The Education of the Citizens of the American Population - Essay Example

Addressing Terry vs. Ohio case 392 U.S 1968) Introduction Land mark court decisions haveover the years determined and laid out significant principles in the development of legal principle and concepts. These court decisions have also substantially changed the interpretation of already existing law. In the USA for example landmark court decisions usually but not always come from the United States Supreme Court. In commonwealth countries, decisions that are reported are classified as leading decisions, when they are used in the settling of the law of the matter involved. A foremost case is one that settles the law upon some central point (Frazer, 1914). Discussion An example of such land mark decisions is the case of Terry vs. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968) which finally became a holding that came to be popularly known as the Stop and frisk holding. This was a landmark decision made by the United States Supreme Court which had based its decision on the Fourth amendment restriction on unreasonable searches of private premises which was to be abided by the police. The police were to abide by this amendment whenever they stopped an individual suspected of committing any crime, on the streets and frisk him/her without likely cause to arrest. The stop and frisk ruling only applied to instances when the police officer is suspicious that the person has committed, or is in the course of committing, and has a reasonable ground to believe that the person "may be in the possession of a weapon and is deemed dangerous" (392 U.S. 1, at 30). The police officer(s) may hence proceed to carry out a quick surface frisk for their own protection, on the outer clothing of the suspect for any form of weapons if they also suspect that the suspect may be armed. The officer(s) must however base their various suspicions with articulated facts to support their reason for suspicion of the individuals and not base their action on a mere hunch (Harrison, 1991). The act has since been extended and applied by the traffic police and highway patrol officers who stop and frisk vehicles suspected of being driven wrongly, or malicious acts by drivers while on the road, also now called the Terry stop. The ruling had been based upon a police officer and detective; Martin McFadden’s observation of a suspect; Terry, and an accomplice; Richard Chilton for standing suspiciously in front of a store at Euclid avenue. The police officer after observing the pair for some time concluded that the two had an intention of robbing the store. When Officer Martin McFadden stopped and frisked the men he found a weapon that was in the possession of Terry who was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon. The case which dragged on to the Supreme Court concluded that the search performed on Terry by the officer was reasonable (Harrison, pg 304). The ruling has been of use and is most useful to police officers nowadays with the consistent rise in crime activities especially with rise in terrorism and drugs and contraband trafficking. The police will always apply the terry frisk when the officer has reasonable distrust that the stopped person is in the course of committing a crime and that the suspect may be armed and dangerous. The suspicion of the police which is usually based on observation of the behavior of the suspects or the review of a person’s criminal record has helped with the identification of criminal acts even before they happen. When a suspect has a background of violence, the search automatically applies, and has almost always been successful in nabbing criminals, terrorists and drug peddlers hence saving many lives and curbing the rise in crime (Anzovin, & Podell, 1988).  This ruling however, implies that all citizens of U.S are criminals and hence are subject to a Terry frisk at any given point in time so long as a police officer identifies reasons that according to his/her own judgment may be suspicious. This has led to numerous unnecessary searches that subjects individuals to demeaning criminal treatments that they do not deserve. This may hence result in the violation of the fourth amendment rights of the citizen from police officers who may want to search them, their house or vehicles with mere citation of suspicion by police officers. As much as the terry frisk is important for national security, innocent citizens should be dully advised and educated about their various rights to prevent a violation on their rights by law enforcers who may also go unpunished due to the individuals ignorance and lack of information. As much as the terry frisk has revolutionized law enforcement in the United States, the citizens still need to be educated sufficiently on how to and how not to deal with the terry frisk to avoid conviction as criminal suspects. The American population should be educated on also to what extent to corporate with the law enforcers with regards on the grounds which they are classified as suspicious, and not getting physically involved with the police officers to prevent them from being frisked which may lead to further charges and also be in a position to identify when their rights are being infringed upon (Wetterer, 1998).  The citizens should also be educated on how to answer leading questions that the law enforcers use so as to trick them into letting the officers carry out unwarranted searches on them or their houses and vehicles ( Anzovin, & Podell, 1988).  Conclusion Much needs to be done in the education of the citizens of the American population so as to prevent confrontations between them and the police and also prevent the violation of their rights by police as stated by the fourth amendment rights in order to have a law abiding country. Bibliography Anzovin, S., & Podell, J. (1988). The U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court. New York: H.W. Wilson. Harrison, M., Harrison, M., Gilbert, S., & Gilbert, S. (19912011). Landmark decisions of the United States Supreme Court. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Excellent Books. Lefroy, A. H. (1914). Leading cases in Canadian constitutional law. Toronto: The Carswell Company ;. Wetterer, C. M. (1998). The Fourth Amendment: search and seizure. Springfield, NJ: Enslow Publishers. Read More