TexasCHLforum.com

Really, the base of the problem with police not identifying themselves as police in a situation like this is that if a lawfully armed citizen were to react and shoot at one of these officers, I assure you the police officers will shoot back. So this is why it puts the public at enormous risk. It's not so much that you are causing the patrons of the McDonalds in this case to be at risk of the bad guy, but you are putting them at risk of being shot by police for simply trying to defend themselves.

The police come in like this and they are not identifiable as police, likewise it makes it improbable that they will identify any of the people in the McDonalds as bad guys if they draw. That's because the good guys usually won't draw on the police, but they might draw on what are obviously bad guys. One easy way for the police to ID a BG is anyone who draws on a clearly-identified police officer is most likely a BG.

Now, I also have a serious problem with the police conducting sting operations of any kind. Mostly because the police themselves are engaging in criminal behavior when they do such a sting. Yeah, sure, I know all of the legal arguments. But the fact remains that the intent of the Constitution and our form of government is for the government, including the police, to derive their rights from the people. Anything that's illegal for me to do, should be likewise illegal for the police to do. When we veer from this philosophy, then it grays all of the lines about what is legal or not for the police to do. Whether the criminal "would have otherwise" committed the same crime is a moot point. The crime they are charged with is one that included enticement by police, and IMHO (understanding that this goes against most legal opinions) is that the police are just as responsible for this crime as the accused. This is, in my opinion, one of the abuses of power in this country that has lubricated the slippery slope that we find ourselves on.

Of course now we have the Austin PD openly violating our fourth and fifth Amendment rights this weekend, and the police chief has the audacity to make the rounds of the radio stations and TV yesterday to trumpet this new policy. Our government tramples our rights with impunity.

mr.72 wrote:Of course now we have the Austin PD openly violating our fourth and fifth Amendment rights this weekend, and the police chief has the audacity to make the rounds of the radio stations and TV yesterday to trumpet this new policy. Our government tramples our rights with impunity.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'd like to. What happened?

yes, what happened?

So a quick Google turned up this: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=47590.0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Not sure if I'm breaking any forum rules by linking to another forum, I'm sure someone will let me know...)



Edit: That link looks about 7 months old though... So what's new?

That seems a bit off the wall. I am curious if he was proposing this or what? and if he did, did it get shot down?

Fangs wrote:So a quick Google turned up this: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=47590.0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Not sure if I'm breaking any forum rules by linking to another forum, I'm sure someone will let me know...)



Edit: That link looks about 7 months old though... So what's new?

That's it. They have done this more than once. This weekend is a so-called "no-refusal" weekend. This is now a normal APD policy. They have a judge on the hook to write them warrants on the spot while this happens.

So not only do people now have to submit to a search of their own body, but they have to provide a part of their body as evidence against them, thus potentially incriminating themselves.

Of course in the name of preventing drunk driving, any violation of our rights is worth it, in the public eye.

I hope they're stopping bicycles too.

Captain Matt wrote:I hope they're stopping bicycles too.

Why would they stop a bicycle? Is it illegal to operate a bicycle under the influence?

mr.72 wrote:

Captain Matt wrote:I hope they're stopping bicycles too.

Why would they stop a bicycle? Is it illegal to operate a bicycle under the influence?

49.02

I understand why they are doing it however it is a HUGE violation of our rights and the law. That is ridiculous

This procedure of drawing blood from a suspected DWI on the street is ridicules. If the suspected person refuses to submit to an intoxalyzer, and the officer has determined that the person is in fact intoxicated, he/she has the right to arrest and charge the person with a DWI and refusal to submit. The arresting officer has a two hour window to acquire an intoxalyzer, blood or urine test from the person if they agree, and it gives plenty of time to obtain a warrant and transport to a medical facility to acquire it. If the police do their due diligence in making the arrest, they can still get the conviction in the courts; it’s just harder to do without one of the test mentioned.

These type of ninja tactics got a police officer killed here locally not too long ago.

The people in Austin are going to have to stand up and put a stop to these kind of things. The so call "peace" officers have become a combat patrol unit, seek out and destroy.

-geo

This makes me beyond PO. This is complete stupidity. Is the Austin PD a police force or a military unit. If they are the latter did the citizens of Austin sign the dotted line too? I am going to guess not and that this goes against every bit of the constitution. I know I did not fight for our rights to be destroyed like this and I am sure that the others here who have served did not fight for this either!

If I were an intern or something at a local hospital or clinic (I'm not, this is hypothetical) and LEOs dragged someone in and ordered me to draw blood . . . I would refuse. As a medical professional, a) it would not be my duty to gather evidence; 2) I would not perform a medical procedure of ANY type on a competent adult without their permission, on ANYONE's say-so; and 3) performing ANY medical procedure on an unwilling person might very well lead that person to visit harm upon me later.

Hmmm . . . after the tame judge signs off, do they present the actual warrant to the suspect? Not a fax copy or something, but a piece of paper with the judge's actual signature on it? Personally, I'd be real reluctant to comply with a warrant I hadn't actually seen with my own two eyes.