In yet another huge blow to our Constitution, the Supreme Court ruled in Jan 2015 that a police officer can violate your 4th Amendment rights if they make a ‘reasonable’ mistake regarding the law.
If you are ignorant of the law, that is no excuse, but if a cop is ignorant of the law, he can violate your rights.
As incredible as it sounds, any cop can ‘play dumb’ and proceed to do anything he wants to you and feel secure that his excuse of ignorance will shield him.
How in the hell can a cop be expected to uphold the law if he doesn’t even know the law?
SEE PAGE 2 TO CONTINUE:
They will be met with my AR
Very untrue, misleading and irresponsible, obviously written by someone with severe reading comprehension issues or just plain ignorant.
The author is trying to misrepresent the meaning and application of the Good-Faith Doctrine/Rule.
The GFD does not apply just because a LEO was unaware of a law/ruling holding that a particular action/conduct violated the Fourth Amendment. But rather, it must show that the LEO not only had a subjective good-faith belief that his or her actions were lawful, but also that it was objectively reasonable for that LEO to hold that belief. If the GFD is triggered by a mistaken belief, based on inadequate training or unawareness of the law or legal procedures, it does not qualify as “good faith.” Just as a suspect’s ignorance of the law is no excuse for violating a law/statute, a LEO’s ignorance of the law is no excuse either…for violating the former’s Cons$#%&!@*utional rights. This is the opinion and standing of the U.S.S.C.
Not all the states, recognize the GFD as an exception to the exclusionary rule.
wrong
If he does not know the law he should not allowed to enforce it.
Then we can shoot them?
To bad for them; my bullets will talk loud, and lethal for me.
Sometimes we have to educate them too.
The Supreme Court needs to be disbanded, just a bunch of old fogies following Obama’s instructions.
Not in my house!!
wrong