Gosh, I thought it was, "Wear's the fire"?
or, "Where'd you get your license; out of a box of Cracker Jacks"?
or, "Would you like to buy some tickets to the Policemen's Ball"?
Posted on 12/29/2023 6:06:24 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A new California law is set to take effect in the beginning of the new year that will require police officers to inform drivers of the reason for a traffic stop before proceeding with any further questioning. The legislation, which was passed in the fall of 2022, is intended to be a significant step in addressing pretextual stops and creating more transparency.
Before AB 2773, officers were not required to immediately tell a driver the reason for the traffic stop. The measure also requires law enforcement agencies to include the reasons for each traffic stop on arrest reports. Typically, the officer would ask if the driver knew why they were being pulled over. Under the new law, this will no longer be the case.
A new California law going into effect in January 2024 will change the way police officers interact with millions of drivers and pedestrians.
California police officers seeking to stop a driver or pedestrian must now initiate any interaction by specifying the purpose of the stop before asking inquiring questions. They will no longer be able to initially ask the driver, "Do you know why I pulled you over?"
California lawmakers passed AB 2773, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law in the fall of 2022, to reduce "pretextual stops" or where an officer stops a suspicious vehicle for a minor offense to look for a more egregious crime, KTXL reported.
The new law goes into effect on Jan. 1 and impacts agents of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, county sheriffs and city police officers.
The new procedure is designed to reduce pretextual stops, a practice in which law enforcement officers stop a driver for a minor traffic violation or another minor infraction as a pretext to investigate a separate and unrelated criminal offense for which they don’t have the necessary reasonable suspicion or probable cause to justify the stop.
For example, an officer could stop a driver for failing to use a turn signal when the actual intention is to search for drugs or other illegal contraband. The initial stop might be legal, but the true motive is to find something else entirely without the direct evidence required to justify the investigation. Pretextual stops have been a subject of legal and public debate.
Proponents of pretextual stops might argue that they are a necessary tool for detecting and curbing crime. When officers stop vehicles for minor violations, they could uncover more serious criminal activities, which could lead to the apprehension of individuals who might otherwise evade law enforcement.
Supporters might also suggest that pretextual stops could have a deterrence effect. If would-be criminals know that a traffic stop could lead to a deeper investigation, it might cause them to think twice about engaging in criminality while driving.
By requiring officers to declare the reason for a traffic stop, AB 2773 will reduce pretextual stops, which can lead to unnecessary tensions between police and the communities they serve. Additionally, it could build more trust between law enforcement and civilians by mandating clear communication from the outset of the interaction and preventing officers from fishing for crimes without probable cause. This would go a long way toward protecting civilians’ Constitutional rights.
California’s new legislation will certainly add to conversations surrounding law enforcement and police interactions with the community. Requiring more transparency will help to safeguard people’s rights and promote accountability among members of law enforcement.
The measure will likely become a topic for debate after it is implemented. But for now, it is time to wait and see how this shakes out.
Wray relies on that opinion every day.
LOL
Cut right to the bottom line, you did.
Dont they all do that anyway? b
I was pulled over this year in minnesota. the officers first words were something to the effect of. " Ive pulled you over for speeding, do you know how fast you were going?" no games, no prizes for right answer. I owned up to me doing 10 mph over the speed limit on an open road in the middle of nowhere.
>no games, no prizes for right answer. I owned up to me doing 10 mph over the speed limit on an open road in the middle of nowhere.<
I will say, once I aged out of my hellraising teens-mid 20s, I've never had any bad experiences with cops.
I've been pulled over twice in the past two decades. Once for running a red light (guilty) and once for speeding (guilty).
Both times, I was cordial and polite. Both times I was let off with a warning.
I'm sure plenty of cops are fine people that I could have a drink with at the bar.
But I harbor no illusions. As I said above, they're agents of the State and will act accordingly if required to do so.
I found a YouTube channel called We the people university. It’s run by a former cop who now trains cops in constitutional policing rather than tyranny.
He trains people that police must have a reasonable articulable suspicion that you broke a specific law before you are required to give them your ID.
If they refuse to articulate the specific law you broke, you are not required to cooperate nor answer any questions.
Do you know why I pulled you over? Is not a reasonable articulable reason.
I once had a deputy follow me for several miles and finally pulled me over. She refused to tell me why she pulled me over. I didn’t know any better and gave her my ID. When she came back she told me that she could tell if my license plate tab was this year or last year. When I sarcastically asked if last years were green too, she stormed off with a huff and drove away.
My most recent “interactions” were with the Wyo. SP who oncomingly headlight flashed me while I was doing ~6 over on a 2 lane US Highway.
Now I run ~4 over.....
I always greet an officer and ask what the PC for the stop is...
They have dash cams.
“Actually seems like a good law for once.”
So did Miranda, an unnecessary law, which freed hundreds of murderers...
How about “how would I know that?”
They also have body cams but they are subject to not having been turned on, footage unclear due to technical difficulties or just plain lost. A dash cam in your vehicle is your best friend.
The reason the cops let you exceed the speed limit is so that they can stop anyone they want.
Now if the cop wants to allege I am driving erratic the first thing I ask for in court is the dash cam evidence. Same thing with DUI suspects and most everyone else. It's all on video. You're being videoed nearly everywhere. No video no case.
Btw, in many departments, the dash cams turn on automatically when the light bar is activated.
Or should I say, less of a case.
Good law
Do you mind if I search your vehicle/you ?
(if you’ve got nothing to hide)
Ok Beria
Or Garland/Wray
Gosh, I thought it was, "Wear's the fire"?
or, "Where'd you get your license; out of a box of Cracker Jacks"?
or, "Would you like to buy some tickets to the Policemen's Ball"?
Officer Judy asks Liberace ‘Do you know how fast you were he playing?”
https://youtu.be/biPiMrgHMpo?t=18
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.