Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: In Lone Dissent, Justice Sotomayor Blasts Majority Opinion: 'No Foundation in Fact or Logic' [View all]unblock
(52,190 posts)65. I don't disagree with the substance of what you're saying
But legally, when you're pulled over, that's an arrest. That's legally important, because it means the police can't do it to just anyone, the way they can just walk up to anyone on the street and say hey, mind if I ask you a few questions. *that* is not an arrest.
Because pulling someone over is an arrest, the police need probable cause of some infraction.
But you are correct in that if someone asked you "have you ever been arrested" you would so no if you've only been pulled over and maybe gotten a ticket or two, but never been taken to the police station, booked, etc.
That's a difference between the legal definition of "arrest" and the lay definition of the term.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
79 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In Lone Dissent, Justice Sotomayor Blasts Majority Opinion: 'No Foundation in Fact or Logic' [View all]
Calista241
Apr 2020
OP
But he didn't. Part of his stop was running a plate for no NO reason. There was no ...
marble falls
Apr 2020
#3
No, this case isn't about "running plates". There is no question as to the legality of that.
PoliticAverse
Apr 2020
#29
No, read the dissent. The case isn't about the legality of "runnng plates"...
PoliticAverse
Apr 2020
#35
re: "So the police need evidence before they do an investigation to find evidence."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Apr 2020
#72
Driving a car which is owned by someone with a suspended license is probable cause
docgee
Apr 2020
#74
not any time they feel like it, any time they reasonably think the driver is illegal
oldsoftie
Apr 2020
#32
The legal requirement is "reasonable suspicion", is it reasonable to suspect
PoliticAverse
Apr 2020
#55
Yes, justices Kagan and Ginsburg argued that it's reasonable to assume the car owner is likely
PoliticAverse
Apr 2020
#38
But part of running plates is to make sure a car is currently legal to be driven on the
cstanleytech
Apr 2020
#18
But that is just it once the plate was run then the officer knows the owner cannot be the driver and
cstanleytech
Apr 2020
#20
Well I will point out that the only judge that dissented was Sotomayor so clearly the other liberal
cstanleytech
Apr 2020
#26
"technically". Not "actually". Being detained is not the same as being arrested.
oldsoftie
Apr 2020
#60
There are some here who think that this was a fair bust, it wasn't. The deputy was 'fishing'.
marble falls
Apr 2020
#2
You make a good point; just because something isnt fair doesnt mean its illegal.
oldsoftie
Apr 2020
#40
Lots of people say "if you haven't done anything wrong, what's wrong with an investigation."
Igel
Apr 2020
#17
No it's not about the scanning itself it's about whether the information gleaned from the scanning
PoliticAverse
Apr 2020
#54
Well, I certainly have no problem with the erosion of my rights, or yours for that matter.
warmfeet
Apr 2020
#25