Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cptsplashdown
...The fact is you need a license to drive a car, but that doesn't mean that being in possession of a car constitutes probable cause for an officer to start an investigation simply because driving a car is illegal without a license....
|
Bad analogy. The car itself isn't illegal without something else. But if the car doesn't have current registration tags, that's another matter.
In the case of, for example, a machine gun, you are openly holding an object which is inherently illegal to possess, unless certain non-obvious conditions have been satisfied. It is, effectively, presumptively illegal. You, and only you, can show that you are in lawful possession of this item, and only by showing the proper paperwork.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cptsplashdown
...The burden of proof is in fact usually on the LEO to prove that a crime has been committed, aka: the presumption of innocence....
|
No, an LEO doesn't need to prove that a crime has been committed, and that you did it, in order to legally arrest you. He only needs probable cause. The presumption of innocence arises in the court room.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cptsplashdown
...Yet many seem quite willing to subject themselves to what may be an illegal search and seizure with nary a thought to their constitutional rights,...
|
This is not about a search. You have in your possession, in plain sight, an object which is contraband unless you have some paperwork to show that you have gone through the hoops necessary to lawfully possess it. An LEO doesn't have to assume that you have gone through those hoops.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cptsplashdown
...Sorry I just think differently.
|
Perhaps, but how you think really doesn't matter. What matters is how judges think. I know something about that, because knowing such things is how I made my living for over 30 years.