Amendment (3.7 Right to Search)

Basically under the proposed law/system if you commit ANY crime police can search you in an attempt to find something illegal on you and essentially up-charge you.
This obviously isn't a thing in real life as it is considered against their rights. Under the new law you could only be searched if they have reasonable suspicion you have something illegal on you pertaining to the crime at hand. Eg. If you are have broke PLPC 12.6 Vehicle Maintenance they won't be able to search you (as this law has no attached jail sentence) but if you area suspect in a 9.2 case they could as you may possibly have a weapon on you. That is to say though obviously if you are recklessly driving and happen to have a gun on you they can still charge you for the gun. Also under the PLPC Arrest means the following: Arrest Process of taking custody of an individual who is involved, or suspected of being involved in a criminal offence so more information can be gathered by an investigation.

I don't believe I missed anything but if I did let me know. I hope this clears things up but I still believe the current system functions better for Perp.
 
Last edited:
As far as I am aware the only crime you can commit and not face a risk of jail time (Automatic search) is jay walking.
 
Avid Feminist said:
Basically under the proposed law/system if you commit ANY crime police can search you in an attempt to find something illegal on you and essentially up-charge you.
This obviously isn't a thing in real life as it is considered against their rights. Under the new law you could only be searched if they have reasonable suspicion you have something illegal on you pertaining to the crime at hand. Eg. If you are trespassing they won't be able to search you but if you area suspect in a 9.2 case they could as you may possibly have a weapon on you. That is to say though obviously if you are recklessly driving and happen to have a gun on you they can still charge you for the gun. Also under the PLPC Arrest means the following: Arrest Process of taking custody of an individual who is involved, or suspected of being involved in a criminal offence so more information can be gathered by an investigation.

I don't believe I missed anything but if I did let me know. I hope this clears things up but I still believe the current system functions better for Perp.
Click to expand...

You better not have chatGPT'd this
 
I don't know (mainly because I haven't thought about it that hard) if the amended wording you've provided sufficiently covers the goal you're trying to achieve, but I do totally appreciate the sentiment behind it and agree with the principles.

I think overall Section 3 of the Penal Code - and Section 4 - should really be looked at again, and @Collier and I were planning to do this following having our rewrite of the Rules, but we haven't got round to it yet. We were also looking at introducing burdens of proof such as probable cause and reasonable suspicion.
 
Avid Feminist said:
Basically under the proposed law/system if you commit ANY crime police can search you in an attempt to find something illegal on you and essentially up-charge you.
This obviously isn't a thing in real life as it is considered against their rights. Under the new law you could only be searched if they have reasonable suspicion you have something illegal on you pertaining to the crime at hand. Eg. If you are have broke PLPC 12.6 Vehicle Maintenance they won't be able to search you (as this law has no attached jail sentence) but if you area suspect in a 9.2 case they could as you may possibly have a weapon on you. That is to say though obviously if you are recklessly driving and happen to have a gun on you they can still charge you for the gun. Also under the PLPC Arrest means the following: Arrest Process of taking custody of an individual who is involved, or suspected of being involved in a criminal offence so more information can be gathered by an investigation.

I don't believe I missed anything but if I did let me know. I hope this clears things up but I still believe the current system functions better for Perp.
Click to expand...
Just gonna point out that here in the states if your arrested for something and when you get searched and they find illegal shit you will get charged for it. It’s not against their rights and it’s fully a thing and allowed within the United States what law book are you reading?
 
Caveric Jonson said:
Just gonna point out that here in the states if your arrested for something and when you get searched and they find illegal shit you will get charged for it. It’s not against their rights and it’s fully a thing and allowed within the United States what law book are you reading?
Click to expand...

IN THE PARALAKE PENAL CODE ARRESTED LITERALLY MEANS BEING PUT INTO HANDCUFFS FOR ANY REASON, EVEN IF IT'S JUST WHILE YOU INVESTIGATE A CRIME
 
Caveric Jonson said:
Just gonna point out that here in the states if your arrested for something and when you get searched and they find illegal shit you will get charged for it. It’s not against their rights and it’s fully a thing and allowed within the United States what law book are you reading?
Click to expand...
I think the operative issue is that the definition of Arrest in the Penal Code currently also - strangely - covers detaining someone purely to gather more information. There isn't a separate definition for detaining. It doesn't mean arrest from the purist legal sense used in real life. Instead what we think of as arrest as laymen - i.e. reading someone their rights, telling them they have committed a crime, and then taking them to jail to be sentenced - is covered in the Penal Code under Charge.

The bit that @exrobite has highlighted for complete removal currently means that - technically - an LEO can detain you on suspicion of jaywalking, which would fall under the definition of Arrest, and then proceed to search you just to determine whether you have committed any other crime. In practice this doesn't happen that often (I hope) and it would likely be challenged harshly via IA and the CC, but the fact that possibility even exists is problematic.
 
Avid Feminist said:
Basically under the proposed law/system if you commit ANY crime police can search you in an attempt to find something illegal on you and essentially up-charge you.
This obviously isn't a thing in real life as it is considered against their rights. Under the new law you could only be searched if they have reasonable suspicion you have something illegal on you pertaining to the crime at hand. Eg. If you are trespassing they won't be able to search you but if you area suspect in a 9.2 case they could as you may possibly have a weapon on you. That is to say though obviously if you are recklessly driving and happen to have a gun on you they can still charge you for the gun. Also under the PLPC Arrest means the following: Arrest Process of taking custody of an individual who is involved, or suspected of being involved in a criminal offence so more information can be gathered by an investigation.

I don't believe I missed anything but if I did let me know. I hope this clears things up but I still believe the current system functions better for Perp.
Click to expand...
What?
Maybe this is just an American thing, but a cop can 100% do all of that here. If you get pulled over for speeding, reckless driving, being on a cellphone while driving, they have the authority to pull you out of the car and can use it as pretext to conduct a search. Same thing applies if you were caught trespassing, if not even moreso. This is why in bodycam footage the first thing you hear from an officer is, "Do you have any firearms on hand?" and usually followed by "anything I need to know about?" you are not required to incriminate yourself per the 5th Amendment, but if you are already catching a citation, they'll search you and they are perfectly within their legal authority to conduct that search.

This is also why Game Wardens are allowed to seize *everything* in relation to crimes relating to poaching. You get caught with fish that are undersize or over the bag limit? Congrats, your boat is going to be towed and all of your fishing equipment seized with them being declared collateral in court, and yes they are allowed to turn back around and conduct a warrant on your home to see if you have anything else in relation to poaching and can "upcharge" if they find anything else of incriminating value.
 
Joey Skylynx said:
What?
Maybe this is just an American thing, but a cop can 100% do all of that here. If you get pulled over for speeding, reckless driving, being on a cellphone while driving, they have the authority to pull you out of the car and can use it as pretext to conduct a search. Same thing applies if you were caught trespassing, if not even moreso. This is why in bodycam footage the first thing you hear from an officer is, "Do you have any firearms on hand?" and usually followed by "anything I need to know about?" you are not required to incriminate yourself per the 5th Amendment, but if you are already catching a citation, they'll search you and they are perfectly within their legal authority to conduct that search.

This is also why Game Wardens are allowed to seize *everything* in relation to crimes relating to poaching. You get caught with fish that are undersize or over the bag limit? Congrats, your boat is going to be towed and all of your fishing equipment seized with them being declared collateral in court, and yes they are allowed to turn back around and conduct a warrant on your home to see if you have anything else in relation to poaching and can "upcharge" if they find anything else of incriminating value.
Click to expand...

1749737501004.png


Know your rights!!!!!
 
I definitely see your point but I like how it is currently tbh. Outside of an Officer blatantly abusing their reason for detainment (cuff hold with no confirmation of a crime yet), I'm of the opinion that if you are a criminal and are ever in a position to end up in valid cuffs, I can't see how one can complain that they're being automatically searched unless maybe getting blindsided and you spontaneously find yourself in a crime scene you weren't given ample time to exit. I'm NA though so I'm just used to cops searching you/patting you down for literally any reason they want so long as the cuffs were valid. I don't know what the expectation is in other parts of the world.
 
Collier said:
exrobite using AI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
gen4.jpg

i can't believe the ratlady would do this... muh air quality...
 
sza said:
I definitely see your point but I like how it is currently tbh. Outside of an Officer blatantly abusing their reason for detainment (cuff hold with no confirmation of a crime yet), I'm of the opinion that if you are a criminal and are ever in a position to end up in valid cuffs, I can't see how one can complain that they're being automatically searched. I'm NA though so I'm just used to cops searching you for literally any reason they want so long as the cuffs were valid. I don't know what the expectation is in other parts of the world.
Click to expand...

The issue is the standard for cuffing someone is a lot lower in perp than it is in America (at least before trump took office)
 
Collier said:
me when I get stuffed in a police car, searched for my weapon and taken to prison all because I had my phone out for 2.3 zaptoseconds
Click to expand...
The 2.3 zaptoseconds in-question:

[Org] Wolfgang Eisenhammer [OfficeGang - Collier]: 10 TOES 10 TOES QUICK HOP ON DISCORD WATCH MY STREAM FOR LOCATION IM TURNING MY HALO ESP ON NOW KOS COPS KOS COPS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tyla Jai
Lower search power to be suspicion instead of belief to remove a loophole
Replies
3
Views
925
TinySlayer
TinySlayer
Daigestive
3.7 Right to Search
Replies
1
Views
1K
Kenty
Kenty
M
  • Locked
  • Suggestion Suggestion
5.2 Forced Withdrawals
Replies
1
Views
1K
MoronPipllyd
MoronPipllyd
  • Locked
Addition to 3.5
Replies
14
Views
2K
M
M
Medium
  • Locked
AR Jeffer Cake
Replies
6
Views
1K
Hayden
Hayden
Back
Top