5 ms·

I wonder how something like this is even remotely debatable, its not like we invented free speech just the other day and now are working out the finer details o

I wonder how something like this is even remotely debatable, its not like we invented free speech just the other day and now are working out the finer details of whats ok to say in front of law enforcement, let alone the fact that it seems like they have wide discretion to interpret the law at that particular moment according to how they are feeling emotionally. On the other hand, what if you refuse to speak to any officer, even one that has no probable cause but would like to know if its gonna rain today and asks if you could check your phone and tell him and you decide to ignore or walk away from said officer? Does that establish enough probable cause (granted the officer feels slighted) to order you to speak or perform an action or present ID? Then, if they decide you are not complying with orders and put cuffs on you, how ironic would it be that you now have the right to remain silent once under arrest but never before?

aidenn0 8y ago
From the opposite point of view, police officers have been put in impossible situations. Consider: a neighbor calls in police to a domestic dispute. The police are fairly certain that showing up will escalate the violence, but they aren't allowed to not show up (indeed they would be liable for anything bad that happens if they don't), and yet they are also potentially liable for the violence that happens when they do show up. I have a friend who is a cop, and one of his pet peeves is being called in for those threatening suicide. He is not a therapist, and indeed the only thing he can do that a therapist would not be allowed to do is respond with violence. In general he says that ~20 years as an officer has seen increasing amounts of people calling the police for issues that grownups ought to be able to resolve on their own.
- TomVDB 8y ago
  > ... indeed they would be liable for anything bad that happens if they don't ... Legally liable? I highly doubt that.
  - didgeoridoo 8y ago
    Your doubts are well-founded. A few relevant decisions: - Warren v. DC (1981): The police have no specific duty to protect you, or to show up when called. - Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005): The police are not liable for failing to enforce your restraining order.

aidenn0 8y ago

From the opposite point of view, police officers have been put in impossible situations. Consider: a neighbor calls in police to a domestic dispute. The police are fairly certain that showing up will escalate the violence, but they aren't allowed to not show up (indeed they would be liable for anything bad that happens if they don't), and yet they are also potentially liable for the violence that happens when they do show up. I have a friend who is a cop, and one of his pet peeves is being called in for those threatening suicide. He is not a therapist, and indeed the only thing he can do that a therapist would not be allowed to do is respond with violence. In general he says that ~20 years as an officer has seen increasing amounts of people calling the police for issues that grownups ought to be able to resolve on their own.

TomVDB 8y ago
> ... indeed they would be liable for anything bad that happens if they don't ... Legally liable? I highly doubt that.
- didgeoridoo 8y ago
  Your doubts are well-founded. A few relevant decisions: - Warren v. DC (1981): The police have no specific duty to protect you, or to show up when called. - Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005): The police are not liable for failing to enforce your restraining order.