Quote:
Originally Posted by YouShallKnow
That's not true. It has to be reasonable suspicion. You cited the case law yourself. Terry requires not just suspicion, but REASONABLE suspicion. You keep mistating the law.
.
|
You are totally missing the point.
If the police feel like pulling you over FOR ANY REASON, they WILL do so.
It does not matter if it is constitutional or not.
IF it turns out that it was NOT, then the charges are thrown out BUT YOU STILL HAD TO PULL OVER!.
THIS STEP IS PERFORMED AFTER THE FACT.
Based on your response, it seems that YOU BELIEVE that if the driver feels that the police officer SHOULD NOT have probable cause then the driver should just keep on driving.
Your logic is just plain fucked up.
So again:
Look
it is a FACT:
The Police can pull you over if they suspect that you might be committing a crime. PERIOD.
It MIGHT turn out that the officer was WRONG.
That does not mean that he did not have the right to investigate.
To argue otherwise means you are just trolling.