• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why do police get to determine "intent?"

Lithium381

Lithium381

Lifer
I've seen lots of laws where people are arrested on their "intent", as judged by a third party. I didn't know the police were employing Miss Cleo now! Sounds like crap out of Minority Report.

Driver had "a hidden compartment" and obviously had the intent to traffic drugs.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/21/driver-arrested-in-ohio-for-secret-car-c#comment
If you're NEAR your car and you're drunk, you're obviously intent to go drive it. I don't understand why they don't wait 10 minutes and just catch you in the act?

What if i'm just going to get my pillow and blanket out of the back seat to crash at my buddies house after a night of festivities? Really?

Why give them so much leeway?
 
Lithium381 said:
I've seen lots of laws where people are arrested on their "intent", as judged by a third party. I didn't know the police were employing Miss Cleo now! Sounds like crap out of Minority Report.

Driver had "a hidden compartment" and obviously had the intent to traffic drugs.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/21/driver-arrested-in-ohio-for-secret-car-c#comment
If you're NEAR your car and you're drunk, you're obviously intent to go drive it. I don't understand why they don't wait 10 minutes and just catch you in the act?

What if i'm just going to get my pillow and blanket out of the back seat to crash at my buddies house after a night of festivities? Really?

Why give them so much leeway?
Click to expand...

I'll make this quick:


- Politicians pass law

- Police enforce law (arrest)

- Prosecutors/grand jury charge you with a crime if they agree with Police

- Corrections Departments carry out punishment

- Courts interpret law and decide if laws are constitutional



So, why do seemingly unconstitutional laws make it so far before being challenged? Because nobody wants to be the one to stop them.

Who would stick their neck out to stop such an over-step? There is no political risk in passing it, because citizens these days only think of themselves. "I would never have a compartment in my car, so why should I care if it is illegal?"
 
Do you agree that sometimes it is possible to determine intent?

For instance someone is shot 1 time vs. 10 times during which the shooter reloaded the weapon? The first one could be accident depending on the circumstances the second one not so much.
 
brycejones said:
Do you agree that sometimes it is possible to determine intent?

For instance someone is shot 1 time vs. 10 times during which the shooter reloaded the weapon? The first one could be accident depending on the circumstances the second one not so much.
Click to expand...


Exac.......wait......no.
 
It is not up to the police to determine intent in this case. They simply arrested the person and it is up to the state to prove the intent (which is extremely hard).

Also, I think any reasonable person could argue someone, with keys in hand, stumbling drunk towards their car has the intent to drive said vehicle. I do think most laws require you to actual enter the vehicle's driver seat however. If you are in the car without the keys or in the passenger seat, you show you don't have intent to drive. However, you are still subject to public intoxication laws.

Waiting 10 minutes for someone to get in their car and start driving could be too late.


I'd also like to inquire as to what valid reason one would have for a secret compartment being installed into a car? Also, the compartment couldn't have been that secret, as the police could see wires going to it.
 
smackababy said:
I'd also like to inquire as to what valid reason one would have for a secret compartment being installed into a car? Also, the compartment couldn't have been that secret, as the police could see wires going to it.
Click to expand...

None of your business. You don't have to justify empty space.

Some lawyer wanting to be in the papers will jump on this, and it will be struck down.
 
OCGuy said:
None of your business. You don't have to justify empty space.

Some lawyer wanting to be in the papers will jump on this, and it will be struck down.
Click to expand...

In Ohio, you actually do have to justify the empty space. It is illegal to have a space installed with the intent to smuggle illegal substances in. Do I agree with such a silly law? No, but blaming the police for finding it and arresting the person isn't some travesty. The travesty is allowing the law to be put into place in the first place.


I do think the idea of a secret compartment is suspect and a rational person would assume it was used to hide things when the vehicle is searched. Unless, last time I checked, hiding your Backstreet Boys CD collection might seem like a good idea to avoid embarrassment, the vast majority of people with such compartments will use them for hiding illegal items.
 
Lithium381 said:
I've seen lots of laws where people are arrested on their "intent", as judged by a third party. I didn't know the police were employing Miss Cleo now! Sounds like crap out of Minority Report.

Driver had "a hidden compartment" and obviously had the intent to traffic drugs.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/21/driver-arrested-in-ohio-for-secret-car-c#comment
If you're NEAR your car and you're drunk, you're obviously intent to go drive it. I don't understand why they don't wait 10 minutes and just catch you in the act?

What if i'm just going to get my pillow and blanket out of the back seat to crash at my buddies house after a night of festivities? Really?

Why give them so much leeway?
Click to expand...

What if I told you it was the Democrats of that state that gave them that much leeway?


edit: forgot link
http://www.billtrack50.com/BillDetail/190490
 
Last edited:
Lithium381 said:
Driver had "a hidden compartment" and obviously had the intent to traffic drugs.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/21/driver-arrested-in-ohio-for-secret-car-c#comment
Click to expand...

Seems like the defense would be pretty easy. Explain what legitimate purpose you had added hidden compartments to your car for.

Lithium381 said:
If you're NEAR your car and you're drunk, you're obviously intent to go drive it. I don't understand why they don't wait 10 minutes and just catch you in the act?

What if i'm just going to get my pillow and blanket out of the back seat to crash at my buddies house after a night of festivities? Really?

Why give them so much leeway?
Click to expand...

Again it would seem to be a pretty easy defense. Is there a pillow and blanket in your car? Is your buddies house near your car, or is 10 miles away?
 
smackababy said:
In Ohio, you actually do have to justify the empty space. It is illegal to have a space installed with the intent to smuggle illegal substances in. Do I agree with such a silly law? No, but blaming the police for finding it and arresting the person isn't some travesty. The travesty is allowing the law to be put into place in the first place.


I do think the idea of a secret compartment is suspect and a rational person would assume it was used to hide things when the vehicle is searched. Unless, last time I checked, hiding your Backstreet Boys CD collection might seem like a good idea to avoid embarrassment, the vast majority of people with such compartments will use them for hiding illegal items.
Click to expand...


You realize there are always laws on the books that haven't been challenged, that doesn't make them legal laws?

It wont last, as the standard of proof in this country is on the State, and what you believe "most people" do or don't do doesn't come into the equation.
"
 
exactly. . . what some people MIGHT do with something is irrelevant if they DON'T do them!
At least wait until they put the key in the ignition or something. I heard about a guy getting arested on a DUI for being in his front yard having a beer doing yardwork or soemthing because his car was in the driveway and he "had access" to his keys. . . . wtf!
 
Lithium381 said:
I heard about a guy. . . .
Click to expand...

Why do "other people" get to determine "my" intent is probably the real question you should ask.

The reason being, we ask to govern ourselves. The only reasonable laws we can give ourselves, is what your average reasonable person would expect.

If your average reasonable person would assume x = y, then x = y. If you think z = y and have good reason to think z = y, your average reasonable person would disagree with you.
 
smackababy said:
I'd also like to inquire as to what valid reason one would have for a secret compartment being installed into a car? Also, the compartment couldn't have been that secret, as the police could see wires going to it.
Click to expand...

hiding a spare credit card/phone that's not visible to thieves in case of emergencies (break down, and you forgot your wallet/phone whatever).

a place to hide the fascia of your expensive 3rd party car radio so you don't have to carry it with you.

in the US, i assume in some states it wouldn't be illegal to hide your legally purchased firearm in case of a carjacking?

hiding cigarettes from the wife.

plenty of reasons to be fair. hell, just the fact that you're a bit of a handyman and wanted to see if you could modify your own car in that way is perfectly valid. it's your car, why the hell not?
 
mizzou said:
Why do "other people" get to determine "my" intent is probably the real question you should ask.

The reason being, we ask to govern ourselves. The only reasonable laws we can give ourselves, is what your average reasonable person would expect.

If your average reasonable person would assume x = y, then x = y. If you think z = y and have good reason to think z = y, your average reasonable person would disagree with you.
Click to expand...

me determining your intent, or someone determining mine, or any combination. . . and then acting on that with no proof is rediclous. Cops should just hand out speeding tickets to pedestrians then. "i think you're probably going to speed today" . . .
 
The whole "With Intent" add on is bullshit, it's just a way to bust people for something they didn't do. I have however never heard of someone being arrested for DUI without at least being in the driver seat, just being near your car doesn't mean anything, maybe your "intent" was to get your wallet you forgot.
 
I can see it now. Some drunk gets in their car and the cops do nothing and he kills a family with children in their car. Then the Cop gets in trouble for doing nothing. Cops cant win. They were probably trained to do exactly what they did.
 
piasabird said:
I can see it now. Some drunk gets in their car and the cops do nothing and he kills a family with children in their car. Then the Cop gets in trouble for doing nothing. Cops cant win. They were probably trained to do exactly what they did.
Click to expand...

They don't have to wait until they kill someone, just getting in the drivers seat is enough, not too mention inserting and turning the key, the rest of that statement is just silly.
 
judge-dredd-3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top