On 4/22/21 2:29 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:07:45 -0400, John wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 18:52:54 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 4/21/21 6:31 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/21/2021 11:09 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/21/21 9:37 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/20/2021 7:27 PM, John wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 07:20:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/20/2021 6:51 AM, John wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 06:30:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


Been thinking about the race related violence and deaths that
seem to be
constantly in the news.Â* The media is fixated on the issue of racial
profiling of minorities, especially black folks who are often being
singled out for stopping by police for minor traffic infractions
that
escalate into arrests, resisting and too often violence that
result in
deaths.

My thought:


When a officer stops a vehicle for a minor traffic infraction,
he or she runs a "check" via radio on the driver's (and sometimes
passenger's) license or ID.Â* That check automatically includes a
search for any outstanding warrants for that person.Â* If a warrant
exists, the person is often cuffed and arrested .... not for the
minor traffic infraction that they were stopped for ... but for
the outstanding bench warrant.

This often turns into resisting arrest with violent results.

This is standard operating procedure for law enforcement.
Not blaming them ... it's just "how it's done".

Maybe that needs to change.

What if outstanding warrants were not automatically included in
the "check" at the time of the vehicle being stopped?

The stop should be only related to the crime or infraction that
caused
the police to stop the person, be it for speeding, a broken
tail light or whatever.Â* It should not be an excuse to check for
anything else, based on the officer's suspicions.

If a person has an outstanding warrant, the search for him or her
is a different issue altogether and other means of apprehending
the person should be used, specifically with the warrant being
the issue.

If the warrant is for a violent crime, it's knowledge might be
very useful.

I understand but if there is a warrant issued for a violent crime it
should be under investigation and pursuit by other means.

It very well could be.

Some kind of compromise is needed to stop the "profiling" concerns.

It's also consistent with law that a stop for one infraction isn't
cause for arrest for another. A database search is convenient but
not necessarily legal, especially if the initial infraction is a
busted taillight.

Do they issue warrants for such offenses? I can see nothing illegal
in searching
the law enforcement's data base for warrants.
--

Freedom Isn't Free!



You are all arguing the policies police can use as they exist now.

That was not the point of my "proposal".

I was trying to address the issue of people getting shot because
they are stopped for a minor infraction and then try to bolt
because the police then attempt to arrest for an outstanding
warrant.

If the stop was *because* of the outstanding warrant ... fine,
arrest the person.

If the stop was for a broken taillight, expired tags or
inspection sticker ... that's the offense they should be
guilty of and receive a ticket.

I know this doesn't make sense to most. It's not common
sense.Â* But the ability of the police to arrest
you for something else in your record that had nothing
to do with the reason for stopping the person in the
first place, will result in these
shootings and killings to continue.

Attempted robbery is not a death sentence felony.
Drug dealing is not a death sentence felony.
Failure to pay child support is not a death
penalty crime.

If someone is guilty of the above, they should be
located and arrested on the merit of the outstanding
warrant, not for a traffic violation that it seems
too often escalates into a shooting.

I am not "anti-police" nor am I turning into a
screwed-up screaming liberal like some.Â* Just
trying to think of ways to keep people alive.




Part of the answer may be found in "policing" the recruiting, hiring,
and training practices of police departments, and ensuring that they
operate in a civilized way that treats everyone encountered decently,
and that maximum force is used only when the physical danger to the
public or the police is obvious and imminent.

George Floyd was handcuffed and on the ground with four cops
surrounding him. He should have remained there until he was able to be
moved safely. Period.



The jury's verdict was completely justified.

My "proposal" obviously makes little sense if one stays in the
thinking that they have been accustom to.Â* I was simply trying
to think outside the box a little to address racial profiling
that I am 100 percent convinced occurs on a regular basis.

Did you hear or read about the Maryland state cop that shot and
killed a teenage white female a couple of weeks ago?

Very little to no media coverage about it.Â* Why?

No, but I did read of a state trooper here who shot a kit who pointed an
"airsoft" pistol at him.

If one of these were pointed at me, I'd shoot also.

https://eu.novritsch.com/product/nov...irsoft-pistol/

I found myself looking at airsoft guns the other day and if you are
willing to spend over $100 for a CO2 version, they get damned
realistic, right down to the operating controls. People use them to
drill for their real firearm.
OTOH I ended up with a couple of cheap plastic ones in an auction lot
and they look pretty real too if you don't get close.


If you point a gun at a cop, even a toy gun that looks realistic, you
deserve what you get. I've only seen a couple of "Airsoft" pistols, and
they look like the real deal. If your wallet, comb, cellphone, et
cetera, in your hand, however, you do not deserve to be shot by a cop.
Part of the job of a cop is to be damned sure of what you are doing in
regard to using deadly force. It is part of the risk of the job.

--
* Lock up Trump and his family of grifters. *