LogFAQs > #893145858

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	i'm sorry but cops choose to put theirselves at risk
hyperpowder 12/30/17 8:27:30 PM #55:	MabusIncarnate posted... hyperpowder posted... MabusIncarnate posted... What do you propose? It's a very simple solution, get rid of "probable cause". Have cops actually do some policing, get evidence, then execute warrents. Don't just bust into peoples house because somebody said something over the phone. This makes zero sense. Do you know how much goes into actually getting a warrant? What you are saying is, if there is a bank robbery in progress with armed men holding hostages, the police should first need to go out to investigate, confirm the situation, gather evidence, then go back to the station, do all the paperwork, and wait for approval on a warrant to move forward a few days later? That's brilliant, real simple solution. The hostages can just stand by for a few days. Do you understand what a warrant is? Or probable cause? There is no probable cause in a bank robbery, because it's a justified cause. There is a justifiable threat and crime in progress. Nobody is assuming a crime is in progress. Sure there can be fake robbery/bomb/shooting calls, but that is a public disturbance and should be taken seriously. And very rarely do you ever hear about police killing innocent people in a fake robbery/bomb threat. But busting into a private residence and blasting innocent people because of an accusation from a phone call? That's just poor police work and pretty unjustifiable. Probable cause being the phonecall is pretty stupid in this day and age. --- Whoever beats my score I will give them a $10 PSN or Live card: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpiorAx40GY <cite>hyperpowder posted [p:893145858] in i'm sorry ... [t:76152091]...</cite> <quote><cite>MabusIncarnate posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hyperpowder posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MabusIncarnate posted...</cite> <quote>What do you propose?</quote> It's a very simple solution, get rid of "probable cause". Have cops actually do some policing, get evidence, then execute warrents. Don't just bust into peoples house because somebody said something over the phone.</quote> This makes zero sense. Do you know how much goes into actually getting a warrant? What you are saying is, if there is a bank robbery in progress with armed men holding hostages, the police should first need to go out to investigate, confirm the situation, gather evidence, then go back to the station, do all the paperwork, and wait for approval on a warrant to move forward a few days later? That's brilliant, real simple solution. The hostages can just stand by for a few days.</quote> Do you understand what a warrant is? Or probable cause? There is no probable cause in a bank robbery, because it's a justified cause. There is a justifiable threat and crime in progress. Nobody is assuming a crime is in progress. Sure there can be fake robbery/bomb/shooting calls, but that is a public disturbance and should be taken seriously. And very rarely do you ever hear about police killing innocent people in a fake robbery/bomb threat. But busting into a private residence and blasting innocent people because of an accusation from a phone call? That's just poor police work and pretty unjustifiable. Probable cause being the phonecall is pretty stupid in this day and age. --- Whoever beats my score I will give them a $10 PSN or Live card: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpiorAx40GY</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1