Run in with one of Rock Hill PDs Narcotics Teams.

This is a discussion on Run in with one of Rock Hill PDs Narcotics Teams. within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Given the multiple other factors in addition to simply sitting in a car, yes....

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 116
Like Tree85Likes

Thread: Run in with one of Rock Hill PDs Narcotics Teams.

  1. #46
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,631
    Given the multiple other factors in addition to simply sitting in a car, yes.
    tacman605 likes this.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Guns and more View Post
    So sitting in your car is reasonable suspicion?

    Oh, I see this has been hashed already. I guess anything is "reasonable suspicion."

    I don't know if I'd give permission that easily.


    So tomorrow a cop comes to your front door and asks to look around inside. You have nothing to hide. and you want it to "end well."
    Do you let him in?

    I know you are thinking, "That would never happen here." Are you sure?
    You mean like this?
    Police set to search for guns at homes - The Boston Globe
    As Boston police prepare to go into some of the city's most dangerous neighborhoods, knock on doors of private houses, and ask if they can search for illegal guns without a warrant, officials are trying to pitch the idea of the plan as friendly cooperation to residents who still see it as a threatening intrusion.
    Michael

  4. #48
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    6,942
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Never EVER give permission to a cop to search your vehicle...NEVER.

    Do not do it. If they need to, make them get a warrant. Of course, if you give permission, they dont need anything.

    Never give permission to a cop. Ever.

    Did I make myself clear?


    If you dont know your rights, you basically have none.
    Here is your million dollar answer.....
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

  5. #49
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,631
    Homes and cars are two very different things. Before you go down that road spouting off about these things, you might want to research the numerous case law pertaining to the issue.

    Knowledge is power... but you must have actual knowledge, otherwise, you are asking for a whole lot of trouble.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  6. #50
    Ex Member Array apvbguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    NE FL
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    Homes and cars are two very different things. Before you go down that road spouting off about these things, you might want to research the numerous case law pertaining to the issue.
    no they are not, in FLA there is case law that says they are one and the same for purposes of the castle doctrine, one would expect the same would be true regarding searches

  7. #51
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by apvbguy View Post
    no they are not, in FLA there is case law that says they are one and the same for purposes of the castle doctrine, one would expect the same would be true regarding searches
    The law was written that way to allow you to protect yourself from attack. You would be wrong to presume it applies to anything else.

    Michael
    MikeNice likes this.

  8. #52
    Member Array ChrisMia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by apvbguy View Post
    no they are not, in FLA there is case law that says they are one and the same for purposes of the castle doctrine, one would expect the same would be true regarding searches
    And you would be dead wrong. Put plainly, you do not have the same level of expectation of privacy in a vehicle as you do in your home.

    I have neither the time nor the desire to pull caselaw or write a treatise here, so we'll let the talismanic Wikipedia do for now:

    Motor vehicle exception - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And to those saying that the OP's car couldn't have been searched, remember that all that is required is RAS. Parked in an isolated area off the side of the road, in a vicinity recognized by LE to be an area where drug transactions occur, coupled with the fact that the person was armed (irrespective of whether he has a permit, etc.), would rise to the level of RAS to at least ask to search the vehicle in the standardized mind of a reasonable person.

  9. #53
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,631
    Quote Originally Posted by apvbguy View Post
    no they are not, in FLA there is case law that says they are one and the same for purposes of the castle doctrine, one would expect the same would be true regarding searches
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMia View Post
    And you would be dead wrong. Put plainly, you do not have the same level of expectation of privacy in a vehicle as you do in your home.

    I have neither the time nor the desire to pull caselaw or write a treatise here, so we'll let the talismanic Wikipedia do for now:

    Motor vehicle exception - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And to those saying that the OP's car couldn't have been searched, remember that all that is required is RAS. Parked in an isolated area off the side of the road, in a vicinity recognized by LE to be an area where drug transactions occur, coupled with the fact that the person was armed (irrespective of whether he has a permit, etc.), would rise to the level of RAS to at least ask to search the vehicle in the standardized mind of a reasonable person.
    Not much else for me to add.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  10. #54
    Member Array ldmtulsa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tulsa, Ok,
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by kb2wji View Post
    OP...thank you. The police were proactively patrolling a known drug area. They approached you with caution and respect, and you returned suit. The police were doing their jobs. The police actually meet good guys while on the hunt for bad guys. You did not have to consent to a search, but you did. You saved yourself a lot of time by not having to wait for a K9, and you made the officers job a lot easier. This got you out of there much quicker and I definitely appreciate the mutual respect. Apparently, there are a few people on this forum who think a fair inquiry to search a vehicle is a gross violation of your rights. Thank you. For handling a simple LEO encounter with a clear head and good judgement. Apparently, for others, this simple encounter would tie undies into a bundle pretty quickly. Again, thanks!
    +1
    the LEO's were respectful as were you. You saved both parties time and they went back to looking for the bg's. Every encounter with LEO's does not have to be negative. The great majority of them are good guys and gals trying to do their jobs. Probably 99% of their daily contacts are with not very nice people and you were the exception that day.
    From a Marine sniper -- "You can run but you will just die tired"
    Semper Fi

  11. #55
    Distinguished Member Array RevolvingMag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Rock Hill, SC- Across Town From Where All the Homicides Happen
    Posts
    1,266
    One of the reasons I so easily went along with the search was the fact of where I was. If I had been in a different place, I would likely have told them that I have to get back to work, and been a little firm about not having time to go through it.

    I'm not LEO, nor have I ever been. But, I would have found it a bit odd were I in their position.
    "Rock and load, lock and roll... what's it matter? FIRE!!"

    "Gun control means hitting your target every time."

    Please take everything I say with at least one grain of salt- I am a very sarcastic person with a very dry sense of humor.

  12. #56
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,546
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Sixto and other LEOs.

    You are correct, no rights were violated.

    I would not have consented to the search. I too, have nothing to hide.

    Drug deals happen on the public streets every day. A person has to park their car, or at least stop it near a curb, in order to conduct a transaction.

    But, using the notion that parking a car anywhere, or stopping near the curb anywhere constitutes "Reasonable, Articulable, Suspicion" (RAS for the acronym impaired) is quite a stretch, IMO.

    Fine, you want to roll up on every parked car on the street? Okay, so it has to have someone in it... or not, maybe they just went inside to make a drug deal.

    I would inform, as the OP did.
    I guess if LEO is opening my door, and physically leading me out of it... I'd hope I had the keys in hand already, and lock it as I got out.
    I would not consent to a search of myself or the vehicle.

    Saying: "The other officer is running my gun, my permit and my license, she has found or will find that I am not a criminal, and in fact that I have complied with all laws regarding the possession and carriage of my weapon (to include informing her immediately of my possession of it), and that I have no outstanding warrants against me."

    "I feel that your only Reasonable, Articulable, Suspicion is that we are all in the wrong place at the wrong time, and I doubt that a warrant would issue on that basis. I need to get back to work from my lunch break. Am I free to go now?"


    Failing that, I would use "the Force" and say "I am not the guy you are looking for, I can go about my business, move along."

    One of those ought to work...

    I understand that the OP was not mistreated in anyway... that he was treated with apparent respect. I feel that responding in kind while refusing to grant permission to search, should be afforded the same continued respectful treatment, and release, or a warrant.
    Of course it isn't in the real world. And that is the problem.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  13. #57
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,108
    While IANAL, everything I've read as regards vehicle search, while not allowing for a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle, searching a car requires probable cause. If, before the search is undertaken, it is determined that I have a valid permit to carry weapons, finding more of the same in my vehicle is no crime... So, at that point, there is no officer safety (under Terry) to be concerned with.

    Probable cause is defined in the constitution.

    IMO only... Both Reasonable, Articulable, Suspicion and Probable Cause begin to evaporate as the LEO checks out the bonafides of the permit holder. Once those bonafides are established, the "standardized mind of a reasonable person" might begin to have some doubt as to the wisdom of such a search...

    I find it hard to stomach that I should submit to search of my vehicle, my home or my person (in the latter case: in a manner not consistent with the "Terry law") in order to save time and or headaches for myself or for the LEOs involved.

    There is probable cause to believe that every single person on this board, and in fact, in this country, has violated or is currently violating some statute, regulation, federal mandate, tax code, etc. There are many more arcane laws and regulations (at all levels, local, county, state, and federal) than any one person or group of persons can hope to read and understand. If that is the case, and I believe it to be, any stop by LEO at any time would require us to submit to search, because we are committing, or have commited some "crime."

    The mentality of allowing the police or any other agency such lattitude in order to "expidite" encounters with them, is akin to making it correct to say, "If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear." Until you are the one erroneously caught up in some "national security" snare.

    It's just plain WRONG.
    MikeNice likes this.
    All that said....
    It could be worse.
    __________________________________________________
    "The History of our Revolution will be one continued Lye from one end to the other."
    John Adams

  14. #58
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,546
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMia View Post
    And you would be dead wrong. Put plainly, you do not have the same level of expectation of privacy in a vehicle as you do in your home.

    I have neither the time nor the desire to pull caselaw or write a treatise here, so we'll let the talismanic Wikipedia do for now:

    Motor vehicle exception - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And to those saying that the OP's car couldn't have been searched, remember that all that is required is RAS. Parked in an isolated area off the side of the road, in a vicinity recognized by LE to be an area where drug transactions occur, coupled with the fact that the person was armed (irrespective of whether he has a permit, etc.), would rise to the level of RAS to at least ask to search the vehicle in the standardized mind of a reasonable person.
    Really? So next time I stay at a motel they have reasonable suspicion because narcos and druggies and prostitutes have done business at that establishment? No. There is nothing reasonable about the suspicion in this situation. And the fact that the fellow was legally armed is utterly irrelevant either way. It has no bearing on what his purpose for being at that location was. Legally armed persons buy drugs and legally armed persons eat their lunch in out of the way places.

    If mere presence somewhere is a reasonably artiuclatable suspicion we are ALL in serious doo doo.
    ksholder likes this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  15. #59
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,320
    It's a free country. If one feels fine consenting to a search, then knock yourself out. If one does not, then reply accordingly. It is a matter of personal preference and choice. I don't really care what anyone else would do as their choice doesn't impact me, but I know what I would do for my own reasons.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  16. #60
    Senior Member Array rolyat63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Tampa Bay
    Posts
    887
    Don't talk to cops part one

    Don't talk to cops part 2

    Reinforcing Hotguns is a Law School Prof (part 1) and a former police officer now in law school (part 2)
    MikeNice likes this.
    rolyat63
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor

    A gun in the hand is a million times more valuable than a cop on the phone!

    FL Concealed Weapon or Firearm Program

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

alcohol enforcement team rock hill

,
concealed carry in park rock hill sc
,
eaa windicator
,
hiding firearm in 2004 tahoe
,
is there any way to speed up processing time for sccwp
,
legal forum california person of intrest
,
probable cause car search wait for k9
,
tahoe secret compartment
,

wait time for sc cwp

,
what are my rights if a narcotics team wants to search me
,
why were the police so visible in rock hill sc today
Click on a term to search for related topics.