U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: Refusing a search is a right, not a provocation (This is just incredible)
Source:
Blacklisted News/Washington Post
URL Source: http://www.blacklistednews.com/Refu ... ocation/52820/0/38/38/Y/M.html
Published: Jul 19, 2016
Author: Radley Balko
Post Date: 2016-07-20 10:26:24 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 823
Comments: 8
[Waterbury Conn.] Police Chief Vernon L. Riddick Jr. brought a message of cooperation with police to a mostly African-American crowd of more than 200 people at Mount Olive A.M.E. Zion Church on Wednesday night. If an officer stops your car, if they ask to search your person or vehicle, if they demand entry into your home, comply and then complain later to the department’s internal affairs office and police chief’s office if you feel your rights have been violated, Riddick said. I understand the argument that you shouldn’t mouth off to cops. I get the argument that you shouldn’t needlessly provoke them. I certainly agree that you shouldn’t physically resist them. It could get you killed. But this is a police chief who, in a town hall meeting spurred by a rash of shootings both by and of police officers, is asking that citizens submit without question if an officer requests to search a vehicle, home or person. In the interest of “cooperation,” he’s asking a black audience to give up their Fourth Amendment rights. We empower the police to protect our rights. Much of the time, that involves protecting us from others who would do us harm. But it also means respecting our rights and refraining from violating them. The Fourth Amendment gives us the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The intent behind the amendment was to protect us from the indignity and violation of our privacy when we’re subjected to a search that’s based on little more than a hunch — the intent was not to protect our right to later complain to internal affairs. I realize things are tense right now. We should certainly respect and be aware of that when interacting with law enforcement officers. But to verbally refuse a request to search is an exercise of one’s rights. It isn’t a provocation. That Riddick and other police officials seem to see it as the latter is telling — and a big problem. ***** Poster comment : He's not just asking blacks to give up their rights - look at the crowd. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
There is no doubt that you do not allow police to search your vehicle or your home without a warrant. I don't even understand the part where I am watching cops, and they stop someone for what they deem "suspicious activity" and begin by patting down a driver, and end with searching the car. This does not sit well with me. What right do they have to search the driver of a car that they pull over for say expired tabs, or failure to use a turn signal?
Search or pat down? "Once a law enforcement officer has lawfully stopped a person, the officer may conduct a patdown for firearms or other dangerous weapons when the officer reasonably suspects that his or her personal safety requires it. Consent is not a necessary prerequisite to an officer-safety patdown for weapons."
#5. To: misterwhite (#4)
Right, looking for weapons when they come upon a small baggie with a gram of MJ. If police are allowed a "pat down" of everyone they stop, it gives them carte blanche to search everyone.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#4. To: jeremiad (#1)
"What right do they have to search the driver of a car that they pull over for say expired tabs, or failure to use a turn signal?"
Replies to Comment # 4.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]