Come Flip Off Cops Here

[LucyDuke]

I didnt use the words 'more than enough', as I dont think that. I used the word 'could' and indeed intoxicated people tend to be more apt to show such behavior.

I gave it as a hypothetical...you paraphrased it as an absolute....it wasnt.

Sure. What do you think 'could' means?

Let me ask you a question. Do you think its the behavioral norm to flip off a cop? I dont. Thus thats out of the norm behavior and 'could' be indicative of something else.

Yeah, it is. And people have been shot for it in road rage incidents.

Rofl. I have been quite factual and honest. Not silly.

One..I really dont care what you think of my credibility. Your so opposed to anything I really stand for its a given you would think that anyway. Second, I dont think its nonsense, and you (and a few others here who never really agree with me) believing it is isnt really enough to convince otherwise.

Dude, I quoted the words "more than enough". They're in your post. Go look at it.

You offered two possible justifications. One of them is utter rubbish, since it's not illegal and doesn't indicate criminal activity. The other is rubbish too, since, if it is an indicator of DUI, it's a horribly unreliable one, and there are dozens of reliable ones that are overwhelmingly likely to be present. But, out of the two, intoxication is vaguely more plausible. You still need more than "could", and unless you can do better than "could", you don't have probable cause.

From freaking Wikipedia, probable cause is any of:

1. a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime
2. a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are probably true
3. information sufficient to warrant a prudent person's belief that the wanted individual had committed a crime (for an arrest warrant) or that evidence of a crime or contraband would be found in a search (for a search warrant)
4. a "substantial chance" or "fair probability" of criminal activity
(Feel free to find more.)

Flipping a bird doesn't satisfy any of those. I know your weird reverence for authority makes this difficult, but cops' authority is subject to restrictions. "You can't detain someone just because they pissed you off" is one of them.

(I know, in the real world cops do do that, with a lot of after-the-fact bs justification, but that doesn't make it right and more importantly it doesn't make it legal.)

"Out of the norm behavior", while it "could" be indicative of "something else", doesn't necessarily indicate criminal activity, which it has to to justify detention.

Flipping the bird on the road is not erratic behavior. I dunno, maybe Washington is infested with too many hippies and you're all peace-love-happiness on the highways, but any road I've ever been on, traffic brings out the satan in people. Also, don't see how road rage has anything at all to do with this conversation.

It's absolute nonsense, Mobby, you can't explain how bird-flipping is sufficiently indicative of criminal activity to justify detention... because it isn't.

Just because I disagree with you on everything ever doesn't mean I think you're incredible.

/shrug. Your opinion. Mines different.

Lets put it in real terms. Cops are going to pull over people who intentionally flip them off and possibly infract them for a wide variety of issues.

Yeah, that lawyer couldn't possibly know what he's talking about.

Big difference between "are going to" and "have legal justification to".

 

[illram]

You even said earlier the officer could have reason to ala the 'one hand on the wheel' thing you mentioned.

Pulling me over for an actual vehicle code violation is very different than pulling me over to find out "what my problem is."

 

[Mise]

Sigh.

You know...maybe I have overestimated your ability to grasp what I have been saying. Cause if you gotta ask this after how clear I've been and how many times I have explained it, then there isnt any real point in trying to argue with you any further.

In other words, you said something stupid and now you're backtracking.

 

[LucyDuke]

Where is this one hand on the wheel thing coming from? Do you people have a third hand to shift with? Where is "two hands on the wheel" required?

 

[Mise]

Where is this one hand on the wheel thing coming from? Do you people have a third hand to shift with? Where is "two hands on the wheel" required?

It also says he was trying to park, but the guy behind him refused to back up. Sounds like he was stationary at the time.

 

[mrt144]

Where is this one hand on the wheel thing coming from? Do you people have a third hand to shift with? Where is "two hands on the wheel" required?

Actually, all people with manual transmissions may be doing something criminal that will lead to further investigation so if you have a manual transmission you're on notice.

 

[illram]

nevermind

 

[MobBoss]

So what can't lead to a traffic stop?

I think the real question is what 'can'.

If the cop answers the question, "why did you pull the suspect over" with "because I was flipped off", he has likely just killed any subsequent findings of criminal activity because flipping someone off is not probable cause that criminal activity is afoot and does not create justification for the subsequent investigatory activity. The cop will have to lie and come up with another foundation for the stop if he wants to get the subsequent charges to stick.

He doesnt have to lie about it at all. He can say the suspect was acting in an angry and emotional manner.

Come on, your an attorney. You know how to use your tongue to say something about 10 different ways. It shouldnt be hard for you to imagine some creative ways that wouldnt be lieing to do that.

You offered two possible justifications.

I also offered that they werent the only two available. /sheesh give it a rest.

One of them is utter rubbish, since it's not illegal and doesn't indicate criminal activity.

Sigh. It doesnt have to indicate criminal activity. You just dont get it do you?

The other is rubbish too

Then use your imagination to come up with a few that arent rubbish. Like I said, those two arent exclusive.

Btw, they were insomuch reasons for the stop, as what a cop might indeed find as a result of the stop.

I do indeed find it odd that you dont seem to think rude behavior could indeed be attributed to intoxication. I see that all the time among soldiers.

From freaking Wikipedia, probable cause is any of:

If I were a cop, I would find it reasonable to pull someone over if they flipped me off to find out whats up.

You dont.

/oh well.

Flipping a bird doesn't satisfy any of those. I know your weird reverence for authority makes this difficult, but cops' authority is subject to restrictions. "You can't detain someone just because they pissed you off" is one of them.

Something you havent considered...at the very least it could lead the cop to scan your plates for warrants and such.

(I know, in the real world cops do do that, with a lot of after-the-fact bs justification, but that doesn't make it right and more importantly it doesn't make it legal.)

Well, well....what are we arguing for then?

"Out of the norm behavior", while it "could" be indicative of "something else", doesn't necessarily indicate criminal activity, which it has to to justify detention.

Dont get hung up on that criminal activity thing. Most traffic infractions arent criminal at all, but minor infractions.

Flipping the bird on the road is not erratic behavior.

We are just going to have to disagree on that. It may not be erratic if done to you or I...but to a cop? Of course it is.

I dunno, maybe Washington is infested with too many hippies and you're all peace-love-happiness on the highways, but any road I've ever been on, traffic brings out the satan in people. Also, don't see how road rage has anything at all to do with this conversation.

Because cops have a concern about that, although you dont realize they do. Most people are a bit more reserved where cops are concerned and with good reason, thats why it makes it out of the norm.

It's absolute nonsense, Mobby, you can't explain how bird-flipping is sufficiently indicative of criminal activity to justify detention... because it isn't.

Sigh. I still maintain that its sufficient cause to warrant a traffic stop.

Tell you want, I know several city and state cops via my work. Maybe I will quiz them about it.

Yeah, that lawyer couldn't possibly know what he's talking about.

Do you automatically assume someone thats a 'lawyer' is always correct in regards to such things?

I have been around lawyers long enough to realize that no, they are not always right, and that no, they sure as hell dont always agree. Especially about the law.

Pulling me over for an actual vehicle code violation is very different than pulling me over to find out "what my problem is."

/shrug. There are quite sufficient code violations in existance that it doesnt really take much to come up with a reason for a traffic stop. All you need to do is attract some undesired attention your way...and the cop can start following you to scan your plates and see if you cross a line somewhere.

I dont think you can deny that either. It absolutely happens that way.

In other words, you said something stupid and now you're backtracking.

No, in other words, I was pointing at your utter inabiltiy to grasp what I was saying. Or it could be that you were being purposefully obtuse. Either way. /shrug.

Where is this one hand on the wheel thing coming from? Do you people have a third hand to shift with? Where is "two hands on the wheel" required?

It came from that attorney that you said knows what he is talking about. In other words, it came from Illram, not from me.

 

[JollyRoger]

IHe doesnt have to lie about it at all. He can say the suspect was acting in an angry and emotional manner.

Acting angry and emotional is not probable cause that crime is afoot. How many times have you been angry or emotional in your life? How many crimes did you commit while angry and emotional? Ever call the cops on a family member for merely being angry or emotional? Why not? You should be tougher on crime.

 

[MobBoss]

Acting angry and emotional is not probable cause that crime is afoot. How many times have you been angry or emotional in your life? How many crimes did you commit while angry and emotional? Ever call the cops on a family member for merely being angry or emotional? Why not? You should be tougher on crime.

How many times have I seen cops calm down angry or emotional people so it doesnt escalate?

A lot.

Your point is moot.

 

[mrt144]

I think the real question is what 'can'.



He doesnt have to lie about it at all. He can say the suspect was acting in an angry and emotional manner.

Come on, your an attorney. You know how to use your tongue to say something about 10 different ways. It shouldnt be hard for you to imagine some creative ways that wouldnt be lieing to do that.

So cops have license to be like attorneys in justifying arrest after the fact, but let's not hold cops to a base of standard in understanding laws?

It's not a lie, it's a creative memory.
It's not a wrongful arrest, it's an opinion on what law was broken.
It's not ignorance of the law, it's subject interpretation of the law.

The real question isn't 'can' because you've opened up the scope of what 'can' be. You're not going to give a definitive answer on this because doing so would just paint yourself into a corner. And if you can't think of any examples where probable cause isn't met where arrests have been made you're either purposely being ignorant or you don't care enough about wrongful arrest.

 

[JollyRoger]

How many times have I seen cops calm down angry or emotional people so it doesnt escalate?

A lot.

Your point is moot.

What does calming people down have to do with probable cause? Again, if the cop is asked "what probable cause did you have that criminal activity may be afoot" and the answer is merely "The suspect was angry and emotional", the foundation for probable cause is not set.

The follow up would be to describe how they exhibited anger and emotion. When the cop said "He flipped me off". I would ask, "Did that make you angry or emotional? Did such anger or emotion mean there was probable cause that you were up to criminal activity?"

 

[illram]

/shrug. There are quite sufficient code violations in existance that it doesnt really take much to come up with a reason for a traffic stop. All you need to do is attract some undesired attention your way...and the cop can start following you to scan your plates and see if you cross a line somewhere.

Again, coming up with something after-the-fact is different than solely pulling me over to find out what my problem is.

And I think Lucy was referring to JR when she was talking about someone who knew what they were talking about, not me.

 

[mrt144]

What does calming people down have to do with probable cause? Again, if the cop is asked "what probable cause did you have that criminal activity may be afoot" and the answer is merely "The suspect was angry and emotional", the foundation for probable cause is not set.

The follow up would be to describe how they exhibited anger and emotion. When the cop said "He flipped me off". I would ask, "Did that make you angry or emotional? Did such anger or emotion mean there was probable cause that you were up to criminal activity?"

This is why you're the best.

 

[Ecofarm]

Flipping off a cop, to his face when he is in uniform, is definately abnormal and suspicious behavior.

 

[mrt144]

Flipping off a cop, to his face when he is in uniform, is definately abnormal and suspicious behavior.

Suspicious and abnormal how?

 

[illram]

Abnormal and suspicious? Suspicious of what?

 

[JollyRoger]

Flipping off a cop, to his face when he is in uniform, is definately abnormal and suspicious behavior.

I would think that avoiding a cop when you see him would be more suspicious, but neither act, in and of itself, rises to a level suspicious enough to justify an investigation.

 

[Ecofarm]

How many people have you seen flip off a cop to their face in uniform? None? That's what I thought. It is abnormally aggressive and suspicious because, like, wth is he on to behave like that?

If anyone is unclear how flipping off a cop to his face in uniform could be construed as abnormal behavior, go try it and see what happens. Ten bucks says the cop will at least ask you 'wth'.

It is NOT the same thing as flipping off a civilian. It's like you are trying to cause yourself problems in a very open way... that's abnormal and suspicious.

 

[JollyRoger]

How many people have you seen flip off a cop to their face in uniform?

I've seen it. The cop confronted them about it but did nothing further since it wasn't enough to justify more than a talking to.