[rwheels]

What if he "mistook" the highway for the autobahn?

[Dang3r]

Originally Posted by rwheels

What if he "mistook" the highway for the autobahn?

That wouldn't happen and hadnt at last trip. I am the one whos standing slow into others way

[TiMSport]

Speaking of the Autobahn, I sure wish this pandemic was a thing of the past so that I can travel to Germany again and enjoy a drive.

[cmyx6go]

Originally Posted by TiMSport

Speaking of the Autobahn, I sure wish this pandemic was a thing of the past so that I can travel to Germany again and enjoy a drive.

The only positive that came from the pandemic was my own little Autobahn here. It was such a pleasure with no one on the road. They're back

[Dang3r]

Originally Posted by TiMSport

Speaking of the Autobahn, I sure wish this pandemic was a thing of the past so that I can travel to Germany again and enjoy a drive.

I wont disappoint you, but during those partly total empty days onto the Autobahn, traffic was limited by stricted permissions to travel to/from work, grocery shopping or doctor. This was checked by Police and got fined if you were caught w/o reason - and I think just speeding for fun is not a real good reason in pandemic times

[TiMSport]

Originally Posted by Dang3r

I wont disappoint you, but during those partly total empty days onto the Autobahn, traffic was limited by stricted permissions to travel to/from work, grocery shopping or doctor. This was checked by Police and got fined if you were caught w/o reason - and I think just speeding for fun is not a real good reason in pandemic times

Hence my remark that I wished the pandemic was in the past.
On a serious note, I've got business I want to attend to over there and I'm unable to do so because of this never ending ordeal. Driving on the Autobahn was just an added bonus.

[4Hockey4]

What do you think of ruling Sedan_Clan ? From a constitutional citizen I applaud, will this change anything for most LEO ?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...h=7ad75a285c1e

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by 4Hockey4

What do you think of ruling Sedan_Clan ? From a constitutional citizen I applaud, will this change anything for most LEO ?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...h=7ad75a285c1e

In my career we've always used warrants unless circumstances are/were exigent (...domestic violence, 5150, etc.), so this changes nothing in terms of the way we operate.

[mahalom3]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

In my career we've always used warrants unless circumstances are/were exigent (...domestic violence, 5150, etc.), so this changes nothing in terms of the way we operate.

Bingo!!

[Sedan_Clan]

Also keep in mind that this statement, "the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion" is a bit misleading. You cannot defeat a lawful detention that began outside of your home by retreating into your home.

[S1nner]

Not sure if it has been asked before, but let's say someone brake checked on me and say I rear ended him. Everything on dash cam. To my knowledge it would be my fault, since I have to keep a distance. Is that true? Thanks.

[mahalom3]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Also keep in mind that this statement, "the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion" is a bit misleading. You cannot defeat a lawful detention that began outside of your home by retreating into your home.

Any contraband we see in plain sight once we are inside your home, we can seize it as well.

[4Hockey4]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Also keep in mind that this statement, "the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion" is a bit misleading. You cannot defeat a lawful detention that began outside of your home by retreating into your home.

So under the this case, if he was on his property and retreated into his house, you could use the same reasonable suspicion to enter like you would a persons car ? As opposed to they were already in. That was NOT a lawful detention, PLUS no warrant

Regardless glad they followed constitution. It was the "Community Caretaking Exception" to 4th folks were taking issue with TBH. We dont need mob decisions, but lawful, constitutional ones. (tough nowadays with folks screaming on social media)

(Not sure if you read whole article)

Thx for response Sedan_Clan

[unluky]

Originally Posted by 4Hockey4

So under the this case, if he was on his property and retreated into his house, you could use the same reasonable suspicion to enter like you would a persons car ? As opposed to they were already in. That was NOT a lawful detention, PLUS no warrant

Regardless glad they followed constitution. It was the "Community Caretaking Exception" to 4th folks were taking issue with TBH. We dont need mob decisions, but lawful, constitutional ones. (tough nowadays with folks screaming on social media)

(Not sure if you read whole article)

Thx for response Sedan_Clan

This - 100%. Can't tell you how many arguments I get into with people who want ALL the evidence put on the news 10 minutes after it happens. That's not how it works Karen. There is no burden of proof to supply it to the mob upon demand. Cases are formed and presented in a court, as they should be.

So STFU and wait till the trial is over before you convict the person.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by S1nner

Not sure if it has been asked before, but let's say someone brake checked on me and say I rear ended him. Everything on dash cam. To my knowledge it would be my fault, since I have to keep a distance. Is that true? Thanks.

Yes you would be at fault for following too closely.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by 4Hockey4

So under the this case, if he was on his property and retreated into his house, you could use the same reasonable suspicion to enter like you would a persons car ? As opposed to they were already in. That was NOT a lawful detention, PLUS no warrant

Regardless glad they followed constitution. It was the "Community Caretaking Exception" to 4th folks were taking issue with TBH. We dont need mob decisions, but lawful, constitutional ones. (tough nowadays with folks screaming on social media)

(Not sure if you read whole article)

Thx for response Sedan_Clan

Any time! There are terms used such as "hot/fresh pursuit" that cover entering property, for example.

[Joekerr]

I find this annoying:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...0his%20bedroom.

So basically, the cops *seem* to have had this guy dead to rights. I was originally quite happy when they initially confiscated everything and was happy enough that yet another individual who didn't think rules applied to him would be behind bars.

But now, the above story breaks, and what - charges are dropped because the cops planted a holster and stole two watches?

Now yes, neither of those things should have been done, and I'd fully support firing whichever cops did that, AND I do think there should be an investigation, and perhaps a raid on every cop that participated in that operation houses to see if they find the watches, and fire any cop that took them.

Similarly, penalize the cop that planted the holster if you can find evidence.

But regardless of the above, why isn't it that the justice system can just throw out the holster bit, and look at the case on its merits for the rest of the charges? Why is he free of all charges? This is a reasonably good example of why I have little faith in the justice system to dispense justice, for years now, I've been referring to it instead as "just a system"...sort of sounds like I'm saying justice when you roll the words together, but I'm really calling it more as I see it.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

I find this annoying:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...ional%20Police)-,Months%20after%20police%20unveiled%20a%20massive% 20bust%20at%20an%20alleged,of%20dollars%20from%20h is%20bedroom.

So basically, the cops *seem* to have had this guy dead to rights. I was originally quite happy when they initially confiscated everything and was happy enough that yet another individual who didn't think rules applied to him would be behind bars.

But now, the above story breaks, and what - charges are dropped because the cops planted a holster and stole two watches?

Now yes, neither of those things should have been done, and I'd fully support firing whichever cops did that, AND I do think there should be an investigation, and perhaps a raid on every cop that participated in that operation houses to see if they find the watches, and fire any cop that took them.

Similarly, penalize the cop that planted the holster if you can find evidence.

But regardless of the above, why isn't it that the justice system can just throw out the holster bit, and look at the case on its merits for the rest of the charges? Why is he free of all charges? This is a reasonably good example of why I have little faith in the justice system to dispense justice, for years now, I've been referring to it instead as "just a system"...sort of sounds like I'm saying justice when you roll the words together, but I'm really calling it more as I see it.

I can understand your frustration. Trust me I do. Those cops knew better though. The objective is to not give the defense anything to work with. Those cops gave them plenty.

[paquet]

I saw this in the news this morning too - annoyed me too.
a perfectly good case shot to hell

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

This is the perfect Sedan_Clan and Lady Jane photo op. When are you coming to Cali?!?

Probably never especially after all that talk about fresh and hot pursuit.

Attachment 2607188

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Probably never especially after all that talk about fresh and hot pursuit.

Attachment 2607188

Lol! Oooooooo sooooo many ways I could respond to that.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Lol! Oooooooo sooooo many ways I could respond to that.

But...But... Isn't this the "Ask a cop anything" thread?