Its definitely a slippery slope and possibly the greatest infringement on rights in quite some time. It is the step to a police stay that can operate outside the law with the ends justifying the means.

Link to text http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-1373_83i7.pdf

It also surprises me that no one is paying more attention to this. It also bothers me that the court willfully acknowledges the illegality of the initial stop but is turning a blind eye based on "at most negligent/good-faith mistakes", that kind of language is ambiguous and ill-defined and they should be ashamed. Moreso I'm concerned that they completely skirted the fact of what might have happened had the individual refused to identify himself, would he had legal grounds to do such and if so would the detention/arrest/meth admissible then? Or would the cop have shot him, found meth claimed fear, and another person is dead at the hands ill-educated and perversely trained thugs who gets off scotch free? There are clear gaps in this courts opinion and the implication stemming from said gaps or just outright lee-way given to cops from this decision is going to be a turn for the worse I fear. . . #initialreaction

I can safely say I'm an unpaid shill, trolling the government forum spies on behalf of the people. So make of that what you want.

I think there are plenty of others like me here. But whenever someone comes here and questions this sub in this manner while also not posting any links about what we're supposed to discuss is kind of a red flag for me. In terms of being a veiled attack on th sub. Call me hypervigilant but it seems that posts of this nature have a kind of agenda to 'create doubt', 'exploit fracture points', 'discredit this sub' in terms of its neutrality, truth and liberty. I could be wrong. But you asked for our opinion so there it is.

Damn dude if youre not fuckin around you need to tone down the paranoia.

USA Today

• They disbanded Habeas Corpus (Patriot Act).
• They can withhold any US citizen without a trail on "terror" charges.
• They routinely conduct surveillance and collect data on every US citizen (Privacy is dead dead dead fucking dead).
  
• They can now use evidence in court that is acquired illegally.
  
• They assassinate US citizens without trail.
• They use torture.
• They commit war crimes on a regular basis (Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria).
• They can effortlessly arrange secret trails inside their own secret courts, with their own handpicked jury, judge and prosecutors.

And I am pretty sure they also rigged the upcoming elections, on more than one occasion, to achieve the desired outcome. You guyz are fucked beyond FUBAR -.- Some day, in the near future, they will stop pretending that you live a democracy, which they killed a long long time ago...

Link to USA today article saying this stuff?

God no, they hardly mention it in the corporate owned mass media when your corrupt and inept politicians sign of you rights one by one, why would they start talking about it now?

Then where is that info from? Considering it looks like you cited USA Today as the source of that list.

The list is a (excuse my french) fucking huge load of articles, reports and academic studies, done by legal experts, lawyers, judges, commentators, members of congress and vigilant citizens. Most of it has been complied since 2001 (Patriot Act), which I very loosely paraphrased, to make my point. I don't have the source material lying around, but you can properly google it if you put enough effort into it, I am sure somebody has collected most of it somewhere. It should of cause have been common knowledge to most Americans, but the corporate owned mass media hasn't reported on it at all, now 99.8% of the US population remains completely ignorant of what has happened. Don't blame the messenger.

Lol, relax. I was simply asking where the info came from. For someone so hard against mainstream media, you should be able to appreciate someone questioning the info being given to them.

Of cause I can post links to a few articles, if that is what you needed?!

Wasn't there a Supreme Court case in the 60s that basically legalized the stop and frisk?

Would this not technically be an extension of that? Bullshit either way...

TL; DR version: Cop makes illegal detainment of a man leaving a suspected meth house. Cop runs the man's ID and finds a pre-existing arrest warrant for a traffic violation. Cop find meth on the man during arrest. Man moves to dismiss meth evidence since it was "the fruit of a poisoned tree" from the illegal stop. Supreme court says the "accidental" discovery of a pre-existing warrant "attenuates" the fourth amendment violation and says evidence is ok for court.

I always favor protecting the 4th amendment above anything, but I can see why it's tempting to ignore it in this case. I'm trying imagine how it could be abused beyond this specific circumstance. Any ideas?

You're already an easy target if you're walking around with a warrant. I guess this makes it easier to use people with warrants as bait or tools to advance investigations tha otherwise would run afoul of the constitution.

One of the ways it can be abused is that if a cop wanted to initiate a terry stop for any reason whatsoever he can so long as during that stop he can find some infraction that you've committed, planning to commit, or may commit; if he finds said infraction now your fourth amendment is null and his stop and anything he finds can be used.

This recent ruling in conjunction with the following decision lead to a state where cops are legally allowed to do just about anything. . . http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf

I've seen quite a few posts about it. I found 6 with this search and 2 more with this search.

You just seem to have missed them... and then blamed the sub for it!

Dont blame him, Ive only seen the 1st one and this one. It should be top position, at least front page

watch 'Rizzoli & Isles' if you can stomach MSM BS/propaganda, not a single proper police procedure visible during the show.

Rizzoli is all screams and threats to get her way. there was similar on one of the NCIS shows, same writers or producer no doubt.

reverse class warfare (hatred of the working class) at the least, outright pimping for fascism at the worst.

Lol, relax. I was simply asking where the info came from. For someone so hard against mainstream media, you should be able to appreciate someone questioning the info being given to them.