Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (3781)	4/25/2001 12:37:23 PM
From: The Ox	Respond to of 23153

FWIW, my view of the supreme court ruling. I haven't read the ruling, so I may be out of line but from reading the news articles, here's my take: Someone driving a car (who commits an offense which a police officer deems justified in pulling the individual over-however minor the offense may be) without proper identification and documentation has put themselves in a position to be arrested. Part of the problem is the way these newspaper article headlines are written. They only point out the seatbelt infraction, they wait until the fine print to point out that the person didn't have a driver's license or insurance documentation. Automobiles are potentially lethal weapons and too many people fail to recognize this fact. None of us know how the policeman handled the initial contact or how the driver treated the police officer, so no need to speculate on these issues, IMO. There are always 2 sides to that coin.