High Court: Police need ‘reasonable suspicion’ to frisk for guns
High Court: Police need ‘reasonable suspicion’ to frisk for guns
August 08, 2014 5:00 am • By HOWARD FISCHER Capitol Media Services
PHOENIX — Police cannot frisk someone they stop and question absent some “reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot,” the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
In their unanimous decision affirming the right to carry a gun without interference, the justices rejected arguments by prosecutors that a simple belief someone is armed and dangerous is enough to justify a frisk, even without any evidence of criminal activity. They said the U.S. Constitution dictates otherwise.
“The Fourth Amendment protects the right of people to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures,” wrote Justice Rebecca Berch.
“When officers consensually engage citizens on the street without having any evidence of wrongdoing, the mere presence of a weapon does not afford officers constitutional permission to search weapons-carrying individuals,” she said. “To conclude otherwise would potentially subject countless law-abiding persons solely for exercising their right to carry a firearm.”
http://azdailysun.com/news/local/state-and-regional/high-court-police-need-reasonable-suspicion-to-frisk-for-guns/article_e4b658f8-1ebe-11e4-b5fe-001a4bcf887a.htmlWorth reading a second time, with a little emphasis of my own:
“To conclude otherwise would potentially subject countless law-abiding persons solely for exercising their
right to carry a firearm.”
It seems to me that dovetails quite accurately with "keep and
bear".
Discuss.
= new reply since forum marked as read
