Offroad is NOT Probable Cause...

[lords8n]

1. Quote

   Probable Cause

    

   An LEO has the right to detain and search a civilian, their vehicle, or a vehicle which they have keys to within the following parameters:

   • They witness the civilian driving off road in any vehicle.

   
   
   First off, there are vehicles specifically designed to be driven off-road. Am I to assume that any time I use one of these "off-road" designed vehicles for it's intended use I am subject to probable cause search and seizure?
   
   Secondly, am I to assume that any time any wheel, in the case of any standard wheeled vehicle, or track, in the case of any standard tracked vehicle, touches anything other than concrete, pavement, or specifically created roads of other material designed specifically for vehicle travel, I am subject to probable cause search and seizure?
   
   This law of probable cause for search and seizure lacks the proper definition and description enough to warrant use that would not and could not violate the rights of the citizens of Los Santos and it's contained and neighboring towns, cities, and boroughs.
   
   I believe this is in violation of our Fourth Amendment rights as described in the Constitution of The United States of America, where, in fact, Los Santos and it's contained and neighboring towns, cities, and boroughs reside.
   
   If it is in fact the position of the government that such a law be in place to protect law enforcement from being evaded during situations where a crime has already been suspected of being committed and a pursuit has ensued that has caused such suspect(s) to flee onto "off-road" terrain in order to gain an unfair advantage over pursuing law enforcement, it should be the pursuant suspected crime that warrants probable cause search and seizure and not that of said vehicle traversing off-road.
   
   Further more, if it is in fact the position of the government that those vehicles not considered "off-road" in design and use that are used on "off-road" terrain for the purpose of hunting, legally or illegally, are to be considered under the law for probable cause search and seizure, then this should be stated clearly and concisely in the law, with condition that proof of the act of hunting be a requirement for such action.
   
   I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express.
   Phil Long
   #OFFROADISNOTPROBABLECAUSE

Edited October 8, 2021 by lords8n

[nxrblaster]

I feel the same. Driving off roads isn't probable cause nor illegal. In real life a cop must have probable cause with evidence to even consider a pull over let alone search a car for just not being on a marked road / off roading you need real probable cause for say you see them hunting and killing ilegall animals but just being off road isn't enough .

[Denver]

This depends on the officer you're dealing with, but if I witness a vehicle that's meant for off-roading, doing so, I won't pull it over. And speaking of probable cause, I would only search said vehicle if it's for instance a semi truck in the mountains. If it doesn't make sense, then yes I will pull them over and or search.

Probable cause however doesn't mean we have to search you and your vehicle, it just means we can. Again depends on the officer you're dealing with.

[Yama]

Sounds like a great point to argue in court 

[Sgt]

If you need an IRL example check out (Executive Order 11644). This is more towards ORV than anything else.

Well....not really an example, but it's something.

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by Sgt

[dK_]

id just like to point out, Los Santos is not the United States of America, and the constitution does not apply here. 

[Timr]

The law is specifically vague so that it can be applied at the discretion of the officer.

Am I going to search you if you're driving a trophy truck up Mount Chiliad? No.

Am I going to search you if you're driving a mule in a sketchy offroad place where a mule has no business? Probably.

[Kathryn Davies]

This is a game and you have to understand that some "laws" are put in place to stop people doing dumb and completely unrealistic stuff, such as hunting with a mule or speeding up a mountain in a sports car. And that stuff is seen as suspicious and searches can be conducted. It's not to say every cop will go through those motions, it's up to discretion and cops go pretty easy on a lot of people with probable cause in offroading. Many cops also do not conduct action on off-road suitable vehicles and in my eyes I would never give someone a charge, search them, etc if their vehicle is off road suitable.

We also have limitations on how we can use this law to charge people in the city - I believe it's something like 4m from a road (generally a realistic distance). If you cut a corner through grass, we aren't going to charge you with off roading. However, if you're climbing the hills by Stab City, following train tracks, or doing any sort of extended amount of off road driving, we're a lot more likely to charge you. We aren't going to accuse you off off roading for "touching grass on the edge of the road". That would be a completely unfair way to enforce that law.

[Samantha Hatfield]

It's discretion of the officers and their choice on whether they went to pursue it, if you don't like it and why they pursued it? file a IA report.

Edited October 9, 2021 by Nikki Delores

[Storrent]

11 hours ago, Richie Jax said:

id just like to point out, Los Santos is not the United States of America, and the constitution does not apply here. 

no thanks this makes zero sense

[Mefcy]

lol -1

[lords8n]

2 hours ago, Nikki Delores said:

It's discretion of the officers and their choice on whether they went to pursue it, if you don't like it and why they pursued it? file a IA report.

It's not an internal Affairs issue as far as I am concerned. I have not been charged with anything, nor have I committed any crime.

It's obvious taking anything to court IC is mute considering who has replied here.
A fair hearing to affect change for the betterment of the community would be impossible.

Remember; The greatest judgement of your character is in how you judge yourself.
 

[Razec]

So, without getting into too much detail, the PC is there to allow officers further investigation of what could be considered a suspicious activity. Although it does grant officers the right to search, it won't be necessarily put into action if the officer deems it's not necessary. It's merely a tool, not a obligation. 

Put it this way: If a vehicle simply decides to turn away from a Police Checkpoint and starts off-roading, it is somewhat suspicious. It grants officers the right to pull the vehicle over. It's a reason for the stop. Although just a Infraction, it also allows officers to go beyond and investigate it further. 

Most of time, officers have reasonable suspicion and that ties in with the allowed search, granted by the PC. 

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by Razec

[lords8n]

7 minutes ago, Razec said:

So, without getting into too much detail, the PC is there to allow officers to further investigate what could be considered a suspicious activity. Although it does grant officers the right to search, it won't be necessarily put into action if the officer deems it's not necessary. It's merely a tool, not a obligation. 

Put it this way: If a vehicle simply decides to turn away from a Police Checkpoint and starts off-roading, it is somewhat suspicious. It grants officers the right to pull the vehicle over. It's a reason for the stop. Although just a Infraction, it allows officers to go beyond and investigate it further. 

 

Then let me set this scene...

Some time between 10pm 10/7/2021 and 1am 10/8/2021...
Allegedly...Two individuals were on their way to go mine for steel. They were in a tow truck towing a mule. officer B. follows them for some unknown amount of time. They do not notice the officer because they are not looking behind them and just interested in mining. They get to a point in their journey, out away from the city, when they have the opportunity to take a small known shortcut through some grass that will cut a bit of distance and time off of their lengthy journey. officer B. observed this and turned on his lights. They pull over immediately. officer B. proceeded to give them a citation for offroading and searched each individual and their vehicles. Afterwards, and while I assume detained, the individuals ask for the officer's name in order to file a grievance because they did not pay attention when the officer announced it on first arrival. officer B. refused and says he doesn't have to because he already told them. At this point i'm unsure what words were exchanged back and forth, but it is alleged that officer B. at some point punched one of the persons in the face and told them to file a complaint about it.

I've known these individuals for a lengthy amount of time, enough so to be quite confident they did not fabricate or embellish their story in the least.

This is what discretion and lack of character gets a citizen in this city.

And no, none of these individuals was me.

[Timr]

18 minutes ago, lords8n said:

Then let me set this scene...

Some time between 10pm 10/7/2021 and 1am 10/8/2021...
Allegedly...Two individuals were on their way to go mine for steel. They were in a tow truck towing a mule. officer B. follows them for some unknown amount of time. They do not notice the officer because they are not looking behind them and just interested in mining. They get to a point in their journey, out away from the city, when they have the opportunity to take a small known shortcut through some grass that will cut a bit of distance and time off of their lengthy journey. officer B. observed this and turned on his lights. They pull over immediately. officer B. proceeded to give them a citation for offroading and searched each individual and their vehicles. Afterwards, and while I assume detained, the individuals ask for the officer's name in order to file a grievance because they did not pay attention when the officer announced it on first arrival. officer B. refused and says he doesn't have to because he already told them. At this point i'm unsure what words were exchanged back and forth, but it is alleged that officer B. at some point punched one of the persons in the face and told them to file a complaint about it.

I've known these individuals for a lengthy amount of time, enough so to be quite confident they did not fabricate or embellish their story in the least.

This is what discretion and lack of character gets a citizen in this city.

And no, none of these individuals was me.

They could lawyer up and request the citation be pulled

[ZaxxYs]

Welcome to the forums, where in some topic people quote "Well in IRL this happens like this" and in some other topics the same people quote "Well this is a game". GLHF.  

+1 from me. 

[ZaxxYs]

Citizens commit a crime and they have to pay crazy fines and do time in prison. Police Officers commit a crime and they get suspended for 2 days and get a thumbs down. Fair. Correct me if im wrong but at least in USA I "believe" police officers and military get bigger sentences or a harsher judge when they commit crimes?? Not sure about that but just wondering. Doesn't seem fair to me. Anyways I believe he is referring to a rule or SOP that he believes is wrong or could be better, I dont think he is talking about the probability of taking something to court and spend 3 hours there for some RP. Not sure. 

[Razec]

 

On 10/9/2021 at 5:32 AM, lords8n said:

Then let me set this scene...

Some time between 10pm 10/7/2021 and 1am 10/8/2021...
Allegedly...Two individuals were on their way to go mine for steel. They were in a tow truck towing a mule. officer B. follows them for some unknown amount of time. They do not notice the officer because they are not looking behind them and just interested in mining. They get to a point in their journey, out away from the city, when they have the opportunity to take a small known shortcut through some grass that will cut a bit of distance and time off of their lengthy journey. officer B. observed this and turned on his lights. They pull over immediately. officer B. proceeded to give them a citation for offroading and searched each individual and their vehicles. Afterwards, and while I assume detained, the individuals ask for the officer's name in order to file a grievance because they did not pay attention when the officer announced it on first arrival. officer B. refused and says he doesn't have to because he already told them. At this point i'm unsure what words were exchanged back and forth, but it is alleged that officer B. at some point punched one of the persons in the face and told them to file a complaint about it.

I've known these individuals for a lengthy amount of time, enough so to be quite confident they did not fabricate or embellish their story in the least.

This is what discretion and lack of character gets a citizen in this city.

And no, none of these individuals was me.

Signing a citation is never a admission of guilt. 

[Mefcy]

6 hours ago, ZaxxYs said:

Citizens commit a crime and they have to pay crazy fines and do time in prison. Police Officers commit a crime and they get suspended for 2 days and get a thumbs down. Fair. Correct me if im wrong but at least in USA I "believe" police officers and military get bigger sentences or a harsher judge when they commit crimes?? Not sure about that but just wondering. Doesn't seem fair to me. Anyways I believe he is referring to a rule or SOP that he believes is wrong or could be better, I dont think he is talking about the probability of taking something to court and spend 3 hours there for some RP. Not sure. 

not true everyone is treated equally irl and in game, its all about getting caught. since ive been in the city ive only seen one cop go awol or crazy and theyre being held until trial rn so

[ZaxxYs]

18 hours ago, Remington said:

not true everyone is treated equally irl and in game, its all about getting caught. since ive been in the city ive only seen one cop go awol or crazy and theyre being held until trial rn so

I mean, if im caught with a Class 3 firearm I have to pay fines and go to jail, but some X person was caught with a class 3 off duty and that X person got "suspended" for 2 days. Sooooo it aint fair lol, it aint the same and people are not treated equally, nothing went to that officers record, he didnt lose a rank, he didnt go to jail, nothing happened. That is why MANY police officers do whatever they want and believe they are better than anyone, or believe they can do whatever they want without any sort of consequence. Just my opinion tho. 

[vDrop]

21 hours ago, ZaxxYs said:

I mean, if im caught with a Class 3 firearm I have to pay fines and go to jail, but some X person was caught with a class 3 off duty and that X person got "suspended" for 2 days. Sooooo it aint fair lol, it aint the same and people are not treated equally, nothing went to that officers record, he didnt lose a rank, he didnt go to jail, nothing happened. That is why MANY police officers do whatever they want and believe they are better than anyone, or believe they can do whatever they want without any sort of consequence. Just my opinion tho. 

Honestly have no clue what this has to do with Off-roading charge as the OP has asked about. Would be nice if you would stop comparing 60+ people to a few people that you are actually talking about. NOT all LEO's have the mindset you claim they have. 

IN regards to the OP, 

Honestly its a great point you brought up in regards to the charge itself. The Charge and PC was put into place to combat specific vehicles doing off-road janky shit. This is one of the oldest charges in the city, and its intended to keep vehicles on the road, not going down janky paths that these vehicles normally wouldn't ever attempt. Based on the information you provided to the alleged scene, I honestly think Internal Affairs is highly appropriate for actions like that. (Allegedly of course). Some officers ROLEPLAY that they are corrupted, and there's NOTHING stopping civilians from proceeding IC with evidence to get someone internally looked at and potentially fired. 

To Continue, there are a lot of people that continue off-road activities and don't get searched. Its 100% officer discretion and its hardly ever used. If a person or persons is operating a vehicle off-road that has an extensive criminal record, most likely they would be searched, but more often than not, they are not. I still recommend those individuals continue to pursue IC Punishments for those officers, if they feel the officers were acting more in a distributive abusive way OOC, then a OOC IA should be filled out. 

I hope this was helpful.

[lords8n]

4 hours ago, vDrop said:

Honestly have no clue what this has to do with Off-roading charge as the OP has asked about. Would be nice if you would stop comparing 60+ people to a few people that you are actually talking about. NOT all LEO's have the mindset you claim they have. 

IN regards to the OP, 

Honestly its a great point you brought up in regards to the charge itself. The Charge and PC was put into place to combat specific vehicles doing off-road janky shit. This is one of the oldest charges in the city, and its intended to keep vehicles on the road, not going down janky paths that these vehicles normally wouldn't ever attempt. Based on the information you provided to the alleged scene, I honestly think Internal Affairs is highly appropriate for actions like that. (Allegedly of course). Some officers ROLEPLAY that they are corrupted, and there's NOTHING stopping civilians from proceeding IC with evidence to get someone internally looked at and potentially fired. 

To Continue, there are a lot of people that continue off-road activities and don't get searched. Its 100% officer discretion and its hardly ever used. If a person or persons is operating a vehicle off-road that has an extensive criminal record, most likely they would be searched, but more often than not, they are not. I still recommend those individuals continue to pursue IC Punishments for those officers, if they feel the officers were acting more in a distributive abusive way OOC, then a OOC IA should be filled out. 

I hope this was helpful.

Great response! Thank you for being logical and thoughtful in your response!

My intent is not RP, although i've thought about it at length, but a possible modification to the rules for the betterment of the community.
I'm not saying to remove the rule...just modify it.

If a LEO is chasing a perp, and the perp goes offroad to evade, the LEO already has probable cause for search and seizure before those tires ever touch dirt.
If it's a lazy Sunday afternoon and a LEO sees a super car meandering up a mountain...sure...give the guy a ticket, but probable cause for search and seizure? Sorry that's a little extreme, and demonstrates the OBVIOUS bias towards LEOs in this city. 

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by tay

[Razec]

I believe you missed the point. If a super car (a vehicle that is clearly not meant for off-roading) is seen going up a mountain, it is more then likely that the vehicle or the person is up to no good. Like @vDrop said "This is one of the oldest charges in the city, and its intended to keep vehicles on the road, not going down janky paths that these vehicles normally wouldn't ever attempt." 
 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Razec

[lords8n]

40 minutes ago, Razec said:

I believe you missed the point. If a super car (a vehicle that is clearly not meant for off-roading) is seen going up a mountain, it is more then likely that the vehicle or the person is up to no good. Like @vDrop said "This is one of the oldest charges in the city, and its intended to keep vehicles on the road, not going down janky paths that these vehicles normally wouldn't ever attempt." 
 

Have LEOs protect citizens from being robbed at the mines and there would be no reason to carry Class-3's there to begin with.
The mentality of "because it's being done means there must be some ulterior motive," is petty, narrow minded, and demonstrates a panic response to potential loss of control.
I don't care how old the law is, that doesn't mean it's logical or right. I could once beat my wife with a mop handle at one time, but somewhere along the way someone questioned that and brought about change for the better.

If you're not open to change and betterment just put up a big giant sign that says, "This city caters strictly to LEO's and we don't give a crap about your opinion on it." Because from the street, that's exactly what it looks like and what everyone thinks. Why do think the ratio of LEOs to non-LEOs posting in these threads is so one-sided? I'm just too new, stupid, and opinionated to STFU. I'll continue calling things out and see how long it takes to face repercussions in the city. Bet not long.

I'm Phil Long, and besides possible minor traffic violations every now and then, i'm 100% legal 100% of the time.

Confucius Say: Give a man fire and he be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he be warm for the rest of his life.

[Kathryn Davies]

I'm definitely open to change and betterment but this is one of the scenarios where I don't believe change is necessary.

There will always be "some" or "few" LEOs that do not handle laws in the same way that the majority do. The incident you outlined is definitely IA worthy, and like others have said, it is officer discretion.

For example, if I go to the mines and see someone there with a Class 3, I could go and process them and give them time. OR I could simply take the weapon from them, tell them it's illegal, and send them on their way. There are different ways officers enforce the law and while many things are arrestable or chargeable, there are always ways to minimise escalation and handle things in a calm and fair manner. There are gunfights where weapons are taken, people are treated and cut loose with warnings.

The same thing goes with the offroading PC - and in most cases with offroading PC, we don't even need to enforce it, because in a lot of cases as soon as I bring up even the possibility of searching a person's vehicle, off they go driving down the road. Felony evasion, I catch that guy and I can search him and the vehicle REGARDLESS of what the original charge was. Even with a misdemeanor speeding ticket, if you flee, you're getting searched. And illegal items don't always need to be charged for. Sometimes I will confiscate switchblades but due to the nature of the other crimes I won't include the charge or give them any penalty, just a warning not to be seen with it again. When people are hunting illegal animals and I search their vehicles and find the stuff on them, sometimes confiscating it and giving a warning is punishment enough, with or without a ticket. And sometimes honesty goes a long way too - if I pull over a vehicle that's off roading and driving crazy and tell them I could search the vehicle right now and they admit to what's in there, I'm tempted to go a lot lighter on them than I originally would have because they've been transparent with me about it.

And to be honest I disagree that the act of a supercar heading up a mountain is necessarily panic of loss of control. As officers we have to evaluate every situation we are put in and consider the possibilities. Could they be heading to a secret location to handover illegal items? Are they taking a less travelled path because they know they are carrying illegal cargo? Are they driving the vehicle in a manner that is unsafe to them and others both in the vehicle and around them? It's true, you don't know the motive, but it is our duty as officers to ensure that people are not conducting illegal activities, and driving a super car in an area that is both completely unsafe and not appropriate is rightfully suspicious and warrants investigation, including a search. And if you aren't carrying anything illegal and are just off roading in a super car for some reason, you can play out the RP and find enjoyment in the fact that an officer went to all that trouble just for you to have some burgers and pussycat mags in your trunk. You can play the "I told you so" card, pay your ticket and carry on with your day. If you are being legal then you should enjoy the interactions with officers and have no fear, while if you are conducting illegal activities / carrying illegal items, you should be more careful as to not look suspicious and attract officers.