3 ms·

Saying that you will not answer questions w/o a lawyer present is not a reason for them to hold you. They can of course break the law and use that to detain yo

Saying that you will not answer questions w/o a lawyer present is not a reason for them to hold you. They can of course break the law and use that to detain you and if they do that you should not resist. If you answer the cop's idle questions about drugs or weapons in the car, then you are inviting the cop to analyze your answer and use it as an excuse to get inside of your car or arrest you, and inviting more problems. Refusal to answer the question and asserting your right is not a suspicious action, and they are legally required to stop asking your such idle questions at that point. Once you are handed your license back, the stop is over. Your detention is over at that point and you are free to go. Driving off is not arguing with the police - it's going about your business. If you consent to stay after the stop is over while they bring a dog, then you are basically consenting to a search of your car.

runako 3y ago
All of your answers are correct, in a court of law. A traffic stop is not a court of law. Task #1 at a traffic stop is to make it home in one piece. > Refusal to answer the question and asserting your right is not a suspicious action, and they are legally required to stop asking your such idle questions at that point. This is...not how traffic stops work. For all intents, it is safer to assume the police office stopping you knows little or nothing about the law, civil rights, or the Constitution. > They can of course break the law and use that to detain you and if they do that you should not resist. > Once you are handed your license back, the stop is over...Driving off is not arguing with the police - it's going about your business. These are potentially at odds, for example. If the officer doesn't know/believe/understand that handing your license back constituted the end of the stop, in his mind you have just fled a crime scene. In his mind, you have escalated and given him a reason to use force. You (or your heirs) may prevail in court that he was "wrong," but on the day of the stop the officer can make that much-later victory Pyrrhic.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

runako 3y ago

All of your answers are correct, in a court of law. A traffic stop is not a court of law. Task #1 at a traffic stop is to make it home in one piece. > Refusal to answer the question and asserting your right is not a suspicious action, and they are legally required to stop asking your such idle questions at that point. This is...not how traffic stops work. For all intents, it is safer to assume the police office stopping you knows little or nothing about the law, civil rights, or the Constitution. > They can of course break the law and use that to detain you and if they do that you should not resist. > Once you are handed your license back, the stop is over...Driving off is not arguing with the police - it's going about your business. These are potentially at odds, for example. If the officer doesn't know/believe/understand that handing your license back constituted the end of the stop, in his mind you have just fled a crime scene. In his mind, you have escalated and given him a reason to use force. You (or your heirs) may prevail in court that he was "wrong," but on the day of the stop the officer can make that much-later victory Pyrrhic.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]