-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Boston Marathon Terrorists Engaged.
- Thread starter FlyingOnFumes
- Start date
Absolutely within your rights. Generally good advice. Just consider opening your trunk will get you on your way in a couple minutes. Refusing the search may mean waiting some time for a dog or warrant. Work the system if you can spare the time.
Can I ask what the difference is between the two statements? I mean, technically I can see that one is suggesting there is no ability to search while the other speaks to willingness to allow it, but if I said the former, would I somehow be forfeiting (or not protecting) my rights in a way I wouldn't with the latter? (In case it isn't coming across, I'm not being argumentative at all. Just trying to understand.)
I was wondering the same thing. If someone says either of those two things to me it communicates the same thing. If one is meant to be more legalize, it isn't necessary. A court does not expect an ordinary citizen to speak formally just to invoke his rights. As to exercising this right, I have always taken it two ways. One is that the citizen is simply making the Constitution work and exercising the "system". No problem. The other is that the citizen is afraid that they will somehow end up in trouble. I suppose, if you really aren't sure of your innocence, like having a weapon in a bag and not knowing that state's gun laws, that may make sense. But then that violates the aforementioned qualification that the citizen be "law abiding". If you are truly and confidently law abiding I don't see the risk. I see, perhaps, the satisfaction of making the Constitution come alive and work for you, but where is the risk? If the cop is dirty and you are afraid of having something planted, he can still do that after getting a warrant or dog. Maybe I just haven't considered all the scenarios.
When pulled over, I always just make eye strong contact, wave a couple of fingers at the police officer, and say: "You don't need to see my identification. These aren't the droids you're looking for. I can go about my business." Works for me...
"I do not consent to searches." It's not combative or challenging to the officer and it's exercising your rights rather than saying things like "I know my rights." Even if you're not abiding by the law (whichever that law may be), if there is probable cause they can search you without your permission. If they're asking you to consent to a search, then they don't have probable cause.
The "I don't see the risk" is the same as saying "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear." Cool, lemme attach this GPS and camera to your car 24/7. How about your living room? No? Well, the courts have ruled that privacy extends to your vehicle as well. There is simply no way to know that you are abiding by 100% of the laws, 100% of the time. There are too many laws and statutes that can trip you up in your day to day activities and the police are not there to help you avoid them.
It always amuses (read: scares) me how often, those who claim to be the advocates of "small government/the Constitution/personal responsibility" are those most willing to cede those rights and views to authority under the guise of "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear."
I've said it once and I'll say it again (with a qualifier this time): Unless you called them for help, never ever ever talk to the police.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
The risk, real or perceived, is that if you give the police officer 'a hard time' by not cooperating, then he's going to give you a hard time and write you up for every possible infraction he can stretch. At the end of the day, it's going to come down to his word vs. yours in court, and could possibly end up costing you an arm and a leg in legal fees.
Not completely true. A few days ago, the Supreme Court decided that in order to enjoy your 5th amendment rights prior to arrest,you must state that you are asserting your right. Silence after being asked a question can be used against you.
http://www.volokh.com/2013/06/17/do...l-procedure-case-of-the-term-salinas-v-texas/
Not the same thing. In Salinas the suspect had waived his right to not answer questions. He participated in an interview and then simply stopped talking. This opinion simply says that if you talk and change you mind you have to assert your 5th amendment not just be silent. Nothing legalese has to be said. No specific words. Just that you don't want to talk any more and want a lawyer. No need to even know what amendment it is.
While you have control over your consent to search, you have no control over the police officer's ability to search you or your property. If you tell an officer, "you cannot search me", they may take that as a challenge and "find" probable cause to search or pursue a search warrant. So you really have no control over their ability to search. "I do not consent to a search" is invoking your 4th amendment right and is less challenging to a LEO.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Also, don't sign sworn statements drafted by a detective when on your hospital bed on a morphine drip, especially if the confrontation leading you getting shot involved off-duty officers.
Note: Any LEO I've spoken to worth his badge says that he leaves the firearm at home when out on the town drinking.
http://data.newsday.com/long-island/crime/huntington-station-shooting/
Note: Any LEO I've spoken to worth his badge says that he leaves the firearm at home when out on the town drinking.
http://data.newsday.com/long-island/crime/huntington-station-shooting/
RiseR 25
Well-Known Member
So would it be safe to say these phrases when talking to the police?
"I do not consent to searches"
"I invoke my right to counsel"
"Am I being detained officer?"
"Am I free to go officer?"
Those seem to be the phrases that emerge most frequently from videos on the net. I know that you said NEVER talk to cops but would these forms of communication suffice while a cop is interrogating you in a traffic stop?