Another cop hater. Boy you guys come out of the woodwork don't you? And you can't even seem to really understand the chronology of a simple narrative.
1) Said driver is stopped for traffic violation
2) Cop notices that the three occupants of the vehicle don't seem to belong together
3) It's o'dark thirty. Odd that three strangers would be sharing a ride at this hour
4) Two are females, one is a juvenile and neither of the adults is her guardian.
This, for all you cop haters is called REASONABLE SUSPICION!
I would have to respectfully suggest that it appears you may have incorrectly read the posting that I made.
If you read the opening of my post, it does in my opinion seem to clearly state that I didn't find any fault in the logic and argument behind making the initial stop or doing an investigation & that doing so was acceptable.
My disagreement with the events lay in the deciding to relieve the citizen of their money after having ascertained that no actual crime was happening & that how local (and national) governments relying on income from law enforcement encounters / operations is in my opinion highly detrimental to our society.
While I would welcome a robust discussion on the merits of reliving citizens of their money using the justice system so as to not appear to be raising taxes which is usually politically unpopular, I hardly think that qualifies me as a "hater".
The founders of our Great Republic understood that Government at each level while often needed & often useful was still a very dangerous entity that could easily be turned against the public that gave them their authority (all power, laws and authority coming only from and by will of the people). As such it was imperative that citizens actively took an interest in the actions of their government at each level to ensure their own freedoms, by setting limits on what the government was allowed to do and providing a robust discussion and active participation in public debate & decision making when various issues arose or limits were bumped up against.
In the end, it is both the duty & right of the citizens to determine through their elected officials and polices / laws that are passed, what laws we must follow and how they should be enforced & how public safety is ensured, while also not violating the rights of others as guaranteed by the constitution. This is the basis of why in modern times we have gone to a robust police force and court system. We have the police and the courts, so we can guarantee everyone's rights which are impossible to guarantee when law enforcement and societal order have to be handled on an ad hoc basis by mobs of the local town folk who tend to lean towards "find the usual suspects and string them up".
It would be unfactual to argue that the police forces all across this country are 100% of the time perfect saints and those that tell them what to do are also 100% perfect. One can strongly argue against the excesses they feel happen & the conditions that they are allowed to happen in & continue in, while still being very supportive of all those that choose the profession and honorably serve the public good & strongly condemning those in the profession who choose to step outside the lines or show exceptionally poor judgment / actions.
Just as one can be passionate about our country and our constitution and our greatness, while still passionately conversing publically about one's views that the politicians and systems of government are corrupted.
Just as one can be passionate about supporting our military, while still wishing to engage in the very needed public discussion and discourse on if our elected politicians are correctly using our military for things that are in the actual national interest and with the actual national long term good in mind, or are usurping it for various corporate and geopolitical gain of others not benefiting the country, or even if simply they have not properly taken into account the long term consequences of their actions.
I meant no offense to you & if you feel that that way, I would be happy to further discuss it, as I think perhaps it may be a simple miscommunication.
