Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
Scenario....cop suspects a car of having someone impaired driving it. Pulls said car over and realizes that in fact the driver is not impaired and driver and/or passenger start to give the gears to the cop about his judgement. Cop gets his panties in a knot and decides to take away cell phone from driver because he "saw" the guy using it. No proof of anything, yet the cop is both judge and jury.
Some may hate the lippery slope argument, but it is a very very valid one. Look no further than the .05 "law"...which will be challenged and overturned thank god, but until that happens peoples rights are infringed everyday. This is the exact same nonsense and i hope the people of BC (and should it make its way into AB) rise up and demand that such invasive laws and punishments best be left in the hands of a court, not in the hands of a police officer who just may be having a bad day.
|
Your scenario isn't relevant to the topic at hand as you are using a 'bad cop' as a reference. You will never, ever be completely protected from a bad cop but that's an entirely different argument.