3 ms·

> I've had a gun pulled on me twice for traffic stops when I went to grab something. I'm white. Something I learned from a friend is to ask permission for ever

> I've had a gun pulled on me twice for traffic stops when I went to grab something. I'm white. Something I learned from a friend is to ask permission for every movement or at the very least narrate and move slowly. "I'm going to reach in the glovebox for my registration. Is that ok?" I think it's the only way to protect yourself from their hyper-nervousness. Edit: friend and I are also white.

petesergeant 7mo ago
> I think it's the only way to protect yourself from their hyper-nervousness. “the only way” puts me in mind of The Onion headline “‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens”
zmb_ 7mo ago
A black friend of mine did exactly this, asked for a permission to get a pen from his pocket. The cop laughed “sure” and the moment he put his hand inside his pocket they jumped him and arrested him.
- altcognito 7mo ago
  With body cameras this is a lawsuit.
  - ceejayoz 7mo ago
    But is it a winning one? Qualified immunity tends to chime in.
    - coryrc 7mo ago
      That doesn't mean what you think it means.
      - ceejayoz 7mo ago
        No? Jessop v. City of Fresno is worth a peek. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/17-16756/17-16756-2019-09-04.html https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/17... > The panel held that at the time of the incident, there was no clearly established law holding that officers violate the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment when they steal property seized pursuant to a warrant. For that reason, the City Officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
        giantg2 7mo ago
        That's not exactly consistent with the given scenario. Use of force issues tend to have much better case law at both the federal and state levels than property related issues.
        ceejayoz 7mo ago
        https://www.generalservices.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/9_18_20_Qualified-Immunity-Cases.pdf https://www.generalservices.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/9... > Corbitt v. Vickers, 929 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2019): Qualified immunity granted for officer who, hunting a fugitive, ended up at the wrong house and forced six children, including two children under the age of three, to lie on the ground at gunpoint. The officer tried to shoot the family dog, but missed and shot a 10-year-old child that was lying face down, 18 inches away from the officer. The court held that there was no prior case where an officer accidentally shot a child laying on the ground while the officer was aiming at a dog. > Young v. Borders, 850 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 2017): Qualified immunity granted to officers who, without a warrant, started banging on an innocent man’s door without announcing themselves in the middle of the night. When the man opened the door holding his lawfully-owned handgun, officers opened fire, killing. One dissenting judge wrote that if these actions are permitted, “then the Second and Fourth Amendments are having a very bad day in this circuit.” > Estate of Smart v. City of Wichita, 951 F.3d 1161 (10th Cir. 2020): Qualified immunity granted for officer who heard gunshots and fired into a crowd of hundreds of people in downtown Wichita, shooting bystanders and killing an unarmed man who was trying to flee the area. The court held that the shooting was unconstitutional but there was no clearly established law that police officers could not “open fire on a fleeing person they (perhaps unreasonably) believed was armed in what they believed to be an active shooter situation.” (And a bunch of others.) And a matching case has to be very specific: > Baxter v. Bracey, 751 F. App’x 869 (6th Cir. 2018): Qualified immunity granted for officers who sent a police dog to attack a man who had already surrendered and was sitting on the ground with his hands in the air. The court held that a prior case holding it unconstitutional to send a police dog after a person who surrendered by laying on the ground was not sufficiently similar to this case, involving a person who surrendered by sitting on the ground with his hands up. "No clearly established law", my ass.
briffle 7mo ago
A famous case of this is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Philando_Castile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Philando_Castile where the man identitified he had a concealed carry, the cop told him not reach for it, he started to say he wasn't, he was getting his license the officer asked for, with the officer cutting him off repeatedly and the officer shot him because he 'feared for his life'. All they have to prove is that they fear for their life. It does not have to make sense, does not have to be 'justified', etc.
- giantg2 7mo ago
  "All they have to prove is that they fear for their life. It does not have to make sense, does not have to be 'justified', etc." That's not really true. The standard is a reasonable fear for your life. That's reasonable standard is evaluated in court by how a reasonable person would have reacted. Yes, they do give some deference to the individual who was actually there (police or civilian). The real problems happen because the DA and the courts tend to have bias when it comes to subjecting members of the system to the same process that others face.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 7mo ago
    Police officers in court cases don't have to meet that standard until it established that they do not have qualified immunity. In vastly more than 9 out of 10 cases, they do, and thus that standard is completely irrelevant.
    - giantg2 7mo ago
      Qualified immunity only applies to civil cases, not criminal.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 7mo ago
        Most (not all) cases against police officers for excessive/fatal use of force are civil (typically civil rights violations).
SapporoChris 7mo ago
Some more recommendations. Keep your registration and insurance in an easily reachable place like in the passenger side visor/mirror. Keep your hands on the top of the steering wheel where the officer can see them at all times. Keep your car clean. The goals are to make the officer comfortable and minimize the time.

petesergeant 7mo ago

> I think it's the only way to protect yourself from their hyper-nervousness. “the only way” puts me in mind of The Onion headline “‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens”

zmb_ 7mo ago

A black friend of mine did exactly this, asked for a permission to get a pen from his pocket. The cop laughed “sure” and the moment he put his hand inside his pocket they jumped him and arrested him.

altcognito 7mo ago
With body cameras this is a lawsuit.
- ceejayoz 7mo ago
  But is it a winning one? Qualified immunity tends to chime in.
  - coryrc 7mo ago
    That doesn't mean what you think it means.
    - ceejayoz 7mo ago
      No? Jessop v. City of Fresno is worth a peek. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/17-16756/17-16756-2019-09-04.html https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/17... > The panel held that at the time of the incident, there was no clearly established law holding that officers violate the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment when they steal property seized pursuant to a warrant. For that reason, the City Officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
      - giantg2 7mo ago
        That's not exactly consistent with the given scenario. Use of force issues tend to have much better case law at both the federal and state levels than property related issues.
        ceejayoz 7mo ago
        https://www.generalservices.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/9_18_20_Qualified-Immunity-Cases.pdf https://www.generalservices.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/9... > Corbitt v. Vickers, 929 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2019): Qualified immunity granted for officer who, hunting a fugitive, ended up at the wrong house and forced six children, including two children under the age of three, to lie on the ground at gunpoint. The officer tried to shoot the family dog, but missed and shot a 10-year-old child that was lying face down, 18 inches away from the officer. The court held that there was no prior case where an officer accidentally shot a child laying on the ground while the officer was aiming at a dog. > Young v. Borders, 850 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 2017): Qualified immunity granted to officers who, without a warrant, started banging on an innocent man’s door without announcing themselves in the middle of the night. When the man opened the door holding his lawfully-owned handgun, officers opened fire, killing. One dissenting judge wrote that if these actions are permitted, “then the Second and Fourth Amendments are having a very bad day in this circuit.” > Estate of Smart v. City of Wichita, 951 F.3d 1161 (10th Cir. 2020): Qualified immunity granted for officer who heard gunshots and fired into a crowd of hundreds of people in downtown Wichita, shooting bystanders and killing an unarmed man who was trying to flee the area. The court held that the shooting was unconstitutional but there was no clearly established law that police officers could not “open fire on a fleeing person they (perhaps unreasonably) believed was armed in what they believed to be an active shooter situation.” (And a bunch of others.) And a matching case has to be very specific: > Baxter v. Bracey, 751 F. App’x 869 (6th Cir. 2018): Qualified immunity granted for officers who sent a police dog to attack a man who had already surrendered and was sitting on the ground with his hands in the air. The court held that a prior case holding it unconstitutional to send a police dog after a person who surrendered by laying on the ground was not sufficiently similar to this case, involving a person who surrendered by sitting on the ground with his hands up. "No clearly established law", my ass.

briffle 7mo ago

A famous case of this is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Philando_Castile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Philando_Castile where the man identitified he had a concealed carry, the cop told him not reach for it, he started to say he wasn't, he was getting his license the officer asked for, with the officer cutting him off repeatedly and the officer shot him because he 'feared for his life'. All they have to prove is that they fear for their life. It does not have to make sense, does not have to be 'justified', etc.

giantg2 7mo ago
"All they have to prove is that they fear for their life. It does not have to make sense, does not have to be 'justified', etc." That's not really true. The standard is a reasonable fear for your life. That's reasonable standard is evaluated in court by how a reasonable person would have reacted. Yes, they do give some deference to the individual who was actually there (police or civilian). The real problems happen because the DA and the courts tend to have bias when it comes to subjecting members of the system to the same process that others face.
- PaulDavisThe1st 7mo ago
  Police officers in court cases don't have to meet that standard until it established that they do not have qualified immunity. In vastly more than 9 out of 10 cases, they do, and thus that standard is completely irrelevant.
  - giantg2 7mo ago
    Qualified immunity only applies to civil cases, not criminal.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 7mo ago
      Most (not all) cases against police officers for excessive/fatal use of force are civil (typically civil rights violations).

SapporoChris 7mo ago

Some more recommendations. Keep your registration and insurance in an easily reachable place like in the passenger side visor/mirror. Keep your hands on the top of the steering wheel where the officer can see them at all times. Keep your car clean. The goals are to make the officer comfortable and minimize the time.