Undercover Police cars

[420sx]

Originally Posted by SpEcRv9

thanks for highlighting the part where you're an idiot so I didn't have to do it myself.

You disagree? I could debate you for an entire thread on that matter alone.

Say youre growing pot in your house, but the police have NO evidence of it. Say they come in without a warrant, and arrest you. Yeah, youre guilty of growing pot. But the entire case will be thrown out if the judge decides the police didnt have the right to enter your house. So again I say- Just because youre guilty of something doesnt mean the police can use whatever means necessary to catch you. Theres a certain protocol that protects your rights that they have to follow. I beleive this cop racing entrapment bs is very very close to infringing on those rights.

Now can you please highlight for me how that makes me an idiot?

[Mr.Crx]

Originally Posted by 420sx

Its not about owning up to what you're responsible for. Its about being persuaded by the police...
If someone baited me into racing them, id fight it tooth and nail. Not necessarily because I believe its an illegal way of catching people- I'm sure there's some loophole that they slip through to somehow word so it doesn't sound like entrapment... but to me, that's exactly what it is. The fact that I agree to "race" (if that's what we wanna call dropping a gear) is irrelevant. If the cop initiates the race, that's entrapment

You still don't get it and that's about the 2nd most idiotic statement I've heard.
How is it NOT about owning up?
You're looking for a way out of a situation that YOU participated in. The officer DIDN'T make you do it, or do you not have self control, free will and choice?
It seems simple.
WTF is wrong with ppl?
Knowing the difference between right and wrong and taking responsibility for their mistakes?

[420sx]

Originally Posted by Mr.Crx

You still don't get it and that's about the 2nd most idiotic statement I've heard.
How is it NOT about owning up?
You're looking for a way out of a situation that YOU participated in. The officer DIDN'T make you do it, or do you not have self control, free will and choice?
It seems simple.
WTF is wrong with ppl?
Knowing the difference between right and wrong and taking responsibility for their mistakes?

Were just going in circles here. Im not trying to argue... but youre just not getting it.

Whether or not you did something wrong, or participated in an illegal activity is irrelevant if the manner in which you are caught is deemed to be entrapment. The debate here isnt whether or not you should accept responsibility for racing, its about whether or not baiting someone into a race is entrapment.

Taken from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm

A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

Whether or not youre guilty becomes irrelevant the moment that entrapment can be proven. Based on that definition, i cant see any other way to veiw the police using bait cars to catch racers besides entrapment.

[jpalamar]

I personally feel that it should be considered entrapment if you are egged on my law informacement to commit the crime that you may or may not of done without being provoked. Don't know the specific laws though and I'm sure there is legal grounds to be convicted of the crime or they wouldn't use this method on racing, drugs, ect...

[Mr.Crx]

Originally Posted by jpalamar

I personally feel that it should be considered entrapment if you are egged on my law enforcement to commit the crime that you may or may not of done without being provoked.

That's BS.
Ppl know the difference between right and wrong. Simply walk away.

So decoys that entice child predators into meeting up is entrapment?
Or an undercover officer looking to buy drugs and finding someone to sell to them is also entrapment?

My point is, if you have any common sense or were not already self inclined to do so, you would not participate in any such activity.
Basically, if you are not a pedophile you would not get caught looking for kids. If you were not a drug dealer, you would not be looking for sales and if you not into racing on the street, you would not engage in such a thing.

[TNTramair]

Originally Posted by 420sx

Were just going in circles here. Im not trying to argue... but youre just not getting it.

Whether or not you did something wrong, or participated in an illegal activity is irrelevant if the manner in which you are caught is deemed to be entrapment. The debate here isnt whether or not you should accept responsibility for racing, its about whether or not baiting someone into a race is entrapment.

Taken from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm


Whether or not youre guilty becomes irrelevant the moment that entrapment can be proven. Based on that definition, i cant see any other way to veiw the police using bait cars to catch racers besides entrapment.

edit: i posted this after Mr.crx made his point...which i agree with.

so what would you say about all the idiots that get caught soliciting prositutes for sex who are actually undercovers?? can they claim entrapment also?? they are basically doin the same thing that the officer would do on the highway to get you to race right? so whats the differance between the 2 situations? or here, a 3rd....an undercover cop selling drugs to some crack head. both those situations they are using something to bate you into "doin something you're not supposed to do"...they use good looking chicks in skimpy alfeits and int he other case use a substance that "looks" exactly like illegal narcotics...in some case using real narcotics.

they are all virtually the same situations but obviously the punishment would be differant for all 3.

[turboman808]

Originally Posted by 420sx

Whether or not youre guilty becomes irrelevant the moment that entrapment can be proven. Based on that definition, i cant see any other way to veiw the police using bait cars to catch racers besides entrapment.

Really though if you go into court and tell the jury "Yeah I street race, so what, that was entrapment." Your gonna get convicted.

I am not convinced although I probably wouldn't convict if I was on a jury just because I hate the whole police/judicial scam.

[daewoo]

Originally Posted by sleeper15

i got into a arguement with one of my friends about this before. i was on the side of "it is entrapment".

but, after we stopped argueing, and i went home. i started doing some re-search. asking some people i know who are involved in law enforcement. and, unfourtantly, it is not considered entrapment.

it's the same as a undercover cope posing as a prositute, and you walking up and buying her "services". and, the cops can't just take any modd'd car and use it as a unmarked car for this. they got to get approved by the state i belive. so, right there, it shows it's legal.

most sting operation on tv show the person pull up to the undercover cop on the side of the road, they do not approach the car. BUT with undercover cop cars they are pulling behind/next to you and tailgaiting you waiting for someone to do something illegal. these two things should not be compared

[Yes SiR]

Not every situation is black and white; the law leaves room for interpretation for this very reason. And while simply giving someone the opportunity to commit a crime is NOT entrapment, there will be times where the boundaries are overstepped. No one is arguing that point, yet it seems to be the only thing people are posting about. If these types of programs did, in fact, fall under the legal definition of entrapment, they wouldn't be so prevalent. I'm sure the majority of people caught using these methods claim entrapment and if that were the case, such programs would be cut, rather than expanded. Either way, I know I'm not going to have to worry about it.

[420sx]

Originally Posted by Mr.Crx

That's BS.
Ppl know the difference between right and wrong. Simply walk away.

So decoys that entice child predators into meeting up is entrapment?
Or an undercover officer looking to buy drugs and finding someone to sell to them is also entrapment?

My point is, if you have any common sense or were not already self inclined to do so, you would not participate in any such activity.
Basically, if you are not a pedophile you would not get caught looking for kids. If you were not a drug dealer, you would not be looking for sales and if you not into racing on the street, you would not engage in such a thing.

Like Ive already stated, several times now... the difference is the PEDOPHILE APPROACHES the decoy! The pedophile finds him online and engages in illicit conversation. The police simply set the trap and let HIM walk into it. THATS the difference. With the topic we're debating- police are ANTAGONIZING other drivers! Totally not even close to the same thing!!

Originally Posted by TNTramair

edit: i posted this after Mr.crx made his point...which i agree with.

so what would you say about all the idiots that get caught soliciting prositutes for sex who are actually undercovers?? can they claim entrapment also?? they are basically doin the same thing that the officer would do on the highway to get you to race right? so whats the differance between the 2 situations? or here, a 3rd....an undercover cop selling drugs to some crack head. both those situations they are using something to bate you into "doin something you're not supposed to do"...they use good looking chicks in skimpy alfeits and int he other case use a substance that "looks" exactly like illegal narcotics...in some case using real narcotics.

they are all virtually the same situations but obviously the punishment would be differant for all 3.

See above. Similar situations, perhaps.. but the same? Not even close. Again I say... the difference is in the MANNER in which the bait is given and taken. A pedophile is going to commit his crime either way. The police are simply providing the opportunity. Theyre not putting him in a situation where he otherwise would have done nothing, and they're certainly not pressuring him to do anything. Same with the crackhead... although I'm not 100% sure how those sting operations go down, Im fairly sure the cop can't approach the crackhead and OFFER him a rock.

Originally Posted by turboman808

Really though if you go into court and tell the jury "Yeah I street race, so what, that was entrapment." Your gonna get convicted.

Well no ****. I'm not saying thats the argument i'd take in court, but in a public forum, its a valid statement. LEGALLY (and i mean, by the book) if you can prove entrapment, IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE GUILTY. The entire case will be thrown out on that basis alone. Any evidence they have on you is no longer valid if you can convince a judge or a jury that you were entrapped. (idk even know if thats proper engrish but you get what im saying lol).

I wouldnt use that argument to convince anybody that I had indeed been entrapped, but it is a valid argument in proving the point that even if you are guilty, it doesnt matter. If your rights were violated in the process of collecting evidence against you, you cannot be charged using that evidence. In a murder case, that specific piece of evidence would be thrown out. In this situation, the whole case would be thrown out.

Originally Posted by daewoo

most sting operation on tv show the person pull up to the undercover cop on the side of the road, they do not approach the car. BUT with undercover cop cars they are pulling behind/next to you and tailgaiting you waiting for someone to do something illegal. these two things should not be compared

Exactly. The difference is a passive bait versus INITIATING the illegal activity.

[420sx]

Originally Posted by Rush

Here's where my train of thought ended up:

These days, being provoked into street racing is not something I need to be concerned about. I just don't do it.

However .. if one of these undercover cop cars were to come flying up on my ass and then start tailgating me, I would NOT hesitate to hop on my brakes to warn him to get the hell away from me. I do that to anyone that comes obnoxiously close to my rear bumper for no good reason. But could that 'brake warning' be enough to earn me a ticket? And if so, for what? Because THAT would really infuriate me.

Thats a good point too, and i completely missed your post! Id even go as far to say- what happens if you brake check a cop and they hit you? EVERY SINGLE rear end collision is ALWAYS ruled the person in backs fault. Would the cop man up, and say he should have been in control of his vehicle, not followed so closely, and accept fault? Or is there a huge double standard? Obviously he'd try to say you did it on purpose- but would that matter once the rest of the cops show up? I've never heard of someone getting rear ended and being at fault. Proving a "swoop and squat" is near impossible.. what would happen? I agree with you though, if he tried to give a ticket for a "brake warning," id be pissed too.

[Diablo2424]

One more reason, most of the time before I race (not that I street race :-X) if someone with a nice looking car pulls up next to me, I'd like to pull over somewhere and check it out... I'd rather look at it in detail and appreciate someone's hard work and joy... not too mention it'll help me decide if I should even bother trying or not, lol. Soo if a cop did pull next to me trying to get me to run, I'd be trying to get him to roll his window down to tell him to pull in somewhere so I could check out his car... whoops.

[Diablo2424]

Originally Posted by 420sx

Thats a good point too, and i completely missed your post! Id even go as far to say- what happens if you brake check a cop and they hit you? EVERY SINGLE rear end collision is ALWAYS ruled the person in backs fault. Would the cop man up, and say he should have been in control of his vehicle, not followed so closely, and accept fault? Or is there a huge double standard? Obviously he'd try to say you did it on purpose- but would that matter once the rest of the cops show up? I've never heard of someone getting rear ended and being at fault. Proving a "swoop and squat" is near impossible.. what would happen? I agree with you though, if he tried to give a ticket for a "brake warning," id be pissed too.

Regarding brake checking a cop, my friend got rear ended by a cop once...it wasn't even a brake check.. he was sitting at a light and the cop for whatever reason didn't stop in time and bumped him... so the first thing my friend did was call 911 to have a different cop come out... too bad the cops obviously knew each other and said the cop's bar lights were on so it's his fault for not getting out of the way... even though his light's weren't on, and my friend was sitting at a red light, where could he possibly go? he ended up paying some tiny fine in court and it was over... he said he would've fought it if it had points or a higher fine... but it wasn't worth fighting over... one more reason I'm not a fan of cops, especially in my area, they're REALLY crooked

[SpEcRv9]

Originally Posted by 420sx

You disagree? I could debate you for an entire thread on that matter alone.

Say youre growing pot in your house, but the police have NO evidence of it. Say they come in without a warrant, and arrest you. Yeah, youre guilty of growing pot. But the entire case will be thrown out if the judge decides the police didnt have the right to enter your house. So again I say- Just because youre guilty of something doesnt mean the police can use whatever means necessary to catch you. Theres a certain protocol that protects your rights that they have to follow. I beleive this cop racing entrapment bs is very very close to infringing on those rights.

Now can you please highlight for me how that makes me an idiot?

I highlighted it for you....

there's a huge difference between growing pot and the cops get a search warrant, and bust you with no evidence etc...than a undercover pull up next to you entice you to race and pull you over when you decide to be an idiot and race....

[phate1229]

by the way if anyone wants that light bar for an 06/07 wrx/sti I've got one, never installed

[Chris B.]

Originally Posted by TNTramair

so what would you say about all the idiots that get caught soliciting prositutes for sex who are actually undercovers?? can they claim entrapment also??

No, that situation is different. The people approaching the girls on the corner have to instigate the transaction and use certain language to say they intend to give the under cover cop, acting as a prostitute, money or goods for sex. The undercover cop just stands there looking like a hooker and waits for customers. Isf the under cover cop were to walk up to a car at a stop light, knock on the window and ask if the guy in the car, who was minding his own business, wants a blowjob or some other form of sex then its entrapment.

Originally Posted by TNTramair

they are basically doin the same thing that the officer would do on the highway to get you to race right?

Nope, its competely different and that's why I think some people disagree with the actions of the undercover cop trying to instigate a race. The undercover cop's actions behind the wheel are similar to the undercover cop acting as a prostitute coming up to someone and saying, "I'm so horny, want to have sex? I'd do a cute guy like you really cheap, give you a good price" or "Love you long time five dolla!"

Originally Posted by TNTramair

so whats the differance between the 2 situations? or here, a 3rd....an undercover cop selling drugs to some crack head. both those situations they are using something to bate you into "doin something you're not supposed to do"...they use good looking chicks in skimpy alfeits and int he other case use a substance that "looks" exactly like illegal narcotics...in some case using real narcotics.

they are all virtually the same situations but obviously the punishment would be differant for all 3.

Actually the situation is different. The undercover cop selling drugs can't be approaching everyone that's walking by if they want a rock and name their price and the undercover cop acting like a prostitute can't approach people and instigate the transaction. So why can the undercover cop behind the wheel rev their engine at people, tailgate, etc... and not have it called entrapment.

I believe that's why some people disagree with what is beign done to instigate a race or just drop a gear nad get out of there and "entrap" people into doing something they wouldn't do if they were left alone to drive and mind their own business.

I can see both sides of the arguement, but I don't thing anyone that got one of those "racing" tickets has challenged it in court to the point where it went high enough for a high level state court to say if it is or isn't entrapment. So basically arguing over it is pointless, unless its in a courtroom.

[ambitiousCK]

If I'd ever notice something like this behind me I'd slam on my brembos =P then ask the "law enforcement" what all the reving and flashing lights was about...I'd like to see them explain themselves lol

[Carmine908]

Originally Posted by ambitiousCK

If I'd ever notice something like this behind me I'd slam on my brembos =P then ask the "law enforcement" what all the reving and flashing lights was about...I'd like to see them explain themselves lol

I don't know about the rules in PA but in jersey if you are rear ended its that persons fault. Hmmm a cop hitting me =D... wait nope they'd still **** me somehow!

[jen.]

I didn't take the time to read this whole thread but I know for sure it goes on in PA.

A couple years ago I was behind a forest green modified mustang with a loud exhaust. It had a license plate that read "I <3 street racing" and the center brake light was replaced with a logo that read "pony express" every time the brakes were hit.

Sure enough when I pulled up next to the guy, his window was slightly cracked, he was in uniform, and he had the police car set up with computer and all on the inside.

[Rally Sport]

Originally Posted by Diablo2424

Regarding brake checking a cop, my friend got rear ended by a cop once...it wasn't even a brake check.. he was sitting at a light and the cop for whatever reason didn't stop in time and bumped him... so the first thing my friend did was call 911 to have a different cop come out... too bad the cops obviously knew each other and said the cop's bar lights were on so it's his fault for not getting out of the way... even though his light's weren't on, and my friend was sitting at a red light, where could he possibly go? he ended up paying some tiny fine in court and it was over... he said he would've fought it if it had points or a higher fine... but it wasn't worth fighting over... one more reason I'm not a fan of cops, especially in my area, they're REALLY crooked

This is really bothering me. This is why so many people hate on cops, sure they're just helping out a buddy, but then they're not playing by the rules we're supposed to live by.