Aurora PD detain 40+ people

[Syco21]

Just watch the video.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/video/denvercbs4-15750663/aurora-police-chief-describes-wild-search-for-bank-robber-29561750.html

 

Thoughts?

[Vagrant0]

None of the people actually involved complained. The officers were doing their job in properly securing an area to apprehend a suspect. This is no different than a swat team detaining and questioning victims in a hostage situation. Sometimes a lockdown is needed in order to prevent or limit casualties or a dangerous person from remaining at large.

 

As long as individual rights are respected, there is reasonable cause, and the result is justified, I see no problem with this.

 

 

The more disconcerning thing was how they knew that the suspect was in that group.

[marharth]

Can't watch the video right now, but this is the case were the officers pulled over a bunch of people to find a bank robber right?

 

I don't know why people are so worked up over this. It might of been a bit of a mistake, but it really isn't that bad.

 

To my understanding, the car the bank robber used was heading in that direction so police blocked off the road and searched all of the vehicles on that road.

[HeyYou]

None of the people actually involved complained. The officers were doing their job in properly securing an area to apprehend a suspect. This is no different than a swat team detaining and questioning victims in a hostage situation. Sometimes a lockdown is needed in order to prevent or limit casualties or a dangerous person from remaining at large.

 

As long as individual rights are respected, there is reasonable cause, and the result is justified, I see no problem with this.

 

 

The more disconcerning thing was how they knew that the suspect was in that group.

 

So, being hauled out of your car at gun point, hand cuffed, sat on the side of the road for no reason aside from being in the wrong place, at the right time, isn't a violation of their rights?

[Syco21]

As long as individual rights are respected, there is reasonable cause, and the result is justified, I see no problem with this.

Rights weren't respected though, this was straight up illegal. Complaints weren't made to the officers on the scene. And supposedly permission was granted to search the cars. But I'm not going to complain that my rights are being violated to the guys that are violating my rights and pointing shotguns at the faces of children. I'm also not going to tell them no, they can't search my car.

 

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Aurora-brutality.jpg

 

 

Unlawful detainment.

Assault with a deadly weapon.

Illegal search and seizure.

 

I'm sure there's more, but those are the main three. People have filed complaints and others are contacting constitutional lawyers to pursue their options.

 

The officers were doing their job in properly securing an area to apprehend a suspect. This is no different than a swat team detaining and questioning victims in a hostage situation. Sometimes a lockdown is needed in order to prevent or limit casualties or a dangerous person from remaining at large.

The officers weren't doing their job, they were violating the law, assaulted over 40 people and actually put them in more danger than they would have been otherwise. The bank robbery had already occurred and they were following a sketchy lead to find the robber. The person they claim was robber, was armed with two handguns. Probably either 40s or 45s. If he decided to start shooting, dozens of people could have easily been killed. A risk compounded by the sheer number of people being detained. Begs the question of how many would have been shoot by the police for trying to escape the robber's barrage of bullets.

[Vagrant0]

So, being hauled out of your car at gun point, hand cuffed, sat on the side of the road for no reason aside from being in the wrong place, at the right time, isn't a violation of their rights?

If they have reason to suspect that I am an armed, and possibly desperate gunman, I would expect nothing less than to have several guns pointed at me looking for any display of threat or suspicion. The constitution only protects against unlawful search and seizures. In this case it was a lawful one since all evidence suggested that the criminal they were looking for was in the area. Without a controlled situation, that individual would have likely taken flight, or a hostage, or started shooting people. At which point we would be standing here complaining that the police weren't doing their duty to prevent the deaths of innocents. The police in this situation acted professionally from all evidence present. A minor inconvenience and delay from what you were doing at the time is much less of a problem than being shot because the area wasn't secured.

 

It may not be pleasant from a liberalist point of view, but really the best way to control a dangerous situation is to reduce the number of unknown factors. This is why schools have action programs in place that have all teachers and students lock their classrooms and just sit where they are in the case of a shooting or terrorist act. It's to reduce the chance of students becoming caught in the crossfire and to allow police moving through to secure and cordon off one area at a time.

 

We don't get to decide if we want to be in the wrong place at the right time, we only have to try and make it work with the least damage to us and those we care about.

[JimboUK]

I'm no expert on U.S law but surely pulling random people out of their cars at gunpoint and then cuffing them just because they happen to be in the same vicinity as a criminal is unlawful. Seriously, just look at the picture Syco21 posted, how the hell can that be acceptable?

[Ghogiel]

If they have reason to suspect that I am an armed, and possibly desperate gunman, I would expect nothing less than to have several guns pointed at me looking for any display of threat or suspicion.

So point guns and scare people first, in the attempt to provoke a response and illicit suspicion second... say what now?

[Vagrant0]

If they have reason to suspect that I am an armed, and possibly desperate gunman, I would expect nothing less than to have several guns pointed at me looking for any display of threat or suspicion.

So point guns and scare people first, in the attempt to provoke a response and illicit suspicion second... say what now?

A police officer pulling their gun when pulling over a speeder isn't uncommon if the officer has reason to suspect a threat. You may only see the flashlight, but there's a good chance they're holding a gun in their other hand as they tell you to keep your hands where they can see them, pull you out of the car, and pat you down for weapons or drugs as their partner searches the vehicle. If you protest or take any action against them they will usually cuff you, put you in the back of their car, and have your vehicle towed to where it can be thoroughly searched. This is standard procedure. I'm guessing you don't live near an urban center or get out much.

 

Justified in that case is a matter of opinion and which side you are on. But nobody seems to complain about those sorts of situations no matter how frequent they might be.

 

It is also not uncommon for police to setup road blocks and screen each and every driver for Blood Alcohol level at certain times of the year. Nobody seems to raise a heavy stink about those situations despite the fact that all of the officers are armed with a service pistol and there are usually a few patrol cars sitting idle to process any drunk drivers.

[HeyYou]

If they have reason to suspect that I am an armed, and possibly desperate gunman, I would expect nothing less than to have several guns pointed at me looking for any display of threat or suspicion.

So point guns and scare people first, in the attempt to provoke a response and illicit suspicion second... say what now?

A police officer pulling their gun when pulling over a speeder isn't uncommon if the officer has reason to suspect a threat. You may only see the flashlight, but there's a good chance they're holding a gun in their other hand as they tell you to keep your hands where they can see them, pull you out of the car, and pat you down for weapons or drugs as their partner searches the vehicle. If you protest or take any action against them they will usually cuff you, put you in the back of their car, and have your vehicle towed to where it can be thoroughly searched. This is standard procedure. I'm guessing you don't live near an urban center or get out much.

 

Justified in that case is a matter of opinion and which side you are on. But nobody seems to complain about those sorts of situations no matter how frequent they might be.

 

It is also not uncommon for police to setup road blocks and screen each and every driver for Blood Alcohol level at certain times of the year. Nobody seems to raise a heavy stink about those situations despite the fact that all of the officers are armed with a service pistol and there are usually a few patrol cars sitting idle to process any drunk drivers.

 

Really? Standard procedure? If they have reason to believe you were involved in a crime, and may be armed, perhaps. But, when I get pulled over for speeding, yes, the officer cautiously approaches the vehicle, and generally has their hand on their weapon, but, they have NEVER asked me to get out of my car, nor do they have a right to search. They can ASK me if they can search my car, but, I am perfectly within my rights to refuse.