This is why you should NEVER NEVER Talk To police....

Legislators'a bunch a' damn alcoholics.


There are a bunch of crap that needs to go, for instance:

Penal Code 21.06:

Sec. 21.06. HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.



If that's going on, where you're most likely to catch it in public, it's public lewdness. A class B.

There is no need for 21.06.

 

Again, something struck down by the courts (the famous Lawrence v Texas) that the legislature hasn't removed...sometimes I wonder if they keep stuff on the books in hopes that it'll somehow become legal again.

 

You're right. It's a tough call. I understand why you don't/wouldn't want to.

I'm just saying it's not in line with the "we're held to a higher standard because we have to be super ethical".. because if you skimp on a moral point here, then it becomes easier to do it somewhere else. But if you never cross the line in any fashion, it's hard to do it anywhere. There's some little phrase that goes with that..

 

Not only is there no need for it - that very statute was declared unconstitutional by the SCT in Lawrence v. Texas in 2003, so it's unenforceable in any event.

 

Well the 2007 legislative session let it slide.

They're slacking.

 

Doesn't surprise me. I think it's stupid that a sticker should help you evade the law. I don't like gray areas because you know someone.

Doesn't surprise me. But if they claim to be held to a higher standard and are given powers due to that, then I will hold them to that standard. Which makes me expect more out of them than bank tellers or burger flippers. (Of course, the pay thing changes things..I hadn't thought about that till someone brought it up)

I'm not outraged at any of this. I appreciate what they do in putting their lives on the line. But I don't think they should have the ability to "step over the line" (make a morally wrong choice like saying "I smell pot" when they don't) and so easily get away with it (and in doing so, violate someone's rights). As DD has said, they are fallible like anyone else.

If they're not, then they're held to a higher standard... and they shouldn't give other cops "perks" or have the same %age of assholes as other professions. Pick one or the other. Either higher standard or normal people with less authority.

 

And then where do you draw the line on ethics? It's all too gray.

Hundreds of people turn without blinkers each day. Do they get a citation? A officer gets to slide for not using a blinker. How do yo weigh that out?
Now you see Tommy Turd, a known drug dealer riding dirty....he doesn't use a blinker. You going to stop him? Is it unethical to stop him for not using a blinker but you let 100 soccer moms turn without a blinker?

 

I promise you, that if you go around smelling burnt mar1juana every where you go, you won't be an officer long.

Unethical officers are usually weeded out. Do some of you think that officer's don't have supervisors around. Officers aren't alone. The boss is always near. And those "fallible" officers don't last long.

 

wow, I was going to say that <b>you</b> are overthinking probable cause.

The traffic stop (e.g., registration, tail-light) on its own does not allow a search until further probable cause is found. You're not really trying to say all stops allow searches are you? Because that is not true.

 

Of everyone that has posted in this thread, everything Spiffy says has been credible.

And spiffy never said you had PC to search because of a simple traffic violation.

 

HEEEEEEEEEEY

 

I like you too.

 

I think you are cherry picking statements out of what I said without reading it all. I said you generally can't STOP without probable cause - I didn't say anything about a search. I fully agree pc for a stop on traffic doesn't get you the ability to search the car UNLESS the officer arrests for the traffic stop in which case they can search incident to arrest.

An arrest does allow a search - yes. A traffic stop does not neccesarily allow for a search, but if the officer decides to arrest for it he can search incident to arrest. I keep saying that over and over again and you don't address it. I've argued countless motions to supress in regards to PC for stop and PC for search - this is blackletter law I'm espousing...

 

Christ. I'm not arguing with you. You responded to me first, and you are the one who got my comments misunderstood, first, wrt PC. I'm just trying to clarify my point and yours. I thought I just did that?

Why are you still arguing?

Aren't we in agreement.

 

You're welcome. I expect a freebie.

 

well seeing as your last post ended with

I thought I'd be ok trying to explain myself...but hey, maybe you just use an argumentative tone to your reponses

 

I think I said before, but in practice, I will always do whatever I can to make an officer I interact with feel at ease. I don't make any sudden movements, I explain that I'm going to reach into the glovebox for my insurance, etc. Even if I think the stop is B.S., I'm not going to argue it there on the side of the road.

And I don't personally care if police officers get free food at McDonald's or if other police officers won't write them tickets. I care when other officers cover up real crimes (I recall a story about police officers who wouldn't arrest their fellow officer who was beating his wife. That's not acceptable).

But there is a line of thought that says that if you allow officers to bend the rules here and there on the small stuff, it encourages some of them to bend the rules even further. I doubt, for example, Sgt. Gottlieb in Durham, NC woke up one morning completely dirty. I'm sure it happened over time.

 

Police officers take that job knowing what they face. I'm sorry if I don't feel sympathy from them on this. If they don't want to put their lives on the line then they shouldn't apply for the position.

 

Are you serious?

wow

 

I know they understand the risks Lil, but I still feel sorry for them if they get shot in the line of duty and do donate money to the $100 club every year.

They deserve our respect.

My point is that they are not held accountable at the same level as everyone else, and they should be....or heck according to WWR, they should be held to a HIGHER standard, but since they are getting away with speeding, running red lights and tickets in general, they are clearly NOT held to a higher standard at all.

DD