the person and bring him in. That is all the the cops are doing. As long as they don't harass a non-warrantee in the process, it shouldn't matter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

meh.

Again, warrants are public information.

Also, if a warrant has issued, then either the protections of the Constitution have already been considered and applied, or there is a problem with the way the courts are issuing warrants--and that would be the problem to address, not the techniques for matching up warrants with the people to be arrested.

Warrants for arrest are basically orders to LE to find the person and bring him in. That is all the the cops are doing. As long as they don't harass a non-warrantee in the process, it shouldn't matter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

I don't know how many different ways I can state that "warrants" are not what I have a problem with.

No, you just have a problem with people looking them up--which is what I am taking issue with.

My point is that there should be zero problem, absent harassment of a non-warrantee, of looking them up. Any problem could only be with the process of obtaining the warrant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

No, you just have a problem with people looking them up--which is what I am taking issue with.

My point is that there should be zero problem, absent harassment of a non-warrantee, of looking them up. Any problem could only be with the process of obtaining the warrant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

No I don't have a problem with people looking them up.

You're just calling it "any action needing to be taken."

I've made my point. Regardless of word games. Moving on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

You're just calling it "any action needing to be taken."

I've made my point. Regardless of word games. Moving on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

No, you are missing the point, it is the random fishing expeditions that go on in hope of finding a keeper. We both agree it seems that this would be fairly difficult without RS or PC, yet a few examples were given that would be in my opinion outside delegated authority.

License plate issue is related to this but different. I don't think these laws that mandated LP's would have passed if they were argued so we can look at them and know who is driving. Just like drivers license it has nothing to do anymore with safety or protecting your property, it has to do with positive law and it's proactive enforcement of it.

sudden valley gunner said:

No, you are missing the point, it is the random fishing expeditions that go on in hope of finding a keeper. We both agree it seems that this would be fairly difficult without RS or PC, yet a few examples were given that would be in my opinion outside delegated authority.

License plate issue is related to this but different. I don't think these laws that mandated LP's would have passed if they were argued so we can look at them and know who is driving. Just like drivers license it has nothing to do anymore with safety or protecting your property, it has to do with positive law and it's proactive enforcement of it.

Click to expand...

Svg in open for suggestions on improvements. How do you propose better searching for guys with warrants? Or do you say any searching for them is bad?

I've advocated my method which is print the list and go searching for the people on the list. If I'm knocking on your door that's seems active to me.

If you happen to be driving a car and taillight is out. I pull you over and check for warrants and license status. Thats my version of passive.

What do you recommend to make it not "random fishing"?

My definition of random unconstitutional would be a random person walking down the street and you just detain then and do a warrant check with or without I'd.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

Svg in open for suggestions on improvements. How do you propose better searching for guys with warrants? Or do you say any searching for them is bad?

I've advocated my method which is print the list and go searching for the people on the list. If I'm knocking on your door that's seems active to me.

If you happen to be driving a car and taillight is out. I pull you over and check for warrants and license status. Thats my version of passive.

What do you recommend to make it not "random fishing"?

My definition of random unconstitutional would be a random person walking down the street and you just detain then and do a warrant check with or without I'd.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I am not disagreeing with your actions as stated.

Don't confuse proactive with active.

Randomly processing data and info on people that you have no suspicion of having a warrant or are not on your warrant list, and hoping you get a hit, is what I am talking about.

sudden valley gunner said:

I am not disagreeing with your actions as stated.

Don't confuse proactive with active.

Randomly processing data and info on people that you have no suspicion of having a warrant or are not on your warrant list, and hoping you get a hit, is what I am talking about.

Click to expand...

How do you build suspicion of someone having a warrant? I feel (may be wrong) that your issue or more with the license plate thing.

I say that because you said "randomly processing data and info". You can't randomly process a persons name and dob for a warrant. Its a very deliberate action.

The checking for warrants is separate from running plates. While a warrant does pop up when you run a plate that's not the only or even. The most efficient way to "fish" to warrants.

I'm just trying to figure out the disconnect.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk