I guess I’m just spoiled living here in this nest of liberalism.
On DC, I was being a wiseass, 'cause I know how much cops love that one little law.
But I was under the impression that vagrancy laws had been shot down on Constitutional grounds. Equal Rights and something else. I dunno, I may do some research. There was some extreme abuse of old vagrancy laws, esp in the south, if I recall correctly. Five bucks in your pocket and proof of address?
Forget it. I’ll start another thread if I can’t find the answer I want.
Nope.
( Shit, I couldn`t find anything grammatically incorrect with your post either.)
It appears as though they can still be applied (vagrancy laws).
The SC has had trouble dealing with this, it appears.
Fine, but look up “felony” in a law dictionary, and you’ll find something like this (bolding is mine) : *n. 1) a crime sufficiently serious to be punishable by death or a term in state or federal prison, as distinguished from a misdemeanor which is only punishable by confinement to county or local jail and/or a fine. *
So while the decision did not explicitly state that it must be a crime currently on the books as a “felony,” likely because they didn’t want the precedent they were setting to be too inflexible, it seems pretty clear that by using the phrase “serious crimes” they were setting a high standard for the justification of the home entry. Which, although I’m not a lawyer, I would read as a pretty clear warning to prosecutors and police that they would not be allowed a blank check for pursuit.
You’re right, the explicit limit isn’t there, but the implicit one is pretty clear.
That cite, by the way, was taken from dictionary.law.com, in case it matters.
Actually, it’s is a contraction of it is. The possesive form of it is its. There you go! 
Btw, this is just in fun. I could do without the spelling nazis too.
Just wondering, did you totally blow through the stop sign or did you do a <your state name here> stop. Someday, when I have nothing better to do, I’m going to stand near a stop sign and, over an hour’s time, count how many people actually come to a full complete stop when there is no need to. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone come to a complete stop at a stop sign when the way was clear to proceed. Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with creeping through a stop sign. But I could see that it would be hard to define how fast one could do this. If I got such a ticket I’d be tempted to fight it in traffic court.
YOUR post came immediately after the:
‘I and another officer …’ correction, but you refered to the reflexive pronoun rule and NOT the person order rule.
So, actually, I was not restating your grammatical correction, which I assumed was intended as a humorous aside.
I guess I was wrong …
I’m going to go hand out with RogueRacer and whuckfistle, and pick on Itfire.
If you’re gonna HAND out, don’t pick on me.
So what if you had pulled up into your garage, then closed the garage door? Could the policeman follow you into the garage; stop the garage from closing; or hi opal?
If you made it into the garage, leaving the police outside, could he then demand you let him in the house? Is he limited to mailing you the ticket? What if it happened so fast he didn’t even get your license plate – could he write up a ticket for a vehicle registered at that address? How would he know for sure who was driving?
Needless to say, this concept puzzles me. I haven’t had so many questions since I was 3!