It's not a question of convenience, it's a question of liberty, a right to privacy, and a requirement that the government actually reasonably believe that you are breaking the law before they confront you. As libertarians like to say, it about the right of every citizen to ve left the hell alone.
Unless the Arizona law is truly limited to reasonable belief based on the actions of the individual, then cops will be able to stop you simply for the crime of breathing while brown. That's wrong. Period. We shouldn't give the government that kind of liberty infringing power, and conservatives, of all people, should understand why. You are, after all, the party of limited govenment.
The fact that the government could stop me while I'm out on my daily run . . . And imprison me until I prove to them that I am innocent (you know, as opposed to them proving that they were justified in stopping me) is a basic affront to the liberty and justice our legal system is based upon. Without reasonable suspicion, or to put it another way, probable cause, you're giving the government power it houldnt have. Malsadas is merely asking how the standard of reasonable suspicion is going to be applied, and what types of actions one must engage in to justify such a "stop."
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 28/4/10 19:42 (UTC)Unless the Arizona law is truly limited to reasonable belief based on the actions of the individual, then cops will be able to stop you simply for the crime of breathing while brown. That's wrong. Period. We shouldn't give the government that kind of liberty infringing power, and conservatives, of all people, should understand why. You are, after all, the party of limited govenment.
The fact that the government could stop me while I'm out on my daily run . . . And imprison me until I prove to them that I am innocent (you know, as opposed to them proving that they were justified in stopping me) is a basic affront to the liberty and justice our legal system is based upon. Without reasonable suspicion, or to put it another way, probable cause, you're giving the government power it houldnt have. Malsadas is merely asking how the standard of reasonable suspicion is going to be applied, and what types of actions one must engage in to justify such a "stop."