9 ms·

Here's the thing: you can have all sorts of detached, academic discussions on a forum like HN or on a blogpost about what the best thing to do is, or the most p

Here's the thing: you can have all sorts of detached, academic discussions on a forum like HN or on a blogpost about what the best thing to do is, or the most pragmatic thing, or the worst thing when dealing with a police encounter. But if you ever find yourself in a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, none of this discussion matters. I've had that happen to me (when an AirBNB owner failed to mention that they have a silent alarm system which calls the police). It is not pleasant, and there are no clever things to do or say. You will do whatever the cop wants, because you do not want to be shot. People don't like hearing this. They like to think of themselves as being smart, as having self-respect and dignity, as being able to 'speak truth to power' or at least stand their ground. That, unfortunately, is not the reality. Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. It is an utterly dehumanizing, degrading interaction. There are no witty things to say or do. You will do whatever you are told, because a person is pointing a deadly weapon at you and telling you to do them.

testfoobar 5y ago
Had a similar situation. Neighbor called cops because he saw a prowler outside his house at 2am. I woke up hearing commotion and went outside to my backyard. Nice young cop was in my yard (no fence between properties) and pointed his drawn gun right at me. My hands went up and I stopped moving. Probably even stopped breathing. It was a terrible situation for everyone. No prowler was caught.
rootusrootus 5y ago
> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose.
- Ansil849 5y ago
  This whole 250 comment thread is basically people discussing what they'd do or what you should do when finding yourself in a police encounter. My counterpoint is that none of that discussion actually applies. As for most people wanting it that way, I think it is because most people have not actually encountered it. They want it in the abstract, likely not so much when it happens to them. Kind of the classic...the people who want wars typically don't want their children in those wars.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    I agree with you, everyone wants the cops to be be all powerful, because everyone assumes they will never be on the business end of that gun. It's basically the same advice Dr. Phil gave, and just about the only advice of his that ever resonated with me. Some people get it, some people don't, and when the cop is putting his boot on your face you aren't going to back talk. People fantasize online about all the things they will do in such a situation, but only people who have a good bit of experience with cops are going to be comfortable enough to talk smack to them. And frankly, for most of us, "don't ever talk to the police, never, never, never" will actually lead to worse outcomes on average. The trick is to recognize when you should follow that advice, and when you should not. Sometimes it's obvious.
    - jandrese 5y ago
      The danger is that the policeman in question may not be all that interested in the truth of the situation, only in catching a "bad guy". So even if you are innocent they may assume you are guilty and look for anything at all that would get a conviction. You might think that the courts would sort this out, since the cop obviously won't have any solid evidence, but it turns out that they don't have solid evidence in a great many cases and still manage to get convictions. The truth matters less than the system, and the system is designed to put people in jail.
  - stackbutterflow 5y ago
    This is a very USian take. There are many countries in the world where people aren't scared to death when police come knock on their door. There are many countries where police officers are actually scared of using their weapon. In these countries it helps to know the law and how to deal with these situations.
SavantIdiot 5y ago
You're right. A corrupt cop is unstoppable, especially one with a corrupt municipality supporting their behavior. However, like netsec, it is a matter of lots of small steps. Asserting "I do not consent to this search" aloud may not stop the search, but it can be used it court, where it may not matter, or it might. The point is, you have to protect yourself. Maybe someone caught recording of you saying that which shows up later, and changes the outcome in a retrial.
- jakeinspace 5y ago
  This is why, in a just society, the penalties for corruption and abuse of power for LEOs should be extreme. Same goes for elected officials I suppose, but abuse of the state's threat of violence is antithetical to a free society.
  - SavantIdiot 5y ago
    100% with you. I don't like it, and I'm not condoning a "let it slide attitude". I protest, I vote for reform, I get peppersprayed, I worry when cops drive behind me that my face popped up on some alt-right hit list for going to protests...
  - kiba 5y ago
    This is why, in a just society, the penalties for corruption and abuse of power for LEOs should be extreme. Same goes for elected officials I suppose, but abuse of the state's threat of violence is antithetical to a free society. I don't think it would be fair nor that I think it would work. If people are afraid to do anything, they will cover their asses than do their jobs. I think, ultimately, the problem is multifaceted. I believe we start with decreasing the role of police and punishment in our society.
    - jakeinspace 5y ago
      Sure, just passing federal legislation wouldn't fix this for the US. This country has a police culture problem that needs to be addressed, which, like any cultural problem, has no single quick fix. I don't know the way to fix things.
II2II 5y ago
A police officer compels you to turn over a password at gunpoint. You do so in an act of self preservation. Will any evidence acquired as a result be admissable in court?
- kingcharles 5y ago
  It depends. The password would be suppressed because it was coerced from you, but the police can now say they would have obtained your data anyway through another method, and then the court will let them use the data. For instance, in my case the police said they could break 2048-bit AES encryption and so they were allowed to keep the data after the password was suppressed.
  - 0x0 5y ago
    2048-bit AES encryption? Considering AES usually is 128bit and sometimes 256bit, that's a tall order. In fact, can you even call it AES with a straight face if you are dealing with 2048bit keys? AFAIK the AES standard only covers 128/192/256 bit keys.
    - kingcharles 5y ago
      This is my fault for not checking before I typed. It is AES with a 256-bit key. It was Microsoft Bitlocker.
      - ChrisKnott 5y ago
        Isn't the key issue what your password was, though? If your password was "123", then they probably could have cracked it regardless of how strong the encryption was.
        kingcharles 5y ago
        The password was secure. The prosecutor did have a forensic guy come in who was very honest and talked about the techniques he uses at the FBI for cracking passwords, e.g. dictionary attacks. The problem was that the police were also allowed to testify and their non-expert testimony was allowed in the trial court even though they are not experts in the subject.
ddingus 5y ago
Right on the money. Have been there, done that. I will add even when they do not have guns drawn, the interaction can go from discussion to whole hog, hands on big and quick!

testfoobar 5y ago

Had a similar situation. Neighbor called cops because he saw a prowler outside his house at 2am. I woke up hearing commotion and went outside to my backyard. Nice young cop was in my yard (no fence between properties) and pointed his drawn gun right at me. My hands went up and I stopped moving. Probably even stopped breathing. It was a terrible situation for everyone. No prowler was caught.

rootusrootus 5y ago

> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose.

Ansil849 5y ago
This whole 250 comment thread is basically people discussing what they'd do or what you should do when finding yourself in a police encounter. My counterpoint is that none of that discussion actually applies. As for most people wanting it that way, I think it is because most people have not actually encountered it. They want it in the abstract, likely not so much when it happens to them. Kind of the classic...the people who want wars typically don't want their children in those wars.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  I agree with you, everyone wants the cops to be be all powerful, because everyone assumes they will never be on the business end of that gun. It's basically the same advice Dr. Phil gave, and just about the only advice of his that ever resonated with me. Some people get it, some people don't, and when the cop is putting his boot on your face you aren't going to back talk. People fantasize online about all the things they will do in such a situation, but only people who have a good bit of experience with cops are going to be comfortable enough to talk smack to them. And frankly, for most of us, "don't ever talk to the police, never, never, never" will actually lead to worse outcomes on average. The trick is to recognize when you should follow that advice, and when you should not. Sometimes it's obvious.
  - jandrese 5y ago
    The danger is that the policeman in question may not be all that interested in the truth of the situation, only in catching a "bad guy". So even if you are innocent they may assume you are guilty and look for anything at all that would get a conviction. You might think that the courts would sort this out, since the cop obviously won't have any solid evidence, but it turns out that they don't have solid evidence in a great many cases and still manage to get convictions. The truth matters less than the system, and the system is designed to put people in jail.
- stackbutterflow 5y ago
  This is a very USian take. There are many countries in the world where people aren't scared to death when police come knock on their door. There are many countries where police officers are actually scared of using their weapon. In these countries it helps to know the law and how to deal with these situations.

SavantIdiot 5y ago

You're right. A corrupt cop is unstoppable, especially one with a corrupt municipality supporting their behavior. However, like netsec, it is a matter of lots of small steps. Asserting "I do not consent to this search" aloud may not stop the search, but it can be used it court, where it may not matter, or it might. The point is, you have to protect yourself. Maybe someone caught recording of you saying that which shows up later, and changes the outcome in a retrial.

jakeinspace 5y ago
This is why, in a just society, the penalties for corruption and abuse of power for LEOs should be extreme. Same goes for elected officials I suppose, but abuse of the state's threat of violence is antithetical to a free society.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  100% with you. I don't like it, and I'm not condoning a "let it slide attitude". I protest, I vote for reform, I get peppersprayed, I worry when cops drive behind me that my face popped up on some alt-right hit list for going to protests...
- kiba 5y ago
  This is why, in a just society, the penalties for corruption and abuse of power for LEOs should be extreme. Same goes for elected officials I suppose, but abuse of the state's threat of violence is antithetical to a free society. I don't think it would be fair nor that I think it would work. If people are afraid to do anything, they will cover their asses than do their jobs. I think, ultimately, the problem is multifaceted. I believe we start with decreasing the role of police and punishment in our society.
  - jakeinspace 5y ago
    Sure, just passing federal legislation wouldn't fix this for the US. This country has a police culture problem that needs to be addressed, which, like any cultural problem, has no single quick fix. I don't know the way to fix things.

II2II 5y ago

A police officer compels you to turn over a password at gunpoint. You do so in an act of self preservation. Will any evidence acquired as a result be admissable in court?

kingcharles 5y ago
It depends. The password would be suppressed because it was coerced from you, but the police can now say they would have obtained your data anyway through another method, and then the court will let them use the data. For instance, in my case the police said they could break 2048-bit AES encryption and so they were allowed to keep the data after the password was suppressed.
- 0x0 5y ago
  2048-bit AES encryption? Considering AES usually is 128bit and sometimes 256bit, that's a tall order. In fact, can you even call it AES with a straight face if you are dealing with 2048bit keys? AFAIK the AES standard only covers 128/192/256 bit keys.
  - kingcharles 5y ago
    This is my fault for not checking before I typed. It is AES with a 256-bit key. It was Microsoft Bitlocker.
    - ChrisKnott 5y ago
      Isn't the key issue what your password was, though? If your password was "123", then they probably could have cracked it regardless of how strong the encryption was.
      - kingcharles 5y ago
        The password was secure. The prosecutor did have a forensic guy come in who was very honest and talked about the techniques he uses at the FBI for cracking passwords, e.g. dictionary attacks. The problem was that the police were also allowed to testify and their non-expert testimony was allowed in the trial court even though they are not experts in the subject.

ddingus 5y ago

Right on the money. Have been there, done that. I will add even when they do not have guns drawn, the interaction can go from discussion to whole hog, hands on big and quick!