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?

[spunkets]

"You can tell all of that from the picture?"

That and the fact no one was arrested.

[Texasforever]

Which is just your round about way of saying 'the law doesn't matter, results matter'

Point to the law being violated.

[Roscoe]

You mean he wasn't an anarchist? ; )

Franklin understood that citizenship involves obligations and responsibilities, unlike the cop hating anarchists on the thread.

[Chad Fairbanks]

And you KNOW which 'stalker' will be leading the pack, don't you?

Good... because, like Cornholio, I need TP for my bunghole... ;0)

[Texasforever]

That and the fact no one was arrested.

Well gee he must not be the sniper then.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

You're right, I don't. But it is irrelevant if either of us does or not.

I think it is relevant. Do you think the people in D.C. mind cooperating with police on this half as much as people who are breaking out in hives about it here? I don't. My guess is they want this solved, and they want it solved yesterday - and the vast majority of them are no doubt eager to do whatever they can to help the police get the job done.

I have no problem with what you describe here. But then you add guns drawn, handcuff me, put me on the asphalt...I have problems. I also have inalienable rights and (assuming we still live under the rule of law-big assumption these days) I have civil rights under the law.

Why is that man in the photograph cuffed and on the asphalt - do you know?

[luvtheconstitution]

You're right, what I want isn't relevant. The police are doing what is legal and proper, and I happen to like it, too. Your last crude statement is a reflection on you, not me.

[FreeReign]

Unless martial law is established the rule of law trumps any emergency in a constitutional republic.

Fourth Amendment exceptions for car searches have been going on since 1925 for lesser probable cause. All of this occurring without the establishment of martial law and with the favorable rulings from various state supreme courts and the USSC.

[justshe]

As I see it there are 3 choices.

1) Total martial law and suspension of all civil rights....at which point the cop-bashers will scream, literally, bloody murder.
2) Continue the current course of action in the hopes that 'luck' will assist LEO in catching the sniper(s). This plan has the cop-bashers screaming bloody murder for lack of results.
3) Do nothing and sit back and wait. This would have the cop-bashers screaming bloody murder for lack of protection.

I cannot think of ONE plan that would satisfy the cop-bashers. Or am I missing something?

[TigersEye]

That means to normal people that in times of national emergency,

Ohhhh pleeeeease! This is a national emergency? Help me Uncle Sam, help me, we're all gonna DIIIIIIIIE!!!!!

[straightbend]

The pictures are worth a thousand words

How true, however, I read in one of the earlier posts where someone asked to have the guns pointed out to them in the picture, and, unless I have overlooked it, I can find no guns in what is shown on the picture. Can you please point them out to me?

You exaggerate greatly when you say all they are inconveinienced for is five minutes, it is more like 5hours and some were not allowed to wait at ease, but were forced to the ground to eat dirt. That is the complaint, not that the shutdown was conducted.

I did not say this, you must be referring to someone else.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Why is that man in the photograph cuffed and on the asphalt - do you know?

I'm guessing he was a smart-ass who probably said something to the cops, such as "You're not gonna look in the trunk are you? Cuz there's nothing in the trunk. No drugs. No guns. No dead bodies...."

;0)

[justshe]

Texasforever a socialist?

Oh.....YOU deserve it this time. ROFLMAO!!!!

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

LOL! Hey, he was innocent, MAN!

[spunkets]

"Well gee"

Then why were all the guns pointed at them and others forced to lay face down on the street cuffed while they awaited a decision?

[Chad Fairbanks]

Cops don't like smart-asses...

Believe me. I know ;0)

[Texasforever]

You are witnessing the birth of an urban legend tonight. By next week the guy on the ground will have been shot in the back of the head.

[takenoprisoner]

zUnless martial law is established the rule of law trumps any emergency in a constitutional republic.

You're gettin there. Keep up the good work inspite of any accidental indeference I may have attributed to you in the past.

[HairOfTheDog]

You cited an example where a cop made a mistake. It happens. It is really bad when it does.

But my punchline in that post states my position in defense of the felony-type stop in THESE circumstances:

"Handling potential felony stops this way doesn't give the occupants the opportunity to look like a threat in a moment of uncertainty, and increases safety for everyone involved."

YES including the officer's safety, which is not a trivial matter.

In assessing that need, we have to trust the instincts of the cops involved unless they prove unworthy of that trust. The trust has to go with the job.

The statistics are on my side on this.... Police make damn few unjustified shooting mistakes. Pretty good considering the human beings involved and the uncertainty of every felony stop situation they are involved in.

[TigersEye]

. I'm dealing with people *I* think are hysterical about having to open the door to their cars and let the police shine a flashlight in the ashtray. That's pretty much it.

That's not what those two pics at the beginning of the thread show. That's not at all it.