The water bottle contained alcohol. Ms. Baker, being under twenty-one, was charged with minor possession of alcohol. Holding: In this case, the officers should not have had their weapons draw while approaching and they had not reason to open the water bottle and exceeded the scope of the frisk. The officers did not use the frisk for safety reasons and their initial reason for the stop was not substantiated after a search of the grocery bag. Rationale: While the officers may have had a reasonable suspicion for the initial stop, their actions in the circumstances surrounding the stop were incorrect and unlawful.
What if that was one of your family member, wouldn’t you want them to be able to protect themselves? I would think so. Many people don’t think of gun violence this way but, it is very true. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” It’s the person behind the gun that causes the death and deviation known with gun violence. So gun control is not the answer to the problem.
Other officers will cover up these actions when filing reports. Police officers do not treat suspects with dignity in many situations. When officers witness the actions of others, they do not report these cases to superiors. The ethical dilemmas that these conflicts can cause include the public not trusting the police force patrolling their communities. The citizens feel they are guilty until proven innocent.
A person can either allow a person to harm them or fight and in some cases even kill. The stand your ground rule is very controversial. Many argue that just because a person is being attacked does not give them the right to kill. Although, two wrongs don’t make a right, but when protecting yourself, the only thing that is on a person’s heart is making it out of the situation alive. In my opinion, the rule does not lead to more crime, simply because "There's nothing in the statute that provides for any kind of aggressive action in terms of pursues and confront”.
Grifin M. Price Kendra Gallos English III H 3/21/18 Gun Control Will Not Solve Anything Guns are given a bad reputation because of the terrors that can be committed by people who want to cause harm. Those who are gun control advocates wish to ban certain weapons without basis, ban certain weapon attachments, and restrict the rights of the second amendment. Gun control supporters base their opinion on statistics about gun violence that use a portion of data that is not about gun violence just to boost the value of the number. Supporters of gun control dismiss the saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” because they are misinformed about the number of defensive gun uses (DGU) which far outnumbers the
That is portrayed through Clyde’s point of view; the law is untrustworthy and avaricious. For example, when the policemen refused to chase the Barrow gang because they are out of the policemen’s range and they do not want to risk their life in the other region. The policemen are being ignorant while, in fact, their job is to keep justice and peace. The internal factor lays within the character it self. He has a low morality and immaturity.
Criminal behavior would all be situational are we assuming that I’m a law abiding normal citizen or what. If this is pertaining to the me here and now then these factors are kind of pointless to make most of them minus the drug issue. Then again what types of criminal behavior are we talking is it j-walking shoplifting grand theft auto or anything like these. Honesty and dishonesty are always factors in self-report studies simply because when someone lies or is dishonest on a self-report study they then jeopardies the whole study there is no real way to tell if someone is telling the truth on a study or just simply filling in the blanks the way they think that someone would like them filled
It can be called giving the bird, the big one, or between the lines. Just like mooning or cursing this is a societal taboo and should be used with caution, especially around the police. After many recent occurrences, the subject arose, is flipping off the police or anyone for that matter considered a first amendment right, or not? There are many mixed views on if it is in fact considered a first amendment right or not. In the past it has been found to not be covered by the first amendment because it is considered “unprotected”.
Any of those would mean that if withheld any of these, the suspect would eventually need a fix and because irritable and vulnerable to severe police interrogation, and lead to a confession or statement that could incriminate them, just so they could have a fix. Of course I highly doubt they would get an alcoholic beverage from the police after an interrogation, but the point of the matter is that if police officers deny any person their liberty, life or property, i.e. left in extreme heat, no water, no food, the person was deprived of
Fudge and his group, in my opinion, did not make the best decision as a group to retaliate against the skinheads for pulling a gun at Malik. I felt a lot of anger in that scene but I do not have a solution. I am a peaceful person but when you cannot talk to this group and there is not positive police presence on your behalf, I am at a loss for words. With all of that against you, I would opt to just talk to my own group to find positive ways to cope with the