Remix.run Logo
Remix clone Hacker News
new | show | ask | jobsGithub
▲ alsetmusic 11 hours ago

> 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.

▲briffle 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A famous case of this is 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 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"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 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Qualified immunity only applies to civil cases, not criminal.

▲PaulDavisThe1st 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Most (not all) cases against police officers for excessive/fatal use of force are civil (typically civil rights violations).

▲fireflash38 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh good. So you'll still be dead, and they might get a reprimand. If you're lucky they'll lose their job.

▲ErroneousBosh 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> All they have to prove is that they fear for their life.

In which case, they should spend the rest of their life in a high-security psychiatric hospital.

They're obviously too mentally fragile to be allowed out in the world.

▲SapporoChris an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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.

▲zmb_ 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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 10 hours ago | parent [-]

With body cameras this is a lawsuit.

▲ceejayoz 10 hours ago | parent [-]

But is it a winning one?

Qualified immunity tends to chime in.

▲coryrc 10 hours ago | parent [-]

That doesn't mean what you think it means.

▲ceejayoz 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No? Jessop v. City of Fresno is worth a peek.

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.

▲qingcharles 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

And handed down in only one circuit, so the other 80% of cops in the country can say "well, in my circuit there was no established case law that said stealing the property was a constitutional violation."

▲giantg2 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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 9 hours ago | parent [-]

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.

▲giantg2 9 hours ago | parent [-]

What was the outcome of the lawsuits against the agencies? You don't have to win a suit against an individual. Most of the big payouts have to come from the cities.

Here are a bunch going the other way. https://policefundingdatabase.org/explore-the-database/settl...

I never said that qualified immunity wasn't an issue, just that there tends to be more protections when use of force is involved than with property.

▲ceejayoz 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> Most of the big payouts have to come from the cities.

In other words, from the victimized populace.

I think a cop who steals seized evidence should be personally liable to the person they stole from.

(…and I'd note "v. City of Wichita" is clearly responsive to your question.)

▲saynay 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I would probably say that both the city and the cop should, independently, be liable. Given the position of authority the city provides, it is ultimately responsible to hire and properly train people who will use that authority well, while the individual is also responsible for their own actions.

▲ceejayoz 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Both is good with me, yes.

▲tsimionescu 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, the "qualified" part is relatively misleading, it makes it sound like there are clear limits to police immunity.

▲petesergeant 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> 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”