[O]fficer safety was such a central concern in public encounters (especially at roadside) that a pat-down search for weapons should be considered well within police discretion. Heytens indicated that authority might even exist if the officer came upon someone changing a tire — if the officer had a notion that the individual was a threat to the officer’s safety.
Just what the government needs--more unaccountable authority for violating individual privacy.
And so much for the argument that "conservative" judges are our last best hope.
And remember: "They" hate us because we're free...
[Via Tom Z]
1 comment:
That's an asinine policy because it's confrontational. It decreases safety, because it starts arguments, and will place the officers in close proximity to those that do have both criminal intent and a weapon.
Only a sadistic statist would insist that his agents have the power to do this. Perhaps he wants confrontations, in order to justify immediate violence in all future encounters?
Post a Comment