Do the police have rights too?

posted at 12:31 pm on September 23, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

At first glance it looks like something out of an Orwellian horror film. Police with high power weapons and riot shields shutting down an intersection on a busy city street, rousting families out of cars, handcuffing them all and lining them up on the pavement. But in this case, there was a method to the mayhem. An unknown individual wearing a beekeeper’s mask – hiding not only their identity, race, age, etc. but their gender as well – had robbed a nearby bank and the police were out to get the bad guy.

The Wells Fargo at Chambers and Hampden was robbed just before closing time on Saturday. Shortly afterwards police shut down the intersection of Buckley and Iliff just southeast of the bank, corralling nearly two dozen cars in search for the suspect.

Police Chief Daniel Oates on Monday apologized to the innocent bystanders that got caught up in the search for the suspect. Oates also said the ends justify the means since the suspect was caught.

The police are still apologizing for the inconvenience and trauma to all of the motorists caught up in the sweep, but insist that there was no question of the location of the suspect.

“We had a virtual certainty that the bank robber was in one of those cars,” Oates said.

Officers did find the suspect in one of the cars, and he will likely face bank robbery charges in federal court, Oates said. Investigators also found a beekeeper mask they say the man wore during the robbery as well as two pistols connected to the crime, he said.

So how did they have a “virtual certainty” that the bank robber would be found at that location? The bank teller had inserted a GPS device in the bag of money they gave the suspect and the police were tracking him. When it became obvious that the getaway car was approaching a choke point in the traffic, officials moved in, shut it down and began methodically going through every car at that intersection. And they found the guy, who the police described as “extraordinarily dangerous.”

But now some of the motorists are raising questions as to whether their civil rights were violated with the mass detention. And adding insult to injury, the lawyer for the suspect is already claiming that his client initially refused the police demand to search his vehicle until he felt “pressured” to do so and that all the evidence obtained from the search – money, guns, beekeeper mask – should be thrown out. (No link on that portion of the story yet, but CNN is covering it on their morning lineup.) Seriously?

I hope there is a judge out there with the common sense to toss this notion out to the curb. Yes, many people were inconvenienced, and the police have already offered an apology. But the cops were in the process of quickly apprehending a violent, heavily armed felon right in their midst. And as to the suspect’s claims of some sort of illegal search… how high does that bar have to be? If you can narrow down the location of the evidence to a group of twenty or so cars, is that not “probably cause” enough?

If this guy walks, the world has truly gone mad.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 8

JannyMae on September 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I just thought of something… What if they were rounding up illegal Aliens instead of a bank robber?

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

OH no no no no no… Now you are comparing apples to green cards… That simply will not do…

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

OH no no no no no… Now you are comparing apples to green cards… That simply will not do…

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

But I bet you that we would be hearing a totally different argument from many of these currently pro police people.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

OH no no no no no… Now you are comparing apples to green cards… That simply will not do…

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

But I bet you that we would be hearing a totally different argument from many of these currently pro police people.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

ROTFLMAO… Oh absolutely, got to have your priorities ya know…

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

The people were inconvenienced because they were “in the wrong place at the wrong time.” Sometimes that happens. This does NOT seem to be a case of the police not giving a damn about the rights of the innocents. Anyone who believes that probably has serious problems with authority…..

JannyMae on September 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM

From the story:

About 19 vehicles were stopped Saturday afternoon for about two hours.

Oates would not discuss the tracking technology used, but called it a “virtual certainty” that the suspect was among the 40 people stopped and handcuffed.

Now, I don’t know about you, but if I was one of those innocent people stopped and handcuffed for two hours, I would pretty well consider that the police not giving a damn about my rights.

This is wrong on so many levels.

Further from that story:

“The law is clear that investigative detentions are lawful for a reasonable period of time,” Oates said. “Reasonableness is determined by the facts and circumstances at issue, and the facts and circumstances were the suspect was in one of 19 cars.”

OK, in this circumstance, it was known that the suspect was in one of 19 cars. What’s the limit here? If it had been 25 cars, would that have been unreasonable? 100? How about a whole city area? Cordon off all roads into and out of the city and institute a vehicle by vehicle search?

This is chilling. Even more chilling that so many people are OK with this.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Maybe the Fukushima reactor suffered for having a poorly created containment shell, and this flaw made a bad tsunami disaster worse.

But generally nothing happens in a vacuum. Is it just a cost-saving measure to buy back reconditioned humvees from the army?

Is it just a coincidence that the administration decides to shock the ammo industry and drive up prices by buying up vast reserves of ammo?

Is it just a coincidence that at the same time Obama states that he will govern by executive order when Congress refuses to act? And will waive law enforcement when he disagrees with it?

Is it just a coincidence that the MSM is so vigorously promoting a cult of personality on behalf of the chief executive?

Is it just coincidence that Obama shuts down coal production and reduces oil permitting while the Middle East burns?

Is it just coincidence that the DOJ releases voter intimidators and looks the other way at sending guns to drug lords in Mexico? All the while Obama refuses to secure the southern border and harrasses whistle-blowers?

Is it just coincidence that Obama increases national debt by fifty percent while not presenting an acceptable budget to the Senate? While Europe simmers in debt and bancruptcy and while we, the US, gets downgraded? Twice?!

Yeah, I guess it’s all just a striking string of bad luck, of unfortunate mistakes. Meanwhile, police are comfortable SWATting homes and handcuffing families instead of just following the bankrobber to his home. And we say good job.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Right? How do you like my tin-foil kabuto?

DarkCurrent on September 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Those don’t work. LOL And besides, the PTB aren’t interested in what you’re thinking. They’re interested in getting you to think a certain way. It can take decades but eventually most come around.

Next thing you know, terrorists from the ’60s will be in good with the highest levels of government in Washington, and we’ll have international financiers/entrepreneurs supporting Leftist U.S. candidates . I know…crazy talk.

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Maybe. But when one looks at certain things and all that lead up to those events, then it still takes you back to collusion. The amount of scripting as to the outcome is questionable.

It’s like when there’s going to be a raid on a gambling joint, and half an hour before the police arrive, all the card tables, roulette wheels and punch cards disappear. Wasn’t by chance. One of the police who was bribed tipped them off.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Interesting, and I wouldn’t doubt that quote.

But the fact is that a lot of that steel that tore open our boys in the Pacific came from America. There’s profit to be made from selling to nations building up their military, then more to support the militaries against them, and even some more for the rebuilding. And then you start all over again.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

We need a civilian force as powerful as the military.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

We do. It’s called the Deptartment of “Homeland Security”.

That’s what scares me.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM

We do. It’s called the Deptartment of “Homeland Security”.

That’s what scares me.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM

its a quote by Obama.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM

They’re printing so much money these days why even both chasing bank robbers anymore? Why not just fork it over and print a tiny bit extra? Now that they grow money on trees old fashioned bank robbers are nothing more than scape goats, the real bank robbers, the ones that matter, are the fed itself and their crooked government.

FloatingRock on September 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

both = bother

FloatingRock on September 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

If suspending the Constitution is really what this is all about — and I fear it is — I am hoping that the US military will defend the Constitution. I suspect that the new DHS will have no such internal historical compulsion.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:45 PM

I mean, the military has the UCMJ, and the DHS is being unionized, right?

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

I mean, the military has the UCMJ, and the DHS is being unionized, right?

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Yes, but much of the support the military gets comes from unionized industries.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Do the police have rights too?

As citizens, yes. But they can no more do this than ordinary citizens can handcuff a bunch of police at random looking for one rogue cop. What the police did in this case was inexcuseable. You simply don’t get the public at large to cooperate with you as a cop when they fear you and want to have nothing to do with you over bullying like this. And that is what policing should be: assisting the law-abiding citizenry, not handcuffing and detaining them.

Rights are inalienable. Police can’t use official power to take away rights without due process, which in itself is a right. No matter how good the idea seemed at the time.

shuzilla on September 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM

It’s still off-putting and depressing to think that the DHS may be more loyal to their union.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

No matter how good the idea seemed at the time.

shuzilla on September 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

I don’t even think it was a good idea.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:59 PM

It’s still off-putting and depressing to think that the DHS may be more loyal to their union.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Well, if there will be trouble, let it happen in my day, so that our children may have peace.

Problem is, due to social security, medicare, fewer and fewer people have children, and are happy to put off til future generations what should be done today, on their watch.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I’ll be surprised if the guy doesn’t walk.

GarandFan on September 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Stoic Patriot is an ass. These people were handcuffed, that is not inconvenient, it is illegal detainment and traumatic. What if someone had a heart attack over this? You are not a patriot, you are a demon and a communist.

SuperBunny on September 23, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Then they’d be as culpable as me if someone whose mother had just died had a nervous breakdown after I mentioned mother’s day: not at all.

I’m no commie, but I do like the idea of being a demon! Do I get special powers?

Stoic Patriot on September 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

And wasn’t it swalker who said that once a government officer is fairly secure in his position in the hierarchy he doesn’t really care what happens to eveyone else?

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

It was bad “optics”. Most people agree that detaining them till the robber was arrested was acceptable, but we cringe at the methods. However, what is the difference? Detained in the car or detained in cuffs lined up like you’re in The People’s Republic of China waiting to be summarily executed is still detained. Is it not?

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Officers did find the suspect in one of the cars, and he will likely face bank robbery charges in federal court

Unless his name is Bernanke you’re wasting your time. He’s a counterfeiter rather than a bank robber but he counterfeits so much money that bank robbery doesn’t matter anymore. Who cares if people rob banks when in the modern world the banks themselves are the robbers? If our government keeps on the path it’s on it won’t be long before bank robbers are going to turn into folk heroes.

FloatingRock on September 23, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Robin Hood? Or Bonnie and Clyde.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 7:18 PM

It was bad “optics”. Most people agree that detaining them till the robber was arrested was acceptable, but we cringe at the methods. However, what is the difference? Detained in the car or detained in cuffs lined up like you’re in The People’s Republic of China waiting to be summarily executed is still detained. Is it not?

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No, actually getting a shotgun in your face and handcuffed on the sidewalk for more than two hours is very different than being in a police enforced traffic jam.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 7:23 PM

And wasn’t it swalker who said that once a government officer is fairly secure in his position in the hierarchy he doesn’t really care what happens to eveyone else?

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

I did not read all of his comments. But i think i saw someone up thread somewhere arguing that cops are really in it for the unionized pensions and they really just go through the motions that keep themselves safe until they can retire and collect them. Safety is pretty much only an issue of keeping cops safe and not a matter of protecting the public from harm. Is why a cell phone ownership is an offense worthy of death for a citizen.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:24 PM

In what universe is Jazz Shaw a conservative?

wv619 on September 23, 2012 at 7:25 PM

This is not even a close call.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

How many people can they detain (in handcuffs) because police believe one of them has committed a crime?. For how long? On the upper end that’s 310 million people. On the low end it’s two. No reasonable person would say that police can randomly detain two people because there is a 50/50 chance that one of them committed a crime. And the upper limit is ludicrous.

In this particular case there was not a 100% chance that the suspect was in the intersection. All they had was a GPS signal. The bank robber could have thrown the unit threw the window of another car.

In every state police need a warrant to search your car or real probable cause.

This case will get bounced because the guy originally said no and was coerced. The City will face many lawsuits and settle all of them.

For those of you who side with the police, here are the questions. How many persons can they detain and for how long?

There is no “reasonable man” answer to this. SCOTUS cannot write an opinion that allows this and gives clear direction.

As I said, not even a close call.

InterestedObserver on September 23, 2012 at 7:27 PM

In what universe is Jazz Shaw a conservative?

wv619 on September 23, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Same one that Mitt Romney can win the supposedly conservative party primary?

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:27 PM

No, actually getting a shotgun in your face and handcuffed on the sidewalk for more than two hours is very different than being in a police enforced traffic jam.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 7:23 PM

On a personal level I agree that there is a difference, but is there a difference to the law? I’m not sure there is. This offends us because it comes way to close to the real thing carried out by the people who would carry out the real thing. It’s an echo of tyranny.

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:31 PM

InterestedObserver on September 23, 2012 at 7:27 PM

If five people fit the description of a robber, the police can detain all five, and put them in a line up, maybe with some decoys as well… So the two person argument you make is falsified by the basic and general police operating procedure.

But you are right in that this particular instance is outside of the constitution and if i were a judge, I would very likely throw out the evidence the police gained.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:31 PM

It’s an echo of tyranny.

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Echo my a$$… This isn’t even the first step’s towards tyranny, this IS tyranny, it’s just soft velvet gloved tyranny.

SWalker on September 23, 2012 at 7:40 PM

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:31 PM

There’s a big difference between being in your car and being handcuffed and forced to sit on the sidewalk when it comes to police confronting an extraordinarily dangerous armed fleeing felon a few feet away.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 7:44 PM

If I was the vehicle in the front and I simply repeated, I do not consent, how long could they keep me there? If i did not voluntarily leave my vehicle, except through police force, what could they hold me for? If they then searched my car and found something that indicated perhaps a law was broken, can they use that evidence to charge me with a crime? If they can do all of these things for a bank robber who does not pose an immediate threat to anything, other than possibly getting away, how far down can we qualify an action like this? We know someone jaywalked?

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Someone has to enforce the law, or there won’t be any.

Some of us are OK with laws against murder, rape and robbery.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Not really. Private law can take the place of state law. For instance you give examples of murder, rape, and robbery. These are all crimes prosecuted by the state, yet the state isn’t a victim of these crimes; as a monopolizer of force, it has inserted itself into a matter between individuals and gets to decide punishment, even though it wasn’t wronged. That’s pretty f’ed up if you think about it.

Dante on September 23, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Not really. Private law can take the place of state law. For instance you give examples of murder, rape, and robbery. These are all crimes prosecuted by the state, yet the state isn’t a victim of these crimes; as a monopolizer of force, it has inserted itself into a matter between individuals and gets to decide punishment, even though it wasn’t wronged. That’s pretty f’ed up if you think about it.

Dante on September 23, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Because in private law calling my wife a wh0re would get you killed.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Someone has to enforce the law, or there won’t be any.

Some of us are OK with laws against murder, rape and robbery.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Not really. Private law can take the place of state law. For instance you give examples of murder, rape, and robbery.

Who enforces that law and how?

These are all crimes prosecuted by the state, yet the state isn’t a victim of these crimes; as a monopolizer of force, it has inserted itself into a matter between individuals and gets to decide punishment, even though it wasn’t wronged. That’s pretty f’ed up if you think about it.

Dante on September 23, 2012 at 7:47 PM

What’s messed up is how its done in Somalia with the tribes and militias. The guy with the strongest force gets to do anything he wants and the weak are preyed upon.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 7:51 PM

The motorists who are complaining are in the wrong, and need to recognize that being part of a civilized society means sometimes serving the public good includes being inconvenienced in one’s own life.

—————————————————————–
Please point out the section of the U.S. Constitution that covers my individual rights being superceded to serve the public good.

Machismo on September 23, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Private Law? The phrase “and everyone did what was right in their own eyes” doesn’t mean they were doing what’s right. This could just as well apply to the mafia. This si why rule of law is so important in the US. And why chipping away at it, and under Obama its abrogation, is so dangerous.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 7:54 PM

is this really HotAir or an alternate universe? If this is O.K. to you, Jazz, Obama would seem to be the man for you. This sounds, eerily, like one of the methods his civilian security force would use so I guess they’re already in operation.

theaddora on September 23, 2012 at 7:55 PM

No, actually getting a shotgun in your face and handcuffed on the sidewalk for more than two hours is very different than being in a police enforced traffic jam.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 7:23 PM

I would argue that both of those conditions are equally bad. Let me give you a fer instance. You have just eaten at a restaurant, had a nice meal and a couple or three glasses of iced tea and are now headed home when you run into this gestapo traffic detainment. Now, a couple minute delay may be no problem; 2 hours and three glasses of tea with your arms cuffed behind you is going to be a big problem. That goes beyond reasonable detainment. Heck, if you were a felon, not being allowed access to sanitary facilities for longer than two hours would probably be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

No, this was not reasonable, and is really telling of the kind of city that Aurora, CO is. It has illegally preempted Colorado state law regarding concealed carry and is now implementing police stops in which innocent civilians (40 of them in this case) are handcuffed and set on the sidewalk while the police “sort out a situation”. Nice police state you got there Aurora.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I would argue that both of those conditions are equally bad.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I am not arguing in favor of waiting for two hours in your car, but its clearly preferable to being handcuffed on the sidewalk.

One reason for taking two hours to search 19 cars is BECAUSE they were handcuffing everyone.

sharrukin on September 23, 2012 at 8:16 PM

I’m sorry but I have a problem with “mass detention” when it comes to nabbing a bank robber. Were this the way to get a dirty bomb about to cause harm in an urban center I’d say do it. Were this the way to get an individual who had just gunned down multiple co-workers I’d say do it.

But to apply this kind a approach to a robbery that would have only netted a few thousand dollars, puts the police in the position of deeming everybody in a given area guilty until proven innocent by lack of a GPS tracking device. It defies common sense and IMO is police overreach. I disagree with the idea that it is a human rights violation but it is oppressive behavior.

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 8:17 PM

I hope there is a judge out there with the common sense to toss this notion out to the curb. Yes, many people were inconvenienced,

I’m sure others were horrified by the word “inconvenienced” so let me just add to the chorus.

This is a horrendous abuse of power. I know cops love to be bullies, but this is waaaaaaaay over the line.

I hope the cops who decided to do this are canned.

In what universe is Jazz Shaw a conservative?

wv619 on September 23, 2012 at 7:25 PM

For too long too many conservatives have given unconditional support to the police (and arm of the state). I have never had a confrontation with the police, so I write this as objectively as possible…

Over the last 35 years, I’ve had my homes broken into, stuff stolen from my car, I’ve been assaulted, my child received sexual text messages from an adult… and in every case I was told “there’s really not much we can do… but we don’t think it’s wise for you to have a gun in your house.”

I’ve been pulled twice by cops for suspicion of DUI… and I don’t drink. I was treated without respect, accused and given a warning (for what?) each time.

Police are a necessary and expensive evil at best. They take more pictures and file paperwork at crime scenes than anything else. The detectives who investigate crimes are far more worthy of respect than the bully with the badge who will “cop talk” you with threats for daring to question him.

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:30 PM

It was bad “optics”. Most people agree that detaining them till the robber was arrested was acceptable, but we cringe at the methods.

DFCtomm on September 23, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No, it was bad police work. They had a general idea where the robber was located. Could it be that the robber wasn’t in a car at this point? Two hours detention of more than a few innocents for a bank robbery is excessive, intrusive, and lazy police work.

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 8:31 PM

“Hey, were just trying to single out the ones who might be a problem.”

-FDR to Japanese-Americans

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM

I do not think I could stand by and watch as my children are hand cuffed.

Those of you that are OK with this……..do any of you EVER remember ANYTHING remotely close to this happening when YOU were growing up???

I’m 50 years old and I have NEVER seen anything like this in America.

Talon on September 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM

The police were thinking on their feet. They had a means to end a manhunt quickly. They arrested everyone, searched all their cars, and found the criminal.

Come on, all. Do you want a police state or not. You go to Singapore and everyone on the street and at the hawkers say it’s a police state. Half the people shrug their shoulders and say “it’s safe“. The other half just shrug their shoulders and say nothing.

In Singapore everything — everything – is video recorded. It’s against the law to neglect to flush the urinal after you use it. You get ticketed for jaywalking. You can leave your iphone on an outdoor cafe table for hours, and if it’s taken, or the SIM card is removed, the police will play back the tape and identify who took it. And you get your item back in a few hours. It’s safe. It’s secure. A woman can walk just about anywhere at night.

Forty percent of the police force is plainclothed. Is a police state what you really want? Do you want safety? Or privacy. It’s your choice.

For now at least.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Do the police have rights too?

I didn’t realize handcuffing people without cause is a right.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Ben Franklin

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Since bank robbery is a federal crime, and Obama has said that State and local cops can’t or shouldn’t apprehend illegals because they have no authority under the Constitution, I would have more respect for the police if they simply told the Feds, to chase the bank robbers themselves.

booger71 on September 23, 2012 at 8:41 PM

I’ve been pulled twice by cops for suspicion of DUI… and I don’t drink. I was treated without respect, accused and given a warning (for what?) each time.

Police are a necessary and expensive evil at best. They take more pictures and file paperwork at crime scenes than anything else. The detectives who investigate crimes are far more worthy of respect than the bully with the badge who will “cop talk” you with threats for daring to question him.

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:30 PM

So are you just a bad driver? I’ve been pulled over for speeding exactly twice and recieved warnings both times. The only traffic ticket I ever got was in New Orleans where some lazy meter maid decided to cite out-of-state vehicles to fill his/her quota. I supposedly parked in a place I never was and the system was so unresponsive there was no way to dispute the ticket. It was easier to pay the bill which is the response the system is designed to induce. I’m still seriously ticked off at paying that $35 but what to do with a police force that, when most needed during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, shot innocent citizens and stole Caddilacs.

For the most part I agree with you though I would use different language and think that you’re unappreciative of one aspect of police work. Some of what police do now is based on having to document every single action in anticipation that the drunk behind the wheel or whomever will sue. To be more specific, much of the paperwork and excessive behavior is policy based on potential lawsuits. At the same time, most cops come off as bullies and not just from them doing their jobs. They need to stay impartial in any information gathering but that doesn’t include handcuffing children for hours because they know a bank robber is in the vicinity.

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Forty percent of the police force is plainclothed. Is a police state what you really want? Do you want safety? Or privacy liberty. It’s your choice.

For now at least.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Slight modification. Mankai already posted Ben Franklin’s comment.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Just a reminder… cops carry guns to protect themselves… not to protect you.

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Since bank robbery is a federal crime, and Obama has said that State and local cops can’t or shouldn’t apprehend illegals because they have no authority under the Constitution, I would have more respect for the police if they simply told the Feds, to chase the bank robbers themselves.

booger71 on September 23, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Outstanding point! Do these same police detain masses of citizens on the uncertain information that there may be an illegal among them?

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 8:43 PM

I’ve been pulled over by cops, been friends with cops, drunk with cops, worked with cops, and I have to agree with mankai. The detectives are more or less straight-up, if not perfect. The troopers and patrol cops think they’re Dirty Harry waithing for me to make their day.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Over the last 35 years, I’ve had my homes broken into, stuff stolen from my car, I’ve been assaulted, my child received sexual text messages from an adult… and in every case I was told “there’s really not much we can do…

…. They take more pictures and file paperwork at crime scenes than anything else. …

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Pretty much the same experience my family has had with crime and police. An aunt and uncle had their house broken into and vandalized by a couple of teens who were neighbors. Police investigated and despite eye witnesses having seen the two girls walking up and down the street by the house (at the end of the block), police didn’t even pull them in for questioning. Dad had property stolen from his store, he did a composite sketch with the police, they did catch the perps, but never recovered the stolen items. We had things stolen from the farm, a nice deputy came out and wrote up a report. Our church was broken into, police came out, investigated and wrote a nice report, nothing else resulted.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM

This is chilling. Even more chilling that so many people are OK with this.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

That’s okay. There are enough of you who are screaming to high heaven about it to make up for us.

JannyMae on September 23, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Just a reminder… cops carry guns to protect themselves… not to protect you.

mankai on September 23, 2012 at 8:46 PM

… and they have no obligation to protect citizens or prevent them from being victims of crime. There are judicial rulings that codify this. They will come in after you have been the victim of a crime and write up a nice report though.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Question, and sorry if it’s been put forth already: if the cops already spoke with the people and searched the cars, why were they detained at all? With or without cuffs? Why not just send them on their way so A’s not to clutter up the scene..?

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Frankly, considering an armed and dangerous man was being pursued, the reaction seems like a tempest in a teapot.

But hey, it’s good to know all the constitutional scholars Paulnuts are out in force at Hot Gas today.

SagebrushPuppet on September 23, 2012 at 9:06 PM

… and they have no obligation to protect citizens or prevent them from being victims of crime. There are judicial rulings that codify this. They will come in after you have been the victim of a crime and write up a nice report though.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:51 PM

F—ing liar. You f—ing piece of lying sh-t.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Wooooo — look at all the constitutional law experts and lawyers.

Most haven’t a clue what the f–k they’re talking about and obtained their ‘knowledge’ and their ideas of law and constitutional rights from Hollywood TeeVee shows — but they won’t let that stop them from firing up that hair trigger cakehole and spouting off despite the fact that none of them were there, no constitutionally protected rights haven been proven violated [and never will be if the whole story is accurate], and that the armed bank robber was, in fact, apprehended and his ill-gotten gains were recovered along with his pistol(s) and disguise used in the commission of the crime. No siree.

Any reason to vociferously hate on the police and spew utter ignorance and corrosive bile is — apparently — reason enough.

Sometimes it also takes a village to assist in the capture and incarceration of violent armed felons, too, you village idiots self-serving nitwits. The police did an outstanding job — even if it was a little bit inconvenient for a miniscule fraction of the village inhabitants.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:13 PM

It’s true, and the cops will tell you so if you ask them. They don’t have to, and don’t want to, protect anyone but themselves.

And if you give them any reason at all to do so, they’ll gladly taze you fourteen times while commanding you to do things they know damn well you cannot do while being tazed, then as you thrash, shoot you for jerkily moving your hand in a way that JUST MIGHT indicate you were going for what they ALWAYS think was a gun, but NEVER is.

For their own safety of course.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:14 PM

And there’s the proof.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

I know i’m jumping in late… but can I just say that I can’t relate to everyone who says they’ve never had a bad encounter with the cops. Between seat belt check points (not joking), dui checkpoints, being pulled over multiple times, drug dogs called out, hours on the side of the road (in several states in the north east)… They just leave a sour taste in my mouth. Yeah, they’ll show up and take a report if somethings stolen or your house is broken in to… probably will never see your stuff again, but at least insurance might reimburse you. Maybe it’s because I’m younger then most people on this blog, but my friends & I (mostly clean cut, white collar, mostly law abiding guys) have all been harassed by the cops to varying levels. It’s just hard for me to side with them in something like this when I know what it’s like to be completely innocent but detained for several hours. Even when they eventually let you go, it’s not like it negates the fact that they held you for several hours for no reason.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Check Warren v DC

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

80% of the cops in America should be either fired or arrested.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

ask the next 20 cops you see if they know what the fourth amendment says, and see what they say.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Check Warren v DC…

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

pfffft

You check Warren v DC…

I’ve been a street cop for nearly 30 years in a major metropolitan area. I already know THE TRUTH of it ALL. You and the bulk of the rest of the crew don’t know jack sh-t. Period.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:18 PM

you’ll probably be tazed and arrested for asking them.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:19 PM

80% of the cops in America should be either fired or arrested.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Part of it is the cops themselves (the cops I know where the same guys crushing beer cans against their heads and starting fights at high school parties), but a big part of it is the “corporate culture” of police work which treats all citizens as liars and suspects. Also, we must blame ourselves and our laws for putting that kind of power in the hands of the our government. It’s probably too late to role it back now, though.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Frankly, considering an armed and dangerous man was being pursued, the reaction seems like a tempest in a teapot.

SagebrushPuppet on September 23, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Really? So do you not think that during the act of pulling people out of their cars at police gunpoint, had the perp gone crazy and started a gunfight, the outcome for people handcuffed on the sidewalk might not have been a bit more disconcerting than “a tempest in a teapot”? Especially in a Colorado city that has illegally preempted Colorado concealed carry laws such that those people in those cars and handcuffed on the sidewalk would also have been unarmed and restrained citizens in the middle of a gunfight? Does that not cause you just a little bit, just a twinge of concern? Two hours spent in handcuffs sitting on a sidewalk is okey-dokey with you?

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM

What a waste of space and breathable air most of you are.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Were you there, assclown?

Were you?

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM

pfffft

You check Warren v DC…

I’ve been a street cop for nearly 30 years in a major metropolitan area. I already know THE TRUTH of it ALL. You and the bulk of the rest of the crew don’t know jack sh-t. Period.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Oh please, you’re a glorified public servant who should be thankful to have as easy of a job as you do. I’m about as impressed with your ramblings about “the truth of it all” as I am when DMV employees go on narcissistic power trips.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:22 PM

I thought not.

Scrote.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:22 PM

I’ve been a street cop for nearly 30 years in a major metropolitan area. I already know THE TRUTH of it ALL. You and the bulk of the rest of the crew don’t know jack sh-t. Period.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:18 PM

You’re a disgrace to law enforcement which is more common than not these days. These people were illegally detained, and their vehicles were illegally searched.

They could have been killed sitting in cuffs on the street, by the perp or by the badge gang themselves.

TYRANNY. When the chief says “the ends justify the means” you know you’ve got a department out of control.

I’d far rather the perp had escaped, than this had happened, although he could easily have been apprehended in a safer location.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:22 PM

If five people fit the description of a robber, the police can detain all five, and put them in a line up, maybe with some decoys as well… So the two person argument you make is falsified by the basic and general police operating procedure.

But you are right in that this particular instance is outside of the constitution and if i were a judge, I would very likely throw out the evidence the police gained.

astonerii on September 23, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Two people who match the description (as long as the description is “male”) is not a random selection of persons, which is what everyone who happens to be in an intersection at a moment in time.

Fifteen or twenty years ago a B of A was robbed in Southern California. The branch was right sown the street from the police station. The police pulled up in front of the branch and the guy ran around the corner and disappeared. He went home. They never charged anyone, but they new the neighborhood he ran to. Why not search the 30 or 40 homes in the neighborhood? Well, obviously that would have been unconstitutional.

Like I said, not even a close call. This guy walks. The police will pay lots of money to the innocent bystanders.

InterestedObserver on September 23, 2012 at 9:23 PM

What a waste of space and breathable air most of you are.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Typical cop attitude. No, officer, you work for US. You are an employee of the town, just like the guy who mows the lawn. Get off your power trip and stop thinking you’re better than anyone else.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Oh please, you’re a glorified public servant who should be thankful to have as easy of a job as you do. I’m about as impressed with your ramblings about “the truth of it all” as I am when DMV employees go on narcissistic power trips.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Woooo. Look at all the career envy and outright jealousy.

That’s right. I can beat you and down and tazer you up and you can’t do sh-t about it, chump.

Problem?

bahahahahaha

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM

There’s good cops and bad – used to play on the local police hockey team and I think there were only two or three certifiable d0ucheb@gs among them. Funny, though – it’s also been my experience that when the uniform goes on, the attitude goes south. Some dillweed keyed the crap out of my car once – bad enough that I filed a vandalism report. Desk cop was more interested in my SSN and my DL number than the actual damage done…

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

What a waste of space and breathable air most of you are.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM

I’d tell you what I think of you, but HOTAIR would ban me. I was about to suggest the best possible use of your service pistol…..

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Woooo. Look at all the career envy and outright jealousy.

That’s right. I can beat you and down and tazer you up and you can’t do sh-t about it, chump.

Problem?

bahahahahaha

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Alright, now I’m thinking you’re not actually a cop. I doubt a cop would be that brazen about it. And trust me, buddy, I most definitely can do shit about anything a cop wanted to do to me. I’m fortunate enough to have a good enough paying job to be able to afford a decent lawyer. Unfortunately, many in this country aren’t and there only advocates are other citizens.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Typical cop attitude. No, officer, you work for US. You are an employee of the town, just like the guy who mows the lawn. Get off your power trip and stop thinking you’re better than anyone else.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:23 PM

That’s right.

But you belong to me when you are on my streets. Don’t think so? I have 30 years of satisfactorily dealing with peons like you that says otherwise.

Problem?

Don’t leave the house then. Now you’re safe as can be, cupcake.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:26 PM

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Right. Gotcha. You really did elevate the conversation without resorting to personal attacks or cursing. Excellent reasoning.

Go back to your drink.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 9:26 PM

That’s right. I can beat you and down and tazer you up and you can’t do sh-t about it, chump.

Problem?

bahahahahaha

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

The badge gang, on display. No different than MS-13….

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM

…liar. You .. lying …

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:07 PM

For your reference: Have no obligation

There are others, just do a Bing search on “Police have no obligation to protect citizens” Yes, it’s the internet. Yes people say all sorts of things on the internet. The results you will find will point you to real, no kidding court decisions.

Check out: Warren v. District of Columbia, one of the seminal pieces of case law regarding this:

but D.C.’s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.”

So, you are welcome to sputter profanity. Back up your position with some actual facts, otherwise you just look like a vulgar darnfool.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM

And, by the way, my grandfather (who was a very honorable man) was a state cop in NJ. I don’t have a problem with the profession … just with how it manifests itself now and how people don’t realize we have to constantly be vigilant to make sure that power does not accumulate to those who are legally allowed to use force against us.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Flatfoot – so you take pride in your mediocrity? Like most of what I’ve seen of the FoP around here. Most, not all…

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Alright, now I’m thinking you’re not actually a cop. I doubt a cop would be that brazen about it. And trust me, buddy, I most definitely can do shit about anything a cop wanted to do to me. I’m fortunate enough to have a good enough paying job to be able to afford a decent lawyer. Unfortunately, many in this country aren’t and there only advocates are other citizens.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:25 PM

You. can’t. do. sh-t. buddy. pal.

bahahahahaha

Tough talkin’ monkey spanker can afford a good lawyer. Woooo. Now you ARE special. So special in fact — I bet you got to ride the little short bus for VIP’s to school. Amiright? Yeah — I am.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Pretty much the same experience my family has had with crime and police. An aunt and uncle had their house broken into and vandalized by a couple of teens who were neighbors.

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM

My experience exactly. Neighbor kid (house next door) was taking care of the dog while our family was away for a weekend. The house was ransacked. The only reason why the truth was known was that the mom of the neighbor kid’s accomplice found the stolen goods in her garden shed and called the cops on her son. Afterward, the police admitted they knew the neighbor’s kid was responsible but simply didn’t have the proof. My take on it is that they knew who did it but didn’t care enough to make a case about it. They simply didn’t care.

Happy Nomad on September 23, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Flatfoot – so you take pride in your mediocrity? Like most of what I’ve seen of the FoP around here. Most, not all…

affenhauer on September 23, 2012 at 9:28 PM

If you think single handedly throwing sh-t heels like you in the pokey is ‘mediocre’ — well then — what’s your beef, tough guy?

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:29 PM

hat’s right.

But you belong to me when you are on my streets. Don’t think so? I have 30 years of satisfactorily dealing with peons like you that says otherwise.

Problem?

Don’t leave the house then. Now you’re safe as can be, cupcake.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Cool. I live on a safe street in a marginal area of the city… Why is is safe? Because of my neighbors, many of whom carry guns. We all watch out for each other. It has nothing to do with the cops… When my neighbors car got broken in to, it took a good 2 hours for them to show up, take a statement, and promptly move on to the next 911 call.

Maybe if cops weren’t so rude to citizens and didn’t hustle people so hard, people wouldn’t hate them.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:29 PM

You check Warren v DC…

I’ve been a street cop for nearly 30 years in a major metropolitan area. I already know THE TRUTH of it ALL. You and the bulk of the rest of the crew don’t know jack sh-t. Period.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:18 PM

From the Warren vs. DC case:

Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate’s screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: “For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers.”

The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.’s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.” [4] There are many similar cases with results to the same effect. [5]

Got a defense for the failure of the D.C. police to show up in a timely fashion given the facts of the case?

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 9:29 PM

But you belong to me when you are on my streets. Don’t think so? I have 30 years of satisfactorily dealing with peons like you that says otherwise.

Problem?

Don’t leave the house then. Now you’re safe as can be, cupcake.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:26 PM

heh. your streets, you don’t have the money to gas up your car, and don’t own a damn thing except a pair of shrunken nuts.

you cops run at the first sign of a real fight, just like you did in LA 92.

We are better off without your parasitic a$$. We can do your job better than you can anyway, ladyboy.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:25 PM

He may be a cop, but he’s also either psychotic, or drunk, or a thirteen-year-old in bed with his parents downstairs while he acts out.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM

AZfederalist on September 23, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Ha. What makes you think I give two sh-ts about what ‘DC police’ do or don’t do — did or didn’t do — that compels me to ‘justify’ anything at all? It means nothing to me. I’m on the opposite side of the country. I could not care less.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:32 PM

I know this is hilarious. Impersonating an officer, lol.

But he’s got the riff down, don’t he? Oh yes he does.

rightwingyahooo on September 23, 2012 at 9:32 PM

He may be a cop, but he’s also either psychotic, or drunk, or a thirteen-year-old in bed with his parents downstairs while he acts out.

flicker on September 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Come f–k around on my beat when I’m working and let’s see how you feel post 10-16, cupcake.

I got something for you I know you’d like.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:34 PM

You. can’t. do. sh-t. buddy. pal.

bahahahahaha

Tough talkin’ monkey spanker can afford a good lawyer. Woooo. Now you ARE special. So special in fact — I bet you got to ride the little short bus for VIP’s to school. Amiright? Yeah — I am.

FlatFoot on September 23, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Yes, I’m obviously mentally disabled.

Timin203 on September 23, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 8