|
|
Post by erictheblue on May 30, 2011 8:40:36 GMT -5
There is also public transportation. You would, I concede, need a car if you lived out in the boonies. However, for city living, a car really isn't a necessity, unless your work (like my mum's -- she works for the school district in the OT/PT department) involves transporting large objects. Two reasons why public transportation isn't a viable option, even in cities. 1) It may not go where you need to go. The DC public transit system is pretty good, but there are parts of the city where there are no subway stations and buses do not go there often. Or the bus route may take you far out of your way, adding considerable time to your transit. 2) You may live in a city, but work elsewhere. That is the situation at my internship - 3 of the 4 attorneys (and me) live in the city, but the job is in the next county over and is rural. Buses don't go out there, so the only option is to drive. The suspect turned a corner. The police followed him, but there was a time when the officers could no longer see him. They knew he had made the turn because they saw him do it, but after he was out of sight, they could not watch him. I will also repeat again... THE OFFICERS HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO ENTER. They had a valid arrest warrant. They had followed the subject of that warrant to this location. A suspect cannot end pursuit that began in public by simply running into a private residence. The officers knocked and heard noises which, considered they had just seen the suspect run in this direction, reasonably sounded like the suspect (for whom they had a valid warrant) was destroying evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by John E on May 30, 2011 9:08:47 GMT -5
I still don't think they had any right to go barging into an apartment without a warrant, unless they know for a fact that the person they are pursuing is in there. Otherwise, get a warrant. Late to the party (as always), but I facepalmed at this. Basically, it means that if any criminal fleeing the cops wants to get away scot free, all s/he has to do is run into an apartment building, get JUST out of sight of the cops, go into one of the apartments, and be quiet. (Hell, he can even make noise) And the cops can't do shit. |
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on May 30, 2011 9:59:54 GMT -5
How far do you consider work beyond car? Oh, let me guess, "You can just move closer" or "find another job". There is also public transportation. You would, I concede, need a car if you lived out in the boonies. However, for city living, a car really isn't a necessity, unless your work (like my mum's -- she works for the school district in the OT/PT department) involves transporting large objects. You do realize not every city has public transport, right? Hell, where I work many, if not most drive from the city like Flint and Sandusky and even Port Huron to work every day. 50 miles one way. This utopia of yours where only certain people need cars is a dream that will never come to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 30, 2011 10:00:56 GMT -5
There is also public transportation. You would, I concede, need a car if you lived out in the boonies. However, for city living, a car really isn't a necessity, unless your work (like my mum's -- she works for the school district in the OT/PT department) involves transporting large objects. Two reasons why public transportation isn't a viable option, even in cities. 1) It may not go where you need to go. The DC public transit system is pretty good, but there are parts of the city where there are no subway stations and buses do not go there often. Or the bus route may take you far out of your way, adding considerable time to your transit. 2) You may live in a city, but work elsewhere. That is the situation at my internship - 3 of the 4 attorneys (and me) live in the city, but the job is in the next county over and is rural. Buses don't go out there, so the only option is to drive. The suspect turned a corner. The police followed him, but there was a time when the officers could no longer see him. They knew he had made the turn because they saw him do it, but after he was out of sight, they could not watch him. I will also repeat again... THE OFFICERS HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO ENTER. They had a valid arrest warrant. They had followed the subject of that warrant to this location. A suspect cannot end pursuit that began in public by simply running into a private residence. The officers knocked and heard noises which, considered they had just seen the suspect run in this direction, reasonably sounded like the suspect (for whom they had a valid warrant) was destroying evidence. This post shows why WMD needs to read up on the law, because she has no gorram clue what she is talking about. It is one thing to be ignorant, everybody is ignorant about something. It is an entirely different matter to act as if your ignorance is knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on May 30, 2011 10:02:56 GMT -5
I still don't think they had any right to go barging into an apartment without a warrant, unless they know for a fact that the person they are pursuing is in there. Otherwise, get a warrant. Late to the party (as always), but I facepalmed at this. Basically, it means that if any criminal fleeing the cops wants to get away scot free, all s/he has to do is run into an apartment building, get JUST out of sight of the cops, go into one of the apartments, and be quiet. (Hell, he can even make noise) And the cops can't do shit. Like I said before. Some people think the cops at that point should just throw up their hands and think "Ohwell, better luck next time." Though with Kitty I think it's more because her pet "crime that shouldn't be enforced" is involved |
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 30, 2011 10:24:10 GMT -5
Late to the party (as always), but I facepalmed at this. Basically, it means that if any criminal fleeing the cops wants to get away scot free, all s/he has to do is run into an apartment building, get JUST out of sight of the cops, go into one of the apartments, and be quiet. (Hell, he can even make noise) And the cops can't do shit. Like I said before. Some people think the cops at that point should just throw up their hands and think "Ohwell, better luck next time." Though with Kitty I think it's more because her pet "crime that shouldn't be enforced" is involved I wonder if she thinks that cops should let a fleeing rapist or abuser go free because s/he turned at a corner. |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on May 30, 2011 10:43:23 GMT -5
Maybe in your city, but in cities like mine, which are ridiculously spread out, with a public transportation system that's struggling to catch up to the urban sprawl and population growth, not to mention the sky-high housing costs (meaning that it's not always possible to find a place close to where you work without going bankrupt in the process), getting by without a car is a nightmare -- especially if you've got kids and/or a social life.
I know someone who had to quit her old job because public transit meant she'd be stuck on a 3.5 hour commute (one way, meaning 7 hours on the bus/c-train for every shift), and the cost of a cab there and back canceled out a significant chunk of her daily earnings. And she doesn't live out in the boonies -- her apartment was within a few miles of the downtown core -- nor did she work out in the middle of no where (it was well within the city limits, and not off in a distant suburb).
|
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on May 30, 2011 17:40:40 GMT -5
I went through something like that years ago. Went to Huron when I was about 17. Took the bus once I got there. To get from one side of town to the other it took me just over 2 hours with all the transfers and whatnot.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on May 30, 2011 19:07:17 GMT -5
To get 7.2 miles with a bus pass, it'll take me a little over 1.5 hours with catching the bus to the depot, switching buses, catching the bus at the end of that line for the connection. Yeeeah.
|
|
|
|
Post by rookie on May 31, 2011 12:04:59 GMT -5
Buses don't come within five miles of my house. And I live just just outside of Baltimore, MD. Baltimore is a major metropolitan area. And the buses that do traverse the city proper only go to the stadiums. So if you don't want to go there, you're either taking your car or SOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 31, 2011 12:36:28 GMT -5
It's almost as if public transportation in the US is unreliable, sporadic, and impractical.
|
|
|
|
Post by rookie on May 31, 2011 13:43:04 GMT -5
It's almost as if public transportation in the US is unreliable, sporadic, and impractical. No it's not. It's a practical alternative to everyone having our own car. Kitty told us so. |
|
|
|
Post by booley on May 31, 2011 14:09:44 GMT -5
I still don't think they had any right to go barging into an apartment without a warrant, unless they know for a fact that the person they are pursuing is in there. Otherwise, get a warrant. Late to the party (as always), but I facepalmed at this. Basically, it means that if any criminal fleeing the cops wants to get away scot free, all s/he has to do is run into an apartment building, get JUST out of sight of the cops, go into one of the apartments, and be quiet. (Hell, he can even make noise) And the cops can't do shit. Yes, if someone fleeing the police manage sot get away and hide, then the cops can just go into your home because you had the bad luck to live in the area. So yes they get away scott free.... as long as they also manage to get out of the building without the cops seeing them (since they know he's in there some where) and before the cops can get a warrant which would allow them to search legally, and if the guy also manages to evade the cops who will undoubtidly keep searching, especially now that they will probably at that point have a good idea of who this person is and where he lives. It seems your scenario has a lot of "what ifs". Especially when the alternative to criminals sometimes getting away is a police state. |
|
|
|
Post by booley on May 31, 2011 14:13:00 GMT -5
It's almost as if public transportation in the US is unreliable, sporadic, and impractical. No it's not. It's a practical alternative to everyone having our own car. Kitty told us so. I would point out that in many cities it is a great alternative opt owning a car. Lots of people in New York, Chicago and elsewhere get along fine without a car. I didn't need a car when I lived in San Diego. But here in St. Louis where the public transportation has been underfunded for years in favor of cars and highways, it's a different story. Like any other thing, Public transportation only works as well as we make it work. |
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on May 31, 2011 14:21:29 GMT -5
Yes, if someone fleeing the police manage sot get away and hide, then the cops can just go into your home because you had the bad luck to live in the area. So yes they get away scott free.... as long as they also manage to get out of the building without the cops seeing them (since they know he's in there some where) and before the cops can get a warrant which would allow them to search legally, and if the guy also manages to evade the cops who will undoubtidly keep searching, especially now that they will probably at that point have a good idea of who this person is and where he lives. It seems your scenario has a lot of "what ifs". Especially when the alternative to criminals sometimes getting away is a police state. Are you willingly being obtuse? It isn't a case of "Criminal gets away, therefore, free searches in suspected neighbourhood". It is a case of "Criminal gets out of sight during a chase, with police close behind. Upon getting to where criminal was last seen going, cops have two choices as to which they think the criminal could have gone. Therefore, they went with the choice where they could hear sound coming from". Bit long-winded, but it is what the situation is. They were close-enough behind and had plenty of reason to believe the criminal (who they begun chasing in public) was in that house. That is well within the area of probable cause, something that the law is clear on. This is also not something that leads to a slippery slope of "OH NOES! POLICE STATE!! D:" and trying to insinuate one has to choose between letting the occasional criminal get away or a police state stinks of a False Dichotomy. Not to mention, your nit-pick on "What if's" is inane. |
|
