Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
Hmmm. No one ever accused me of being shy to take a side but these cases are so tough.
I do find it interesting that you feel safer with cops making judicial decisions than judges. That is indeed dangerous thinking. The notion that cops aren't at times just as dangerous or more dangerous than the criminals suggests a bit of naivete. Come to DC (to tony and joes on the waterfront) on a friday or saturday night and you tell me if you feel the same way. I digress.
Again, there is a fine line between keeping us free from crime while keeping us free from harassment.
|
I didnt say that they make the decisions as opposed to judges. I just think narrowing the operational ability for arresting
probable criminals is a bad way to go. They still have to be right and produce evidence. In this case they were right and the reason that the criminal was let off was because the court failed to see
how they came to the conclusion a drug deal was taking place because they just saw something being passed as opposed to seeing "drugs" being passd and the fact that the criminals didnt run. So my contention is that if upheld couldnt drug dealers simply wrap the drugs in nice little bags and stand still when the police arrest them? No one wants to see civil rights eroded but by keep making the polices job 'technically' harder, you are moving the bar to favor those who break the law. If the police are not trusted to make these decisions as to who is engaging in criminal behavior than who is?