Supreme Court Ruling

[wolf]

First I 'd like to thank the Webmaster, this is much much, berter! We all thank you for that.
The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that officers can not search someone just because someone said that that person may have a gun. WOW! Can you believe this. Talk about taking a giant step backwards.
Last month they ruled that we can chase someone on the mere fact that they ran when they saw us. Now we can even frisk someone when someone gives us a heads up that the person maybe armed.I am still outraged at this decesion. It's an officers safety hazard and an accident waiting to happen.

[RaychelR]

Hmm, I guess it depends on which lobby group has the most money this week that they change their mind frames so often.

[Roman]

As discouraging as this ruling is, just remember that there's more than one way to skin a cat (where the hell did this expression come from?). Just as a sharp officer can usually find 5 different reasons to stop any given vehicle, there's usually a couple solid justifications for a cursory search. http://www.officer.com/ubb/cool.gif

[Tackleberry]

If probable cause is there as in finding something to detain the person for, then a safety patdown isn't out of the question right?? But in all seriousness this is a step back for us but I'm sure the powers that be do have good intentions and the protection of an innocent person's privacy I'm sure came into play with this ruling. Anyway most of these people when you approach them will just run at the site of seeing us or of asking us to speak to them. This the powers that be have allowed us to chase and have probable cause thereafter to search, it's kinda like a catch-22 type situation.

Stay Safe!

Tac

[LeeRoy]

Keep in mind fellas. This was a unanimous decision by a court with both conservative and liberal justices. From what I read in the paper the officer involved received an anonymous call of a gun toting subject, saw a subject matching the description at a bus stop, and detained the subject ordering him to place his hands on the wall. Raising his hands in the air caused the suspects shirt to raise revealing a gun in his waistband (Now I question how that is possible given the youth fashion of wearing baggy pants. Most guns would fall out right? Chuckle).

The main issue here is the anonymous report without cooberation. All the officer had to do was hang back a bit and watch the subject and see any kind of action consistent with carrying a gun. That information would cooberate the caller's report of suspicious activity and would give the officer power to act. The officer in question did not do that or if she did she did not articulate it. I don't blame her. We've all done it and gotten away with it.

This case was not out of line with what I have been taught throughout my career. Anonymous reports are not reliable and you need to cooberate the information before you act on it.

Remember, a full jail is a happy jail.