So how do we put that into wording within a law? We're cool with police forcing innocent people to be subjected to a search despite them not doing anything wrong AS LONG AS it MIGHT catch someone with a warrant BUT we are not cool with police saying they have to force me to let them in my house to watch a neighbor.

 

Why do we let police do any search if we haven't done anything wrong?

 

 

I'm saying if you were pulled over for a checkpoint, and in the process the police readily identified a know fugitive in the car, they should be able to arrest them on the spot.

Guru or any other legal eagle - can the police have a checkpoint that requires me to let them search my car?

I'm saying if you were pulled over for a checkpoint, and in the process the police readily identified a know fugitive in the car, they should be able to arrest them on the spot.

 

So your "public property" argument would give the police the freedom to do anything to me while I'm driving down the road/walking in a park/on a city bus, correct? Without any proof of any wrongdoing?

I'm at a US Park. I'm sitting there reading a book.

 

Can the police force me on the ground so they can search me for any signs of a bomb?

 

 

If they have probable cause. Sure.

So your "public property" argument would give the police the freedom to do anything to me while I'm driving down the road/walking in a park/on a city bus, correct? Without any proof of any wrongdoing?

 

Isn't a warrant proof enough?

If they have probable cause. Sure.

 

No, no, no. There was no probable cause here just like there was no probable cause when I'm driving down the road and have to stop at a checkpoint.

 

So, again, can they force me to the ground "just to make sure" I have no explosives in my pocket?

Isn't a warrant proof enough?

 

Where did a warrant come into this?

 

You said "public property" gave them the right to force me to stop at the checkpoint (vs my private property being searched). So that would seem to indicate that they do not need a warrant on "public property."

Why do we let police force us to stop at a checkpoint when we would NEVER want them to be able to stop us while walking down the road for ANYTHING without probable cause?

 

It can't be explained logically.

No, no, no. There was no probable cause here just like there was no probable cause when I'm driving down the road and have to stop at a checkpoint.

 

So, again, can they force me to the ground "just to make sure" I have no explosives in my pocket?

 

 

No I don't think they should be able to force you to the ground with no probable cause.

 

I've been thru a checkpoint one time. They didn't stop every car. Some they waved on thru. I would say the police are trained to know what to look for when stopping cars for possible DUI offense.

Where did a warrant come into this?

 

You said "public property" gave them the right to force me to stop at the checkpoint (vs my private property being searched). So that would seem to indicate that they do not need a warrant on "public property."

 

 

Did you not ask if during a routine check point if a person with a know warrant was spotted in the car are they police allowed to arrest them?

No I don't think they should be able to force you to the ground with no probable cause.

 

I've been thru a checkpoint one time. They didn't stop every car. Some they waved on thru. I would say the police are trained to know what to look for when stopping cars for possible DUI offense.

 

The police are stopping people randomly. They are not stopping them because they look like they're drunk.

Did you not ask if during a routine check point if a person with a know warrant was spotted in the car are they police allowed to arrest them?

 

Gotcha.

 

So does the fact that there is a warrant only apply to a stop without cause on public property?

No I don't think they should be able to force you to the ground with no probable cause.

 

.

 

Then why do you think it's OK for a checkpoint ? They are not only pulling people over who show signs of being drunk? How could they even know? Some checkpoints have 20 or 30 cars in line? The police didn't see them driving up to the checkpoint. It's completely random ie without cause.

Gotcha.

 

So does the fact that there is a warrant only apply to a stop without cause on public property?

 

 

Not sure what you're asking here. I believe a person with a known warrant should be arrested no matter how he is spotted.

The police are stopping people randomly. They are not stopping them because they look like they're drunk.

 

 

I would say a car with 4 guys ranging in age from 20-28 is a lot more likely to be stopped than a young couple with 2 young kids in the back.