• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Being Told By Police To Exit Vehicle And Get In Theirs

Into the Night said:
Nope. It's because they are:
1) not attempting to kill or harm you
2) you agreed to it in most cases
3) where you didn't agree to it, the procedure is done to stabilize (save your) life.

If I use a defib machine to stop a heart that's gone into fibrillation so that it can get a chance to reset it's rhythm, that is not assault with a deadly weapon either, even though the defib machine is quite clearly capable of stopping the heart permanently. The only time you would even use such a machine is if the patient is unconscious. He is not awake to ask. It is presumed by law that attempting to save the life of a patient is not assault.
Click to expand...
That's my point. It's not as simple as "if cops can put me in their car involuntarily then why can't I do it?" as some might claim. The reason the officer can detain you and put you in his car is to insure the safety of the public, himself, and even the detainee and there are perimeters in when he can or can't detain you.
 
DebateChallenge said:
How about if they tell you to exit the car because a light is out?
Click to expand...

Pennsylvania v. Mimms. If the officer has a lawful reason to stop you, he at any point of the traffic stop can order you out of the vehicle.
 
Maccabee said:
If they lock their doors in front of me then yeah, but I've yet to see evidence that locking your doors alone gave enoigh reason for the officer to search your car.
Click to expand...

Of course they would be locking the door in front of you.

Yo ask the person to get out of their car and they do but lock the door behind them. You aren't going to suspect them of something for them doing that?
 
Mason66 said:
Of course they would be locking the door in front of you.

Yo ask the person to get out of their car and they do but lock the door behind them. You aren't going to suspect them of something for them doing that?
Click to expand...

Of course, but I still don't think an officer will act on that alone.
 
Maccabee said:
Of course, but I still don't think an officer will act on that alone.
Click to expand...

I just watched an episode of Live PD and the officer, after asking for permission to search the vehicle and being denied, said he will bring the dog because he was refused the search.

Nothing was mentioned throughout the stop of smelling drugs, which they usually do to justify the search.

That seems reactionary. He was denied the search, it was a simple traffic stop, so he would take it a step further.

If the door was locked on him, I am sure that would have gotten him more suspicious, even though he had no reason to be suspicious of the driver.
 
Maccabee said:
If they lock their doors in front of me then yeah, but I've yet to see evidence that locking your doors alone gave enoigh reason for the officer to search your car.
Click to expand...

Locking your doors in and of itself is not a justifiable reason.
 
Mason66 said:
Of course they would be locking the door in front of you.

Yo ask the person to get out of their car and they do but lock the door behind them. You aren't going to suspect them of something for them doing that?
Click to expand...

What's to suspect? My car locks automatically when I get out of it and move away from the car.
 
Mason66 said:
I just watched an episode of Live PD and the officer, after asking for permission to search the vehicle and being denied, said he will bring the dog because he was refused the search.

Nothing was mentioned throughout the stop of smelling drugs, which they usually do to justify the search.

That seems reactionary. He was denied the search, it was a simple traffic stop, so he would take it a step further.

If the door was locked on him, I am sure that would have gotten him more suspicious, even though he had no reason to be suspicious of the driver.
Click to expand...

LivePD does not show what happened. They only show snippets of what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom