- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Can LEOs assume hostile intention based on visual observations even if not threatened
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:04 pm
Can LEOs assume implied hostile intention based on visual observations even in the absence of all other indicators? Is suspicion enough?
Right now, LEOs in many states can confiscate and keep a citizen's personal property (cars, cash, property, etc), without formal charge, based solely on suspicion of illegal activity. Are we at that point when it comes to disarming legally armed citizens.
Right now, LEOs in many states can confiscate and keep a citizen's personal property (cars, cash, property, etc), without formal charge, based solely on suspicion of illegal activity. Are we at that point when it comes to disarming legally armed citizens.
9
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:05 pm to Delupe
According to some it depends on who they vote for
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:07 pm to Green Chili Tiger
It is good to know if you are dealing with a Waltz\Harris voter or a normal functioning human.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:08 pm to Delupe
You shouldn’t be impeding lawful arrest. Local law enforcement should be arresting everyone that disrupts a federal arrest.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:10 pm to Delupe
quote:
Can LEOs assume implied hostile intention based on visual observations even in the absence of all other indicators? Is suspicion enough?
Reasonable fear of imminent fear of serious bodily injury.
Spidey senses doesn’t seem to fit “reasonable fear.”
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:12 pm to Delupe
Without extenuating circumstances - not at a Wendy's.
But in the presence of anti-law enforcement rioters it's entirely reasonable.
But in the presence of anti-law enforcement rioters it's entirely reasonable.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:12 pm to Delupe
I think humans react humanly when presented with scenarios.
If you aggress a human with a means to fatally defend himself, death has to be part of your calculus.
If you aggress a human with a means to fatally defend himself, death has to be part of your calculus.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:13 pm to Delupe
quote:
Can LEOs assume implied hostile intention based on visual observations even in the absence of all other indicators? Is suspicion enough?
How 'bout give a real-life example of what you have in mind.
A rabid dog may only give "visual observations."
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:13 pm to Delupe
quote:
Can LEOs assume implied hostile intention
What counts as implied hostile intention?
We know hitting LEOs with your car doesn't count.
We know that interfering with an arrest, resisting arrest, and fighting police while armed doesn't count.
We know climbing through a window while unarmed and not attacking anybody does count.
It is all pretty inconsistent, but like Chili Tiger said above, it depends on who you vote for.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:15 pm to GRTiger
quote:
I think humans react humanly when presented with scenarios. If you aggress a human with a means to fatally defend himself, death has to be part of your calculus.
You’re looking at two separate questions and conflating them.
I think everyone understands what happened.
The question of the legal justification is completely distinct from the logic chain the officer used in firing the first shot.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:16 pm to Delupe
Judging on past history of that situation, would you risk your life by ignoring the threat?
Wha would be your guess, why an individual would have a loaded pistol and several rounds of ammunition at that gathering?
Wha would be your guess, why an individual would have a loaded pistol and several rounds of ammunition at that gathering?
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:17 pm to Delupe
quote:
Can LEOs assume implied hostile intention based on visual observations even in the absence of all other indicators? Is suspicion enough?
Do you consider interfering with a legal law enforcement acrion to be an indicator?
This post was edited on 1/24/26 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:20 pm to the808bass
I think it follows. Surley the lead up and feelings from the LEO will come into play.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 5:32 pm to BigTigerJoe
quote:
You shouldn’t be impeding lawful arrest. Local law enforcement should be arresting everyone that disrupts a federal arrest.
This board swears up and down that breaking into a vehicle or into someone’s based off of if they have an accent constitutes a legal arrest.
ICE can enter home without a warrant
Tearing down the very foundations of our country in front of your eyes, but you’re busy blaming protestors for ruining the country. Wow.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 6:24 pm to MonteCarleaux
quote:
Tearing down the very foundations of our country in front of your eyes, but you’re busy blaming protestors for ruining the country. Wow.
That’s what the Biden administration did, pal.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News