Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: digger48

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/392/1

“Our evaluation of the proper balance that has to be struck in this type of case leads us to conclude that there must be a narrowly drawn authority to permit a reasonable search for weapons for the protection of the police officer, where he has reason to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual, regardless of whether he has probable cause to arrest the individual for a crime. The officer need not be absolutely certain that the individual is armed; the issue is whether a reasonably prudent man, in the circumstances, would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.”

Like enforcing our immigration laws, only Donald Trump has the stones to say, “Enough”.


16 posted on 09/21/2016 3:07:12 PM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: tumblindice

Thank you.

That was the part of one of the decisions that I had read last year on the topic.

I probably got linked to it by a FReeper.


18 posted on 09/21/2016 3:10:57 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: tumblindice

All the Supreme Court cases that I am aware of are from the 1960’s so perhaps it does need to be revisted. Especially given that only around seven or eight (?) percent of the New York stops under Bloomberg actually resulted in a summons or arrest.


20 posted on 09/21/2016 4:00:25 PM PDT by erlayman (yw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson