• 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!

Another reason to never trust a Cop.

Bodi said:
Incorrect. It isn't a lawful order unless they have reasonable suspicion to search you.

Can police force you to take your hands out of your pockets?

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM
legalknowledgebase.com legalknowledgebase.com

.
Click to expand...
They’re not searching you, just moving open hands over clothing to ensure no weapons. That’s what they can do if someone refuses to take their hands out of their pockets.
 
Bodi said:
And in the case in the OP... the person is the homeowner on their own property.

.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t referring to the OP, don’t care. Probably some frauditor or sov cit looking for settlement money.
 
The Brad Dad said:
They’re not searching you, just moving open hands over clothing to ensure no weapons. That’s what they can do if someone refuses to take their hands out of their pockets.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were searching. I said that they can't force you to remove your hands. I backed it up with some evidence from a legal source.

You are free to think anything you want to. But we both know you are wrong. *shrug*

Wasn’t referring to the OP, don’t care. Probably some frauditor or sov cit looking for settlement money.
Click to expand...

I didn't say you were referring to the OP. I was referring to the OP. Understanding what you are reading is pretty important.

The OP is clear that the homeowner was not engaged in anything that would constitute reasonable suspicion. He called them over to take a police report about an incident, he was on his own property. They could have left at any time but chose to escalate and illegally force the man's hands from his pockets. But you have to watch it in order to know that...
.
 
Bodi said:
I didn't say they were searching. I said that they can't force you to remove your hands. I backed it up with some evidence from a legal source.

You are free to think anything you want to. But we both know you are wrong. *shrug*



I didn't say you were referring to the OP. I was referring to the OP. Understanding what you are reading is pretty important.

The OP is clear that the homeowner was not engaged in anything that would constitute reasonable suspicion. He called them over to take a police report about an incident, he was on his own property. They could have left at any time but chose to escalate and illegally force the man's hands from his pockets. But you have to watch it in order to know that...
.
Click to expand...
Whomever you were arguing with about whether they have to legally take their hands out should probably read that article, that wasn't my comment. I told you they can conduct a t frisk if the person won't take their hands out. A t frisk, btw, is when they take a flat hand and with the outer portion move it over packets and such. Going into a pocket is illegal unless the suspect is under arrest.
 
The Brad Dad said:
Whomever you were arguing with about whether they have to legally take their hands out should probably read that article, that wasn't my comment. I told you they can conduct a t frisk if the person won't take their hands out. A t frisk, btw, is when they take a flat hand and with the outer portion move it over packets and such. Going into a pocket is illegal unless the suspect is under arrest.
Click to expand...

They can only conduct a frisk or have you remove your hands if they have reasonable suspicion of criminal behaviour. Sounds like you are trying to avoid the facts and start a Red Herring distraction attempt. Well, you are wrong. They can not force you to remove your hands, nor can they frisk you unless the legal criteria are met.

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM YOUR POCKETS.

Can police force you to take your hands out of your pockets?

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM
legalknowledgebase.com legalknowledgebase.com

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM YOUR POCKETS | Lawlancaster

The PA Superior Court has recently decided the case of Commonwealth v. Hemingway, No. 684 WDA 2017 (June 26, 2018), holding that the trial court did not
lawlancaster.com lawlancaster.com
 
Bodi said:
They can only conduct a frisk or have you remove your hands if they have reasonable suspicion of criminal behaviour. Sounds like you are trying to avoid the facts and start a Red Herring distraction attempt. Well, you are wrong. They can not force you to remove your hands, nor can they frisk you unless the legal criteria are met.

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM YOUR POCKETS.

Can police force you to take your hands out of your pockets?

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM
legalknowledgebase.com legalknowledgebase.com

POLICE OFFICER MUST HAVE REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS AFOOT and THAT YOU ARE ARMED OR DANGEROUS BEFORE ASKING YOU TO REMOVE YOUR HANDS FROM YOUR POCKETS | Lawlancaster

The PA Superior Court has recently decided the case of Commonwealth v. Hemingway, No. 684 WDA 2017 (June 26, 2018), holding that the trial court did not
lawlancaster.com lawlancaster.com
Click to expand...
The legal criteria for a t frisk is officer safety. The only recourse of a suspect is to comply and then sue id they feel their constitutional rights were violated. Good luck on the last one.
 
The Brad Dad said:
The legal criteria for a t frisk is officer safety. The only recourse of a suspect is to comply and then sue id they feel their constitutional rights were violated. Good luck on the last one.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you didn't read the sources of evidence.
If you did then that is even worse, after reading your conclusion.
You just make shit up... like the last 'debate'. I am seeing a trend beginning.

.
 
Bodi said:
Pretty sure you didn't read the sources of evidence.
If you did then that is even worse, after reading your conclusion.
You just make shit up... like the last 'debate'. I am seeing a trend beginning.

.
Click to expand...
You could have just admitted you didn’t know what a t frisk is.
 
The Brad Dad said:
You could have just admitted you didn’t know what a t frisk is.
Click to expand...

Rarely, but it does happen... I wonder what fun there is in engaging in such bad trolling. Seems too boring a thing to even contemplate... but then again, some people lose their shit laughing at farts... gotta admit, people are different. 🌈



.
 
Last edited:
The best policy is just never to initiate contact with cops at all if you can possibly avoid it.

The guy in the OP should have just let the initial incident go and moved on and not have called the cops.

Just avoid cops at all costs.
 
Bodi said:
Rarely, but it does happen... I wonder what fun there is in engaging in such bad trolling. Seems too boring a thing to even contemplate... but then again, some people lose their shit laughing at farts... gotta admit, people are different. 🌈



.
Click to expand...
Sounds great. Lemme know how that t frisk research goes.
 
Safiel said:
The best policy is just never to initiate contact with cops at all if you can possibly avoid it.

The guy in the OP should have just let the initial incident go and moved on and not have called the cops.

Just avoid cops at all costs.
Click to expand...
My bet is the guy is some kind of YouTube agitator like an auditor or sov cit. It wasn't an organic confrontation
 
Bodi said:
Not while on his property. They can leave if they don't like it.

He could demand that they do not carry guns on his property...

.
Click to expand...
I bet you would scream bloody murder if the guy pulled his hands out of his pocket with, say a cell phone, and the cop shot him, mistaking the phone for a gun. Personally I would take my hands out of my pocket, then again, I'm not trying to make money on YouTube by making cops look bad.
 
Bodi said:
Not while on his property. They can leave if they don't like it.

He could demand that they do not carry guns on his property...

.
Click to expand...
I assume that you already know they can't leave their guns in the car.
 
911Sparky said:
I bet you would scream bloody murder if the guy pulled his hands out of his pocket with, say a cell phone, and the cop shot him, mistaking the phone for a gun. Personally I would take my hands out of my pocket, then again, I'm not trying to make money on YouTube by making cops look bad.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to justify a cop shooting an unarmed person?

.
 
911Sparky said:
I bet you would scream bloody murder if the guy pulled his hands out of his pocket with, say a cell phone, and the cop shot him, mistaking the phone for a gun. Personally I would take my hands out of my pocket, then again, I'm not trying to make money on YouTube by making cops look bad.
Click to expand...
Yeah, pretty much. There’s a whole subgenre of this stuff. YouTube needs to deplatform all of them. It would end immediately.
 
Bodi said:
Are you trying to justify a cop shooting an unarmed person?

.
Click to expand...
I think you need to take a reading comprehension course. I said if you were to remove your hand from your pocket with an object in hand, something that could be mistaken for a weapon, you could be shot. Cops have a split second to determine if you are a danger to their safety, and when dealing with a belligerent man like the one in the OP, there will be no benefit of the doubt.
 
911Sparky said:
I think you need to take a reading comprehension course. I said if you were to remove your hand from your pocket with an object in hand, something that could be mistaken for a weapon, you could be shot. Cops have a split second to determine if you are a danger to their safety, and when dealing with a belligerent man like the one in the OP, there will be no benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...
You were completely articulate. And you’re 100% right.
 
The Brad Dad said:
Yeah, pretty much. There’s a whole subgenre of this stuff. YouTube needs to deplatform all of them. It would end immediately.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. It seems there is a similarity to the Sovereign Citizen movement, could be some overlap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom