# Kissing your husband while black? Not if the LAPD can help it. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 14, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492 "2014-09-14T19:21:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 31
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/601 "2014-09-15T20:44:23Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Okay, but that’s not illegal. Not illegal, just not smart. > [@](#): > > All those actions the cops took when they overstepped their authority? You know, all the handcuffing and detaining stuff they did? That _was_ illegal. It certainly appears to be. It also appears to hinge on a fine point of law, which some trained attorneys failed to catch on to. > [@](#): > > So in the final analysis, the cops are the losers. It says a lot about your priorities that your ire is focused almost entirely on her, when she didn’t break the law here. Honestly, I have no ire, I’m criticizing her choices. This incident is like a microcosm of the differences between the interactions between whites and blacks with law enforcement. You have two people who are placed in a theoretically identical situation, being told they’ve been accused of performing a lewd act in public. The white guy basically asks the cop what he needs, and hands over his ID when asked. The black woman is immediately confrontational, threatening, refuses to provide ID, and accuses the cop of being racist. When she storms off, the cop is actually commiserating with the BF, who just moments before was accused of the same lewd act the woman was. This all went on before the improper detainment. You have a cop responding to a complaint, it’s his job, he pretty much has to do something resembling police work when he shows up, so he talks to the two people who the complaint is obviously about. Now there is a choice, you can play ball, make life easy on everyone, answer questions politely, provide information if the cop wants it, and then the cop leaves and go on with your life. Or, you can make the encounter as painful and difficult as possible without actually committing a new crime in front of the officer, and then act shocked that the encounter is painful and difficult for you as well. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/602 "2014-09-15T20:57:06Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Something can be serious and not worthwhile at the same time. For example, the problems with your outlook are serious because you’re in favor of abrogating all sorts of civil rights, but your posts are not worthwhile because they’re panicky fluff and you’re a shitty debater. I’m just kidding, of course. No, a thing can’t be serious and not worthwhile at the same time. Look at a thesaurus. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/603 "2014-09-15T20:59:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > For example, the problems with your outlook are serious because you’re in favor of abrogating all sorts of civil rights …Such as? > [@](#): > > No, a thing can’t be serious and not worthwhile at the same time. Look at a thesaurus. Reality shows. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/604 "2014-09-15T21:09:17Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > …Such as? This thread is mostly about the Fourth Amendment, and in general your view seems to be that the government should be able to do whatever it wants as long as it means well. That’s antithetical to any kind of liberty. I ignored this at the time because you got busy saying other dumb stuff, but it seems to me you acknowledged that already: > [@Marley23](#): > > So in your mind, democracy is all about protecting the powerful from the powerless? That’s fascinating. > [@Smapti](#): > > In my mind, democracy is about carrying out the will of the people. Democracy is not about carrying out the will of the people. That’s one component of it, but limits on the will of the people are fundamental to democracy and those limits are hard-wired into every single part of our system of government because liberty is impossible without those limits. Anybody who paid attention in elementary school knows this, but I’m not sure you’ve graduated. > [@Smapti](#): > > Reality shows. Not serious. Even so, this is one of the least stupid things you’ve said all thread. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/605 "2014-09-15T21:13:57Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > This thread is mostly about the Fourth Amendment, and in general your view seems to be that the government should be able to do whatever it wants as long as it means well. That’s antithetical to any kind of liberty. The government’s job is to provide liberty to the citizens that create it and empower it. Liberty cannot exist without government. > [@](#): > > Democracy is not about carrying out the will of the people. That’s one component of it, but limits on the will of the people are fundamental to democracy and those limits are hard-wired into every single part of our system of government because liberty is impossible without those limits. Those limits exist because the democratic process created them. They could also be _removed_ democratically if that’s what the American people wanted. If the American people decided they wanted to abolish the Fourth Amendment in numbers sufficient enough to amend the Constitution to that effect, that would be a valid exercise of democracy. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/606 "2014-09-15T21:17:17Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The government’s job is to provide liberty to the citizens that create it and empower it. Liberty cannot exist without government. Without limits on government there is no liberty for all. > [@](#): > > Those limits exist because the democratic process created them. They could also be _removed_ democratically if that’s what the American people wanted. If the American people decided they wanted to abolish the Fourth Amendment in numbers sufficient enough to amend the Constitution to that effect, that would be a valid exercise of democracy. And there goes the liberty along with it. Do you have any knowledge of history, or the modern world outside the US, or anything at all? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/607 "2014-09-15T21:19:50Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Do you have any knowledge of history, or the modern world outside the US, or anything at all? Plenty. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/608 "2014-09-15T21:24:23Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Plenty. What? And all this time you’ve been holding out on us? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/609 "2014-09-15T21:25:11Z")
Question (I know this is the Pit, but I’m curious…feel free to throw in a FUCK YOU XT!! or whatever along with the answer :p)…what crime could the police be charged with in this case? I’m not a lawyer, and it seems a bit confusing to me. I was reading a CNN article that seemed to indicate that the cops had legal grounds to ask for ID, but the consensus in this thread seems to be that they didn’t, and that they violated the law by detaining her for not showing ID. So, what crime could the police be charged with, and what’s the probable outcome of pursuing this? I assume that there will for sure be a civil suit against the LAPD and that they will most likely be paying damages, but what about criminal charges? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/610 "2014-09-15T21:26:55Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The government’s job is to provide liberty to the citizens that create it and empower it. Liberty cannot exist without government. Yes. For example, citizens are supposed to be free of the threat of unreasonable search and seizure of their persons, goods, homes, etcetera. > [@](#): > > Those limits exist because the democratic process created them. Well, sort of. They were created by a government that excluded the vast majority of people from the democratic process, but the democratic process built on them. > [@](#): > > Those limits exist because the democratic process created them. They could also be _removed_ democratically if that’s what the American people wanted. Thank you for another demonstration of how democracy can be antithetical to liberty. I’m not sure how you think this proved your point, but I have to say I hardly need the help- I’m arguing with **Smapti** , for crying out loud. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/611 "2014-09-15T21:29:37Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > No. Her rights can be addressed in the courts. If the cop was wrong the charges are dropped and she can sue. It’s not immediate gratification but it’s a lot safer than arguing or fighting with them in the street. If a cop can require that you go to the time and expense of going to court any time you want to exercise your right, you effectively are denied that right. The whole point of a right is that it is a basic assumption of living everyday life. Cops should be taught what people 'a rights are and they should be taught not to infringe them in the first place. If the assumption is that the cop is always right and until and unless you can take a matter to a court then you should defer to the cops, then you’re living in a police state. You should only have to go to court in borderline cases in which the extent of your rights are in dispute. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/612 "2014-09-15T21:30:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes. For example, citizens are supposed to be free of the threat of unreasonable search and seizure of their persons, goods, homes, etcetera. I agree. > [@](#): > > Well, sort of. They were created by an unelected government that excluded the vast majority of people from the democratic process, but the democratic process built on them. And which provided for their democratic ratification and modification. > [@](#): > > Thank you for another demonstration of how democracy can be antithetical to liberty. If the people decide that they don’t want liberty, should they be _forced_ to have it? Seems to me like a lot of the biggest boondoggles our country has gotten into in recent decades have been the result of trying to “spread liberty” to peoples who weren’t interested in it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/613 "2014-09-15T21:31:57Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The government’s job is to provide liberty to the citizens that create it and empower it. Liberty cannot exist without government. > > Those limits exist because the democratic process created them. They could also be _removed_ democratically if that’s what the American people wanted. If the American people decided they wanted to abolish the Fourth Amendment in numbers sufficient enough to amend the Constitution to that effect, that would be a valid exercise of democracy. Absolutely true. It might not be wise, at least in my opinion, but it would certainly be valid. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/614 "2014-09-15T21:33:50Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > I agree. You agree in theory. I see no evidence you agree in practice. > [@](#): > > And which provided for their democratic ratification and modification. Another “sort of.” > [@](#): > > If the people decide that they don’t want liberty, should they be _forced_ to have it? Seems to me like a lot of the biggest boondoggles our country has gotten into in recent decades have been the result of trying to “spread liberty” to peoples who weren’t interested in it. Hey, another irrelevancy. I didn’t see that coming. Anyway, no, the people are not allowed to vote away fundamental freedoms. The bar on altering those is incredibly high - so high as to be deliberately undemocratic. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/615 "2014-09-15T21:33:51Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Question (I know this is the Pit, but I’m curious…feel free to throw in a FUCK YOU XT!! or whatever along with the answer :p)…what crime could the police be charged with in this case? I’m not a lawyer, and it seems a bit confusing to me. I was reading a CNN article that seemed to indicate that the cops had legal grounds to ask for ID, but the consensus in this thread seems to be that they didn’t, and that they violated the law by detaining her for not showing ID. So, what crime could the police be charged with, and what’s the probable outcome of pursuing this? I assume that there will for sure be a civil suit against the LAPD and that they will most likely be paying damages, but what about criminal charges? I am convinced the CNN advisors are wrong. But snide I made the same mistake at the start if this thread as they did, I am disinclined to be too harsh. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/616 "2014-09-15T21:40:11Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Hey, another irrelevancy. I didn’t see that coming. Anyway, no, the people are not allowed to vote away fundamental freedoms. The bar on altering those is incredibly high - so high as to be deliberately undemocratic. The bar on altering them is so high that it would be deliberately undemocratic _not_ to allow it if the people so overwhelmingly favored that course of action. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/617 "2014-09-15T21:43:54Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The bar on altering them is so high that it would be deliberately undemocratic _not_ to allow it if the people so overwhelmingly favored that course of action. I’m sure this made sense in your head. Out here, it makes no sense at all. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/618 "2014-09-15T21:44:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I have to say I hardly need the help- I’m arguing with **Smapti** , for crying out loud. Given how often he contradicts himself, it might be more accurate to say that **he** hardly needs the help. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/619 "2014-09-15T21:45:38Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m sure this made sense in your head. Out here, it makes no sense at all. If 90% of the American people supported amending the Constitution to abolish the 4th amendment, it is your assertion that it would be “undemocratic” to allow them to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/620 "2014-09-15T21:49:19Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If 90% of the American people supported amending the Constitution to abolish the 4th amendment, it is your assertion that it would be “undemocratic” to allow them to do so. I didn’t assert that anywhere. Maybe your problems run deeper than I thought. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492.md?page=30) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492.md?page=32)