Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,034
    Thanks (Given)
    4822
    Thanks (Received)
    4655
    Likes (Given)
    2517
    Likes (Received)
    1576
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    3
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14075391

    Default

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...r-bank-robber/

    Jun 4, 2012 8:20pm

    Police Stop, Handcuff Every Adult at Intersection in Search for Bank Robber

    Police in Aurora, Colo., searching for suspected bank robbers stopped every car at an intersection, handcuffed all the adults and searched the cars, one of which they believed was carrying the suspect.
    Police said they had received what they called a “reliable” tip that the culprit in an armed robbery at a Wells Fargo bank committed earlier was stopped at the red light.
    “We didn’t have a description, didn’t know race or gender or anything, so a split-second decision was made to stop all the cars at that intersection, and search for the armed robber,” Aurora police Officer Frank Fania told ABC News.
    Officers barricaded the area, halting 19 cars.
    “Cops came in from every direction and just threw their car in front of my car,” Sonya Romero, one of the drivers who was handcuffed, told ABC News affiliate KMGH-TV in Denver.
    From there, the police went from car to car, removing the passengers and handcuffing the adults.
    “Most of the adults were handcuffed, then were told what was going on and were asked for permission to search the car,” Fania said. “They all granted permission, and once nothing was found in their cars, they were un-handcuffed.”
    The search lasted between an hour and a half and two hours, and it wasn’t until the final car was searched that police apprehended the suspect.
    “Once officers got to his car, they found evidence that he was who they were looking for,” Fania said. “When they searched the car, they found two loaded firearms.”
    The actions of the police have been met with some criticism, but Fania said this was a unique situation that required an unusual response.
    “It’s hard to say what normal is in a situation like this when you haven’t dealt with a situation like this,” Fania said. “The result of the whole ordeal is that it paid off. We have arrested and charged a suspect.”
    The other people who had been held at the intersection were allowed to leave once the suspect was apprehended.

    borderline case or did they cross the line?

    does the ends justify the means in this case? ... sometimes ? always?
    do we toss the 4th and the constitution in crapper when things are difficult
    or do we just reinterpret it to mean what we want it to mean TODAY?
    And give the gov't the benny of the doubt and the citizen scorn and a crack on the jaw if they don't "cooperate".
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In a house; two stories, suburban
    Posts
    7,471
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    264
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2395475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...r-bank-robber/

    Jun 4, 2012 8:20pm

    Police Stop, Handcuff Every Adult at Intersection in Search for Bank Robber





    borderline case or did they cross the line?

    does the ends justify the means in this case? ... sometimes ? always?
    do we toss the 4th and the constitution in crapper when things are difficult
    or do we just reinterpret it to mean what we want it to mean TODAY?
    And give the gov't the benny of the doubt and the citizen scorn and a crack on the jaw if they don't "cooperate".
    In this situation, absent any description of the subject, it certainly doesn't meet the bar for a warranted search, but FWiW, they were asked to consent. Speculation as to whether they would have been 'cracked in the jaw' had they refused is a bit over dramatic IMHO, but certainly some intimidation wouldnt be beyond the realm of possibility. A bank robbery, assuming it had occurred recently, minutes/hours (not days), could meet the standard for exigent circumstance. But again, "all consented"; so we can only speculate on what would have happened.
    He who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.AeschylusRead more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/qu...zeMUwcpY1Io.99

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by logroller View Post
    In this situation, absent any description of the subject, it certainly doesn't meet the bar for a warranted search, but FWiW, they were asked to consent. Speculation as to whether they would have been 'cracked in the jaw' had they refused is a bit over dramatic IMHO, but certainly some intimidation wouldnt be beyond the realm of possibility. A bank robbery, assuming it had occurred recently, minutes/hours (not days), could meet the standard for exigent circumstance. But again, "all consented"; so we can only speculate on what would have happened.
    Well, we all know Rev is going to assume the worst about the gov't.

    As for me, I'm conflicted. Certainly an armed bank robber needed to be apprehended, but I'm not sure that it was necessary to handcuff every person who was on the road at that time to do so.

    I think I offer a unique perspective , on here anyway, when I say that I've seen how traumatic children can see it when their parents are put in hand cuffs for ANY reason, little kids don't understand things like "Mommy didn't do anything wrong, we're just looking for a bank robber" I mean it's one thing when a person has been speeding or what have you and gets put in cuffs for whatever reason, for the officer's safety. That is their own fault for putting themselves in that situation. But all but one of these people did nothing to put themselves in that situation.

    There has to be a better way. Oh, wait there is. red light cameras, but some of you don't like those either.
    '

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,034
    Thanks (Given)
    4822
    Thanks (Received)
    4655
    Likes (Given)
    2517
    Likes (Received)
    1576
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    3
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14075391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post

    ....As for me, I'm conflicted. Certainly an armed bank robber needed to be apprehended, but I'm not sure that it was necessary to handcuff every person who was on the road at that time to do so.

    I think I offer a unique perspective , on here anyway, when I say that I've seen how traumatic children can see it when their parents are put in hand cuffs for ANY reason, little kids don't understand things like "Mommy didn't do anything wrong, we're just looking for a bank robber" I mean it's one thing when a person has been speeding or what have you and gets put in cuffs for whatever reason, for the officer's safety. That is their own fault for putting themselves in that situation. But all but one of these people did nothing to put themselves in that situation.

    There has to be a better way. ......
    '
    I agree with all of that Con.

    I think it's a tough call.
    Handcuffs were probably unnecessary though.
    At least in this case the police Did, as Log mention, Ask to search. And they had some bit of real probably cause to detain the people (unlike the TSA).

    But handcuff everyone , for what?
    Last edited by revelarts; 06-05-2012 at 01:28 PM.
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    I agree with all of that Con.

    I think it's a tough call.
    Handcuffs were probably unnecessary though.
    At least in this case the police Did, as Log mention, Ask to search. And they had some bit of real probably cause to detain the people (unlike the TSA).

    But handcuff everyone , for what?
    Again , let me interject a little of my perspective based on my experiences.

    On one raid I participated in, we went in early because the main guy the drug task force wanted was in the midst of beating the shit out of his old lady when we got to the house. We went in and everyone was put in cuffs except the little woman who was being beaten on. As I was helping hold the guy who was beating her down she clocked me in the back of the head with a ceramic crock pot. The officer who was supposed to cuff her didn't follow procedure and I got to get stitches because of it.

    Was this woman some violent offender? No, but people sometimes panic and do dumb things when confronted by men with guns , even when those men (and women) have badges. So for safety sakes, EVERYONE goes into cuffs. And that's for the safety of them , LEOs and any innocents around.

    So once stopped, yes I can see why everyone was put in cuffs. I just don't think they needed to detain EVERYONE to begin with.


    How do you feel about red light cameras?

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,034
    Thanks (Given)
    4822
    Thanks (Received)
    4655
    Likes (Given)
    2517
    Likes (Received)
    1576
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    3
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14075391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    Again , let me interject a little of my perspective based on my experiences.

    On one raid I participated in, we went in early because the main guy the drug task force wanted was in the midst of beating the shit out of his old lady when we got to the house. We went in and everyone was put in cuffs except the little woman who was being beaten on. As I was helping hold the guy who was beating her down she clocked me in the back of the head with a ceramic crock pot. The officer who was supposed to cuff her didn't follow procedure and I got to get stitches because of it.

    Was this woman some violent offender? No, but people sometimes panic and do dumb things when confronted by men with guns , even when those men (and women) have badges. So for safety sakes, EVERYONE goes into cuffs. And that's for the safety of them , LEOs and any innocents around.

    So once stopped, yes I can see why everyone was put in cuffs. I just don't think they needed to detain EVERYONE to begin with.
    so a drug house with violent people and a random group of folks at intersecting are the same?
    sorry I'm not there, you'll need more than that to convince me that everyone needed to be cuffed in the middle of the street, for the cop's or "their own" safety, sorry.


    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post

    How do you feel about red light cameras?
    let's see.

    How about Cameras recording everything the LEOs and elected politicians do all day long for 10-20 years... posted live and recorded online. We see how that goes then we might try it on the unruly citizens.
    Last edited by revelarts; 06-05-2012 at 02:09 PM.
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    so a drug house with violent people and a random group of folks at intersecting are the same?
    sorry I'm not there, you'll need more than that to convince me that everyone needed to be cuffed in the middle of the street, for the cop's or "their own" safety, sorry.



    let's see.

    How about Cameras recording everything the LEOs and elected politicians do all day long for 10-20 years... posted live and recorded online. We see how that goes then we might try it on the unruly citizens.
    I am 100% pro LEOs being filmed while on duty. In arkansas a LEO can be terminated for failing to activate his dash cam when making a stop or for failing to turn on his shoulder cam when using either a tazer or drawing his service weapon. I wish all LEOs were under such scrutiny.

    I am NOT however a fan of allowing random passerby cameras film LEOs. Now if the person being detained wants to film. Absolutely he/she should be able to do so. Including "wait officer let me turn my camera on before you begin" if the person being detained feels the need.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Georgia!
    Posts
    11,818
    Thanks (Given)
    738
    Thanks (Received)
    671
    Likes (Given)
    1133
    Likes (Received)
    825
    Piss Off (Given)
    24
    Piss Off (Received)
    1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1203902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    I agree with all of that Con.

    I think it's a tough call.
    Handcuffs were probably unnecessary though.
    At least in this case the police Did, as Log mention, Ask to search. And they had some bit of real probably cause to detain the people (unlike the TSA).

    But handcuff everyone , for what?
    Well, just a wild ass guess but it was an 'armed robbery'. I gotta assume they had guns. So, in this situation what's the best way to prevent their use...cuff em all while you sort it out IMO.

    Damn, I was right: “When they searched the car, they found two loaded firearms.” Now the question is...if able would the perp have used them, perhaps killing some innocent folk/s in an effort to avoid arrest? We'll never know and IMO that's a good thing.
    UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION

    Above the Best

    Why the Hell should I have to press “1” for ENGLISH?

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,604
    Thanks (Given)
    23856
    Thanks (Received)
    17377
    Likes (Given)
    9630
    Likes (Received)
    6081
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    I

    I dont know about you but thats exactly what i want, a government that follows the letter of the law. They cant be trusted to use judgement
    So you are in favor of the police having no discretionary powers?


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,604
    Thanks (Given)
    23856
    Thanks (Received)
    17377
    Likes (Given)
    9630
    Likes (Received)
    6081
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...r-bank-robber/

    Jun 4, 2012 8:20pm

    Police Stop, Handcuff Every Adult at Intersection in Search for Bank Robber





    borderline case or did they cross the line?

    does the ends justify the means in this case? ... sometimes ? always?
    do we toss the 4th and the constitution in crapper when things are difficult
    or do we just reinterpret it to mean what we want it to mean TODAY?
    And give the gov't the benny of the doubt and the citizen scorn and a crack on the jaw if they don't "cooperate".
    I can go along with this. The circumstances warranted it.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,604
    Thanks (Given)
    23856
    Thanks (Received)
    17377
    Likes (Given)
    9630
    Likes (Received)
    6081
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    I am 100% pro LEOs being filmed while on duty. In arkansas a LEO can be terminated for failing to activate his dash cam when making a stop or for failing to turn on his shoulder cam when using either a tazer or drawing his service weapon. I wish all LEOs were under such scrutiny.

    I am NOT however a fan of allowing random passerby cameras film LEOs. Now if the person being detained wants to film. Absolutely he/she should be able to do so. Including "wait officer let me turn my camera on before you begin" if the person being detained feels the need.
    I agree that police should have both audio and video recordings to protect themselves as well as the public.

    The right to video police is coming:

    http://jurist.org/paperchase/2011/08...ice-action.php

    Sunday, August 28, 2011

    First Circuit upholds right to record public police action
    Aman Kakar at 2:55 PM ET

    [JURIST] The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit [official website] Friday ruled [opinion, PDF] that there is a clearly-established First Amendment [Cornell LII backgrounder] right to film police officers performing their duties in a public space. The case stems from a 2007 incident, when police officers arrested Simon Gilk after he openly recorded three police officers arresting a suspect on the Boston Common. Circuit Judge Kermit Lipez, speaking for the unanimous three-judge panel, rejected the officers claim that they had qualified immunity since the law regarding recordings of police action is not well-settled. The opinion recognized that the undoubted right to gather news from any source, by means within the law, is an important corollary to the First Amendment saying:
    The First Amendment issue here is, as the parties frame it, fairly narrow: is there a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public? Basic First Amendment principles, along with case law from this and other circuits, answer that question unambiguously in the affirmative. It is firmly established that the First Amendment's aegis extends further than the text's proscription on laws "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press," and encompasses a range of conduct related to the gathering and dissemination of information. ... The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles. Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting "the free discussion of governmental affairs.
    Lipez cited well established case law and stressed that the right to gather news is not one that inures solely to the benefit of the news media but also extends to a private individual. The Court recognized that the right to record is not without limitations and is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The Center for Constitutional Rights [advocacy website] filed an amicus brief [PDF] arguing that concerned individuals and Copwatch groups have a right to record the activity of police in the public. The police officers arrested Gilk and charged him with violating of the wiretap statute, disturbing the peace, and aiding in the escape of a prisoner. The Commonwealth dropped the last charge recognizing that they did not have probable cause. The other two charges against Gilk were also dismissed by a Boston Municipal Court. In February 2010, Gilk filed a complaint under 42 USC § 1983 [text] for violation of Gilk's First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights. The officers appealed to the First Circuit court after the district court denied the officers motion to dismiss the case because the officers had qualified immunity.

    The IL legislature in their ever infinite wisdom has passed a law saying it's illegal to record audibly, thus ok for visual recordings.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  12. #27
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    5,457
    Thanks (Given)
    14
    Thanks (Received)
    714
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1515011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    You are wrong on so many levels here, but one I would like to address is THIS.

    I'm sure the TSA would LOVE to use the time honored tactic of profiling criminals, but nope little libbies won't let that happen, and so the searches have to be random instead.

    PS - A person can entirely avoid the "strip searches" by walking through the damn x ray machine.
    Unless they get pulled from the line, and need I remind you, CHOOSING to leave the airport rather than be violated is not allowed? And again, why is it reasonable to search people completely at random? It isn't, and thus, it's violates the Fourth Amendment. The entire point was to keep government from turning the entirety of the citizenry into suspects.

    Why does the TSA, which is a safety organization (Transit SAFETY Authority), NOT Law enforcement or even Security, get to conduct these searches?
    "Government screws up everything. If government says black, you can bet it's white. If government says sit still for your safety, you'd better run for your life!"
    --Wayne Allyn Root
    www.rootforamerica.com
    www.FairTax.org

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DragonStryk72 View Post
    Unless they get pulled from the line, and need I remind you, CHOOSING to leave the airport rather than be violated is not allowed? And again, why is it reasonable to search people completely at random? It isn't, and thus, it's violates the Fourth Amendment. The entire point was to keep government from turning the entirety of the citizenry into suspects.

    Why does the TSA, which is a safety organization (Transit SAFETY Authority), NOT Law enforcement or even Security, get to conduct these searches?
    You need to read the fourth in its entirety. UNREASONABLE searches, it's reasonable to expect that you might searched at an airport so hence the fourth isn't violated by said searches.

    By the way if your argument is that the TSA isn't even an authorized LE agency, then they aren't bound by the fourth anyway.
    Last edited by ConHog; 06-05-2012 at 09:39 PM.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    5,457
    Thanks (Given)
    14
    Thanks (Received)
    714
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1515011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. P View Post
    Well, just a wild ass guess but it was an 'armed robbery'. I gotta assume they had guns. So, in this situation what's the best way to prevent their use...cuff em all while you sort it out IMO.

    Damn, I was right: “When they searched the car, they found two loaded firearms.” Now the question is...if able would the perp have used them, perhaps killing some innocent folk/s in an effort to avoid arrest? We'll never know and IMO that's a good thing.
    Um... no, they wouldn't have? If they had intended to use the firearms, wouldn't they have kept them? Seems to me that I still need to be holding the gun in order to aim and fire it. As far as I know, regular firearms still require that for effectiveness.
    "Government screws up everything. If government says black, you can bet it's white. If government says sit still for your safety, you'd better run for your life!"
    --Wayne Allyn Root
    www.rootforamerica.com
    www.FairTax.org

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Georgia!
    Posts
    11,818
    Thanks (Given)
    738
    Thanks (Received)
    671
    Likes (Given)
    1133
    Likes (Received)
    825
    Piss Off (Given)
    24
    Piss Off (Received)
    1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1203902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DragonStryk72 View Post
    Um... no, they wouldn't have? If they had intended to use the firearms, wouldn't they have kept them? Seems to me that I still need to be holding the gun in order to aim and fire it. As far as I know, regular firearms still require that for effectiveness.
    The story says two firearms were found in the car loaded, right? Close enough to use IMO IF the perps hadn't been cuffed. No?
    Like I said, we'll never know.
    UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION

    Above the Best

    Why the Hell should I have to press “1” for ENGLISH?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums