Please bear with me, trying to address several points. Thanks in advance.
<snip> if an interested party drives by to confirm that the situation is safe.....If however they drive by and see you brandishing... or leaving a corner store at a high rate of speed... then s/he's also doing his job by detaining you. <snip>
I would hazard a guess, though I have no evidence, that a gangsta would/could chew bubble gum and likely scratches his butt too. Where OC is not made illegal there is no distinction "in the eyes of the law" between chewing bubble gum and OCing. Cops have made a distinction between chewing bubble gum and OCing.
Regarding leaving a corner store at a high rate of speed, on foot or in a vehicle?
If on foot I submit that you are advocating the detainment of any individual who is observed, by LE, leaving a store at a high rate of speed (running) because that citizen must have just robbed that store or why else would that citizen be running from the store. If by vehicle, that individual is very likely violating a traffic law and warrants being stopped for a observed violation/infraction.
<snip> If a curious citizen wants to learn more and the first thing they are greeted with is an endless amount of hatred and near tinfoil hat conspiracy, why should they trust us any more than the officers we want them to distrust? If you want the benefit of the doubt, and to be treated like a non-criminal until you become a criminal, maybe it'd be a good idea to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt and treat them as humans up until they lose that right ("you" being used loosely, not just Lasjayhawk).
Fortunately, under our legal system LE must give us the benefit of the doubt until they have RAS/PC of my illegality. Besides, and depending on the cop, I have the threat of violent physical force hanging over my head if I do not arbitrarily give the "benefit of the doubt" to that cop whether or not he proves that he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Harless?.....Harless?..........Harless?
Being polite and respectful to anyone is not a chore for me, but a healthy and complete distrust of every cop is prudent and every lawyer I have talked to agrees.
By the way, if every top cop publically supported OC and described what OC is and why it is a lawful activity most MWAG calls would not be made. For those that are made, and before a cop is dispatched, the "investigation" could be avoided if the cops did their job correctly.
<snip> I'm talking about police doing their job, so long as that job doesn't interfere with the lives of anyone but those who are breaking the law. <snip> Isn't that their job?
No, it is not their job to investigate lawful behavior. The underlined above is a case of what we want LE to do but the reality is far different of what cops routinely do where OC is concerned.
The job of LE is to investigate crimes that are reported to them by the citizenry. If OC is not a crime the cops must ask just one more teeny tiny question "what is the MWAG doing with that gun?"
<snip> - if there are enough reports from concerned citizens about <chewing bubble gum> I think it's their job to appear. <snip>
OK, "enough" concerned citizens have reported a citizen chewing bubble gum. What is LE's job at this point?
In conclusion.....finally.
It seems that mwaterous is unlikely to return to this thread. So, mwaterous has been "shown" that every cop should be considered a "bad cop" until that cop proves to us that he is not a bad cop.....it is obviously not fair to that cop but my freedom depends on this approach to cops I come in contact without first calling them. The burden is on that cop to prove he is not a bad cop.....so says my lawyer.
There is ample evidence that the
vast majority of cops are "good cops" and leave We The People to our own lawful devices. But, until there is a "app for that" to provide a distinction between the good cops and the bad cops upon meeting any cop I'll use the advice I have paid for and even the free advice gleaned from the Interwebs....."
DON"T TALK TO COPS!!!!"
Bottom line. A cop has the authority to interrupt your comings and goings, what he does not have is the authority to compel you to reciprocate. To even attempt to compel you to reciprocate places that cop squarely in the "
bad cop" category. Heck, even stopping you to begin with places that cop in the "
might be a bad cop" category until further investigation results in that cop deserving to be placed in the "good cop" category.
