CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. - police were searching bags

[color of law]

Can somebody please tell me how the police have the authority to search bags to enter a public place?

Heavy security as Charlottesville anniversary weekend opens
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/activists-rally-against-hate-on-charlottesville-anniversary

As many businesses in a popular downtown shopping district began to open Saturday, law enforcement officers outnumbered visitors. Concrete barriers and metal fences had been erected, and police were searching bags at two checkpoints where people could enter or leave.

What law allows this in Virginia or for any state?

§ 19.2-59. Search without warrant prohibited; when search without warrant lawful.

No officer of the law or any other person shall search any place, thing or person, except by virtue of and under a warrant issued by a proper officer. Any officer or other person searching any place, thing or person otherwise than by virtue of and under a search warrant, shall be guilty of malfeasance in office. Any officer or person violating the provisions of this section shall be liable to any person aggrieved thereby in both compensatory and punitive damages. Any officer found guilty of a second offense under this section shall, upon conviction thereof, immediately forfeit his office, and such finding shall be deemed to create a vacancy in such office to be filled according to law.....

 

[Grapeshot]

Charlottesville security presence a product of uncertainty

"The downtown mall was barricaded off all weekend and every person had to be screened by police to get inside."
"The arrested individuals were charged with crimes of assault and battery, disorderly conduct and possession of a concealed weapon.

"The downtown mall was barricaded off all weekend and every person had to be screened by police to get inside."

"The arrested individuals were charged with crimes of assault and battery, disorderly conduct and possession of a concealed weapon."
http://www.nbc12.com/story/38875500...le-security-presence-a-product-of-uncertainty

I see some potentially serious issues here.

With a permit, a concealed gun is quite legal AND OC would not require a permit at all by persons not otherwise disqualified.

Public street/right of way and you must be "screened' to get inside. Really?
From what I can determine, the "downtown mall" is an 8 block long public right-of-way for pedestrian traffic. From where do the police draw their authority?

 

[gutshot II]

"The downtown mall was barricaded off all weekend and every person had to be screened by police to get inside."
"The arrested individuals were charged with crimes of assault and battery, disorderly conduct and possession of a concealed weapon.

"The downtown mall was barricaded off all weekend and every person had to be screened by police to get inside."

"The arrested individuals were charged with crimes of assault and battery, disorderly conduct and possession of a concealed weapon."
http://www.nbc12.com/story/38875500...le-security-presence-a-product-of-uncertainty

I see some potentially serious issues here.

With a permit, a concealed gun is quite legal AND OC would not require a permit at all by persons not otherwise disqualified.

Public street/right of way and you must be "screened' to get inside. Really?
From what I can determine, the "downtown mall" is an 8 block long public right-of-way for pedestrian traffic. From where do the police draw their authority?

Exactly what is done to "screen" a person before they can enter the area? What is the difference between being "screened" and being "searched"? What happens if you decline to be "screened"? Can you be denied access to a public street? If you can be denied access to a public street, how many can they deny you access to? Can it be more than one? Can it be all public streets?

 

[solus]

Little OC’g dude from rural religious Eastern NC has a question of possible interest...

uh, er, well...is this the same topic raised on the 12th of August 2018 by CoL in this thread:

http://vb.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?136919-CHARLOTTESVILLE-Va-police-were-searching-bags

just saying, ya know...

 

[Grapeshot]

Little OC’g dude from rural religious Eastern NC has a question of possible interest...

uh, er, well...is this the same topic raised on the 12th of August 2018 by CoL in this thread:

http://vb.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?136919-CHARLOTTESVILLE-Va-police-were-searching-bags

Just saying, ya know...

It does appear so. The COL's post relates to a 4th Amend issue; whereas the other is targeted at denial of a public right-of-way. I will let both stand as this needs (must be) exposed to the light of day.

 

[Grapeshot]

Unabashed bump.

 

[Grapeshot]

This thread primarily targets the 4th Amend issue; whereas, the other is the denial of a public right-of -way.

 

[scooter348]

Can somebody please tell me how the police have the authority to search bags to enter a public place?

Heavy security as Charlottesville anniversary weekend opens
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/activists-rally-against-hate-on-charlottesville-anniversary


What law allows this in Virginia or for any state?

The police were granted a search warrant under §19.2-52, which states:
§ 19.2-52. When search warrant may issue.
Except as provided in § 19.2-56.1, search warrants, based upon complaint on oath supported by an affidavit as required in § 19.2-54, may be issued by any judge, magistrate or other person having authority to issue criminal warrants, if he be satisfied from such complaint and affidavit that there is reasonable and probable cause for the issuance of such search warrant.

They were granted the authority of what to search by §19.2-53, which states:
§ 19.2-53. What may be searched and seized.
A. Search warrants may be issued for the search of or for specified places, things or persons, and seizure therefrom of the following things as specified in the warrant:

1. Weapons or other objects used in the commission of crime;

2. Articles or things the sale or possession of which is unlawful;

3. Stolen property or the fruits of any crime;

4. Any object, thing, or person, including without limitation, documents, books, papers, records or body fluids, constituting evidence of the commission of crime; or

Remember, the warrant is either granted or not granted by the magistrate based on what is articulated to him or her by the officer(s). With the history of events from last year, this was probably an easy warrant to obtain.

 

[OC for ME]

It remains a general warrant and is unconstitutional.

 

[color of law]

The police were granted a search warrant under §19.2-52, which states:
§ 19.2-52. When search warrant may issue.
Except as provided in § 19.2-56.1, search warrants, based upon complaint on oath supported by an affidavit as required in § 19.2-54, may be issued by any judge, magistrate or other person having authority to issue criminal warrants, if he be satisfied from such complaint and affidavit that there is reasonable and probable cause for the issuance of such search warrant.

They were granted the authority of what to search by §19.2-53, which states:
§ 19.2-53. What may be searched and seized.
A. Search warrants may be issued for the search of or for specified places, things or persons, and seizure therefrom of the following things as specified in the warrant:

1. Weapons or other objects used in the commission of crime;

2. Articles or things the sale or possession of which is unlawful;

3. Stolen property or the fruits of any crime;

4. Any object, thing, or person, including without limitation, documents, books, papers, records or body fluids, constituting evidence of the commission of crime; or

Remember, the warrant is either granted or not granted by the magistrate based on what is articulated to him or her by the officer(s). With the history of events from last year, this was probably an easy warrant to obtain.

This is a good example of someone showing their ignorance. [strike]This is the wrong place to spew such propaganda.[/strike] I suggest you do all your homework before posting.

§ 19.2-54. Affidavit preliminary to issuance of search warrant; general search warrant prohibited; effect of failure to file affidavit.

No search warrant shall be issued until there is filed with the officer authorized to issue the same an affidavit of some person reasonably describing the place, thing, or person to be searched, the things or persons to be searched for thereunder, alleging briefly material facts, constituting the probable cause for the issuance of such warrant and alleging substantially the offense or the identity of the person to be arrested for whom a warrant or process for arrest has been issued in relation to which such search is to be made and that the object, thing, or person searched for constitutes evidence of the commission of such offense or is the person to be arrested for whom a warrant or process for arrest has been issued......

 

[user]

The first question is whether the search was consensual. If people gave permission, either implicitly by handing over the bag when asked, or explicitly ("Yes, it's ok if you search my bag."), then there's no problem. If it was unconsensual (armed and uniformed cop simply asserting, "Hand over that bag to be searched.", then that's not just unlawful, it constitutes the crime of malfeasance in office, and the tort of unlawful arrest (one is not free to leave as long as the cops retain one's personal property). If, on the other hand, a person were to say, "No, thank you." when the cop says "I need to search that bag.", and the cops' position after that is that the person can't occupy the public streets & buildings just like everyone else, then that's a violation of the citizen's right to travel and use "the king's highway", in contravention of the 14th Amendment right to equal protection.

But chances are, the cops said something like, "May I search your bag.", or "I need to search your bag." or some such conditional, nonthreatening, request for permission. (That phrase, beginning with "I need..." is one they use a lot, but the cop's personal needs is not the citizen's problem - As Nancy Reagan said, "Just say no.")

 

[since9]

If every citizen knew the law and simply said, "No," then law enforcement would be very leery about pulling these antics.

Once again, we're seeing in real-time (well, delayed somewhat) how We the People are actually allowing ourselves to be subjected to unlawful rule by nothing more than sheer apathy on our part.