The thing is, it isn't "probable cause", it is "reasonable suspicion"
which is a much lower legal standard. From a police perspective, a
curious looking bulge in someone's pants waistband might be reasonable
suspicion that they have a weapon but it isn't probable cause.  This
law also isn't about just the police. I would still be unhappy if it
was limited to just the police but at least the police are trained and
deal with things like reasonable suspicion and probable cause. The
law, however, explicitly charges every single agent of every single
government agency, be it state, city, town, county, what have you,
with initiating an immigration investigation if they have reasonable
suspicion. That is turning everyone who works for the government into
an immigration police force without any training at all.

Judah

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Kris Sisk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm no lawyer, so I could be off here, but doesn't 'suspect' in a legal sense 
> imply that an officer has some reasonable cause for said suspicion? IE, "He 
> looks Mexican" isn't probable cause, but "He either can't or refuses to speak 
> English" might be.
>
> And yes, I realize that in the real world many cops would take it too far and 
> harrass people they wouldn't. I'm thinking more of trying to get a grip on 
> what was going through the lawmakers heads.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:316892
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to