Quote:At least I see where you stopped reading. This case did a lot to define the boundaries of the law.


So any cop can claim the belief they or others are in danger and can place their hands on citizens. How do you see this enhanced focus in high crime areas like Chicago playing out? Do you see the risk of average citizens having their rights violated by the other sections you didn't cite?

Quote:The term Reasonable suspicion does mean something.  It means based on articulable facts and reasonable inferences an officer can stop you for questioning, frisk the outer garments of your clothing solely to determine if you have a weapon for his protection and the protection of the public at large and then question you about the suspicious behavior.  

 

The officer in question would still have to show cause for his "stop and frisk".  It is explicit in the "Terry standard" that the state cannot rely solely on the "good faith, or hunch" of a police officer.  

 

This is when an officer, based on his training and expertise as a law enforcement agent, makes a judgement that a set of behaviors may reasonably lend itself to the commission of a crime or a danger to himself or the public at large.  The scope of the "Frisk" is limited to the detection of weapons by a patting of the outer clothing, not a general search for contraband or other evidentiary material.  

 

If it is shown that a police department is using said procedure in the absence of reasonable suspicion and infringing on the rights of a population or specific ethnic group then the program can be shut down. 

 

Moreover, Trump can encourage this practice, but he isn't in  a position to mandate it's use in every police precinct accross the country.  

 

I think that when you look at a place like Chicago its something that you have to consider.  This is a situation where just waking up in the morning puts you in the same relative danger as the kid waking up in Afghanistan.   If there is a method of aggressive policing that can save 80% of the lives being lost every year in places like that then you would have to make one heck of an argument against its implementation.