Kissing your husband while black? Not if the LAPD can help it.

[Smapti]

@iiandyiiii

Surprised to see Smapti standing up for people who broke the law here.

As far as I can tell, nobody broke any law at any point in this exchange.

[Marley23]

In your case, “as far as I can tell” creates a huge amount of wiggle room.

[jayjay]

@Smapti

You say things like this, and I’m the one who’s a fascist. Right.

And you can’t recognize sarcasm or irony to save your lily-livered life…

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Hentor

How about you? Guess what - there are in fact multiple murderers out there walking free.

@Smapti

And you’re OK with that?

I’m firmly against multiple murderers.

How about you? Do you think there should be any limits on doing something about it?

Should, for instance, the police be allowed to randomly search houses to try to find them?

Should the police be allowed to take random people into custody and interrogate them in order to locate the multiple murderers out there?

How about incarcerating or executing people they think might be multiple murderers?

Are you okay with those things, or should there be limits on what the police can and can’t do?

[JesterX]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

Me - no. I would not call them incompetent, because I’m not comfortable with police states.

How about you? Guess what - there are in fact multiple murderers out there walking free. Would you prefer to be stopped and questioned whenever you go out in public because of that fact? How are the cops to know you aren’t one?

She wasn’t randomly stopped and questioned. The cop was answering a call.

And if the suspect was a multiple murderer who then went on to murder other people AFTER being stopped by the cops? You’re ok with that being a LIKELY reality of what you’re arguing for?

[Bouncer]

So, who besides me is wondering if the LAPD PR dept isn’t going to one day en masse just throw all their papers in the air, yell “Fuck it!” and walk out.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@JesterX

The point was, what is known by the participants at the time of the encounter. Judges and lawyers can hash out the fine legal points AFTER the incident. If the cops were wrong, charges are dropped in court. Like I said, cops and citizens should NOT be arguing legal points at every street level encounter.

So you would prefer that citizens and police continue to abuse the law out of ignorance, rather than start (or continue) complying with it?

[JesterX]

@Bricker

I’d absolutely find that acceptable. If the cops asked him for ID and he refused, and they had no reasonable suspicion, then they’d certainly have to let him go.

In fact, I’d prefer they did.

What if they didn’t, ran his ID, and discovered he was wanted for questioning in a multiple murder? And then, after they arrest him and Mirandize him, he confesses… only to challenge the legality of his initial detention, and the confession as well because it arose from the illegal detention? The police have hurt their chances to successfully prosecute a murderer because the cops couldn’t obey the law.

See my post the Hentor

[Smapti]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

Should, for instance, the police be allowed to randomly search houses to try to find them?

If they have suspicion that a murderer is hiding in a given neighborhood, then yes, or do you believe that Dzokhar Tsarnaev should be a free man today?

Should the police be allowed to take random people into custody and interrogate them in order to locate the multiple murderers out there?

If they have suspicion that a certain person might be a murderer or be involved with one, then yes, or do you believe Gary Ridgway should be a free man today?

How about incarcerating or executing people they think might be multiple murderers?

If they’ve been convicted of murder, yes, or do you believe every murderer in the history of mankind should be free today?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@JesterX

She wasn’t randomly stopped and questioned. The cop was answering a call.

No shit. You’re conflating my response to Smapit on a broader point about limiting the powers of the police with the issues involved in this specific matter. Don’t do that.

And if the suspect was a multiple murderer who then went on to murder other people AFTER being stopped by the cops? You’re ok with that being a LIKELY reality of what you’re arguing for?

See, if you paid attention to the point I was making to Smapti, you wouldn’t say such stupid shit.

[you_with_the_face]

@JesterX

This is where cops simply can’t win. If a wanted felon, say a multiple murderer, was stopped on the street for public lewdness, and the cops let him go because he couldn’t ask him for id to determine he was a multiple murderer, would you find that acceptable? Or would you call the cops a bunch of incompetent morons?

What? How would the cops be able to ascertain he was a murderer if they were stopping him for lewd behavior?

You seem to think cops are obligated to determine whether any random individual that crosses their path is a wanted criminal. They aren’t.

And unless I missed it, you still haven’t answered my question. Are gun owners suspicious just because they have exercised their right to bear arms? If not, criminal intent shouldn’t be assumed just because someone exercises their 4th amendment rights either.

[Smapti]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

See, if you paid attention to the point I was making to Smapti, you wouldn’t say such stupid shit.

So, are you OK with the cops letting a multiple murderer go because he didn’t feel like showing ID?

[Omar_Little]

@you_with_the_face

That wouldn’t have worked, since what he was arrested for was lewd conduct.

Yes, but you said hookers and johns don’t do it in broad daylight…obviously some do.

[Smapti]

@you_with_the_face

What? How would the cops be able to ascertain he was a murderer if they were stopping him for lewd behavior?

Upon identifying him and discovering there’s a murder warrant on him.

Are gun owners suspicious just because they have exercised their right to bear arms?

I would say yes.

[iiandyiiii]

@Smapti

As far as I can tell, nobody broke any law at any point in this exchange.

The cops broke the law by detaining Watts, as Bricker and Hentor have explained.

[Marley23]

@Smapti

If they have suspicion that a murderer is hiding in a given neighborhood, then yes, or do you believe that Dzokhar Tsarnaev should be a free man today?

So close. So desperate.

[JesterX]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

So you would prefer that citizens and police continue to abuse the law out of ignorance, rather than start (or continue) complying with it?

I would prefer less incidents where people are hurt or killed. The simplest way to accomplish that is for citizens to NOT fight with cops. And use the courts to address their grievances if they feel their rights were violated. It seems to me that every RESPONSIBLE citizens should advocate the same.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Smapti

If they have suspicion that a murderer is hiding in a given neighborhood, then yes, or do you believe that Dzokhar Tsarnaev should be a free man today?

If they have suspicion that a certain person might be a murderer or be involved with one, then yes, or do you believe Gary Ridgway should be a free man today?

If they’ve been convicted of murder, yes, or do you believe every murderer in the history of mankind should be free today?

I infer from this that you accept that there are limits to the powers of the police, given the qualifiers you placed in advance of each of these statements.

So, you acknowledge that we are not willing, as a people, to tolerate any and all police behavior even if it means that we have not captured all multiple murderers out there.

By the same token, we are not willing to tolerate any and all police behavior even if it means that completed misdemeanors may go unpunished. In fact, US v Grigg explicitly describes this tradeoff.

[JesterX]

@you_with_the_face

What? How would the cops be able to ascertain he was a murderer if they were stopping him for lewd behavior?

You seem to think cops are obligated to determine whether any random individual that crosses their path is a wanted criminal. They aren’t.

And unless I missed it, you still haven’t answered my question. Are gun owners suspicious just because they have exercised their right to bear arms? If not, criminal intent shouldn’t be assumed just because someone exercises their 4th amendment rights either.

Not “assumed”, INVESTIGATED.

Edited to answer . . . And yes, I think anyone walking around openly with a gun should be questioned. Hands down.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Smapti

So, are you OK with the cops letting a multiple murderer go because he didn’t feel like showing ID?

If he was randomly stopped? Yes.

Just the same as I would be okay with the possibility that a multiple murderer not being incarcerated if that was the result of due process under the law.

See, I’m not willing to tolerate just any police behavior - to sacrifice individual liberty - in order to maximize security. Your kneeling may vary.