• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Trouncing on the 4th Admendment!

Legba

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
1,881
Location
, ,
imported post

The Terry standard still applies, as I understand this ruling - not that it is always strictly observed in traffic stops. I've had cops pat me down, invoking "officer safety" as the excuse, absent any particular suspicion of wrongdoing on my part. My suggestion that they should have gone into primary education if they were so concerned for their safety was not well received. Falls under "assumption of the risk" as far as I'm concerned. They want to live by the sword -let them take their chances. I don't mean to trivialize their legitimate safety concerns, but the 4th amendment exists for a reason, and it is not a "technicality," or ought not to be anyway.

-ljp
 

Jblack44

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
291
Location
Westland, Michigan, USA
imported post

Legba wrote:
The Terry standard still applies, as I understand this ruling - not that it is always strictly observed in traffic stops. I've had cops pat me down, invoking "officer safety" as the excuse, absent any particular suspicion of wrongdoing on my part. My suggestion that they should have gone into primary education if they were so concerned for their safety was not well received. Falls under "assumption of the risk" as far as I'm concerned. They want to live by the sword -let them take their chances. I don't mean to trivialize their legitimate safety concerns, but the 4th amendment exists for a reason, and it is not a "technicality," or ought not to be anyway.

-ljp
Have you been patted down after being pulled over for a traffic violation?
 

Legba

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
1,881
Location
, ,
imported post

Yes, and after specifically stating that I was not resisting, but neither was I consenting to a search. These are usually pretext stops, where they try to elevate a specious traffic stop into a felony complaint of some kind - usually "war on drugs" stuff. They usually hair-split at that point, claiming that they can do a pat down and that it is different from a "search" as such, although I had a cop pull out an ibuprofen bottle to see what drugs I had after such a pat-down. Hardly a safety issue even if it would have turned out that I had contraband. A pill bottle is plainly not a weapon.

On another similar occasion, a cop complained that he thought I had a crack pipe in my pocket. I actually consented to let him check on this one occasion after getting tired of denying it. It was a ball-point pen, and I had told him so, but he remained unconvinced, even after he examined it. He took it apart and was even smelling the damned thing. They must have James Bond-type dual purpose pen/crack pipes. I wouldn't know.

-ljp
 
Top