Drivers of White Vans are being treated as criminals

Vanity | Self

[SamAdams76]

The photos above currently on the Drudge site concern me. I followed the link and the article clearly stated that nobody was arrested last night.

Why then, do we have drivers of white vans, innocent civilians, evidently being pulled out vans at gunpoint and treated like dangerous criminals? One photo shows a man on the ground, evidently in handcuffs, with police officers standing over him as though they have just captured Whitey Bulger. When I first saw the photo, I figured the man was obviously a wanted criminal that police just so happened to come across during their search. But since there were no arrests last night, this man was obviously released and was no criminal after all.

The other photo shows a man by another white van with his hands in the air and a police officer has a gun drawn on him. Again, this was evidently just another innocent civilian who had the misfortune to be driving a white van on I-95 last night.

Now I understand the need for these roadblocks and for the police to be very thorough in their search for the sniper(s). But I cannot see the point of innocent people dragged out of their vehicles at gunpoint with no pretext other than the fact that they happen to be driving a white van.

Now maybe somebody here has an explanation why these two individuals were treated like criminals. Maybe they tried to evade the police or maybe they were driving stolen vans. But again, there were no arrests made last night. So what is the deal with our citizens being treated like Jesse James just for driving a white van?

[Howlin]

I'm waiting for you to post the EXACT place ladyinred said what you accused her of.

So far, it's been 29 minutes since I asked you.

[willyboyishere]

Even simpler answer: LACK OF IMAGINATION.

[McGavin999]

Do you talk that way to your mother?

Thank you jwalsh. I didn't bother to respond because obviously the person was raised by wolves and the poor thing doesn't know any better.

[willyboyishere]

Be glad your name isn't ladyinwhitevan.

[NittanyLion]

So basically, you're answer is that the cops should do nothing proactive after the shooting to apprehend the shooter. That's what I'm getting here NL. For somebody with a good mind, that kind of takes my breath away.

Believe it or not, I know it sounds ridiculous. Which is also why I know it'd never happen; these roadblocks must be erected to avoid a huge public outcry.

But honestly, do you believe they'll work? I suppose my initial point was twofold: this method (which I believe is without probable cause) will not work, and here's another method which might work better. A visual search is one thing, but pulling white van owners out of their van and physically searching through it is another.

But I realize my argument is a tough one to make.

[jwalsh07]

So, you're a live and let live kind of guy who would take no offense at somebody asking your Mom or wife what the eff they were laughing at? I doubt it.

As for the LOL, you should get a life. It had nothing to do with the killings, it had to do with libertarian bs analogies.

[COB1]

"You remind me of another friend of ours who is missing in action right now!"

My gosh, LIR, you're right!
That sounds exactly like one of her posts!
Too bad she's missing. She'd love to cross swords with these escapees from the Cato Institute.

[NittanyLion]

I don't pay attention to who the hell pings you.

LOL. Nonetheless, your comments to that poster were in reference to comments made about me. So I'll feel free to respond if I like - and you might want to avoid calling me paranoid when the facts support my claims. Otherwise, you might look rather foolish...

[takenoprisoner]

Thank you jwalsh. I didn't bother to respond because obviously the person was raised by wolves and the poor thing doesn't know any better.

So now you defame my mother? How dare you. Is this your best? Not very clever are we?

[CobaltBlue]

I do hypotheticals.

Yes, if the search is illegal, the results will be tossed. For that crime. And if all the results for the other cases stem from that one stop, only, then all the cases will be tossed, based on the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine.

However, the sniper will have been stopped, and plain ordinary policework will lead eventually to the guy anyway, so odds are he can still be convicted of something that did not stem from an illegal search.

However, why assume that the searches are illegal? After having posted on this thread for a while, my guess is that the guys lying facedown with handcuffs got loud and mouthy with the cops.

By which I don't mean quietly saying no, you may not search my van without a warrant.

[ladyinred]

Wouldn't she though?
I think I am in the twilight zone!
Beam me up and all of that!

[jwalsh07]

Your argument is not a tough one to make when some punk kills somebody in the normal course of human events. It gets impossible to make after all those killings at a time when this country is fighting a war against an unseen enemy.

Regards NL.

[McGavin999]

Oh please. You guys have so distorted the situation and so over reacted that this thread is totally ridiculous.

[NittanyLion]

No, because you don't seem to understand that when you're dead you have NO rights!

I hear the gun controllers make that same argument all the time. And it isn't any more logical when they do it.

[COB1]

"but pulling white van owners out of their van and physically searching through it is another."

What part of the body did the policeman grab when he pulled the van owner out?
You must have seen this!
You just stated that the van owner was pulled out!

[ladyinred]

Be glad your name isn't ladyinwhitevan.

If it was, I would understand the police in the area of the sniper attack pulling me over, and I would appreciate the fact that they were doing their job. That's just the kinda gal I am.

[NittanyLion]

Your argument is not a tough one to make when some punk kills somebody in the normal course of human events. It gets impossible to make after all those killings at a time when this country is fighting a war against an unseen enemy. Regards NL.

I agree. But I do enjoy making it anyway...this type of conversation is a substantial one.

I've got a dinner riding on Bush/McBride. Got any polling info?

[NittanyLion]

What part of the body did the policeman grab when he pulled the van owner out? You must have seen this! You just stated that the van owner was pulled out!

"Pulling" was meant in a figurative sense. My fault, I should've used a better descriptor.

[McGavin999]

Oh, I'm so sorry dear. Does you mother teach you to use the "F" word when arguing with women? What does she do for a living dear, work on the wharfs?

[GirlShortstop]

However, the sniper will have been stopped, and plain ordinary policework will lead eventually to the guy anyway, so odds are he can still be convicted of something that did not stem from an illegal search.

However, why assume that the searches are illegal?

Simply because the debate was whether the fourth was being violated. I hope you're right.