To a cop, any black man on any two-wheeled vehicle is presumptively an e-cyclist until proven otherwise. They are also “armed” and “fit the description”.
We need to be stripping the old toys away from the cops. The authoritarians don’t get new toys until they prove they can be responsible with the ones they have.
Oh, it absolutely would. “Reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime” is all that is needed to stop someone. Criminalizing e-bike usage gives yet another “crime” for cops to justify an “investigation” of “suspicious” activities.
Sure, their “investigation” will ultimately disprove their initial suspicion. But that doesn’t make their initial suspicion invalid.
That initial suspicion gets them the stop, the detention. That initial stop gets your ID in their hands, their questions in your ears. While stopped on that initial suspicion, they get to evaluate your actions and behavior for nebulous “crimes” like “disorderly conduct” and “disturbing the peace” and “resisting arrest”. They get to issue contradictory orders, then arrest you for the one you didn’t follow.
The solution to “ACAB” is to strip them of the justifications they have to act, not to expand their scope.
Only e-cyclists
Or anyone they “suspect” of being an e-cyclist.
To a cop, any black man on any two-wheeled vehicle is presumptively an e-cyclist until proven otherwise. They are also “armed” and “fit the description”.
We need to be stripping the old toys away from the cops. The authoritarians don’t get new toys until they prove they can be responsible with the ones they have.
That would not be a valid reason.
Oh, it absolutely would. “Reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime” is all that is needed to stop someone. Criminalizing e-bike usage gives yet another “crime” for cops to justify an “investigation” of “suspicious” activities.
Sure, their “investigation” will ultimately disprove their initial suspicion. But that doesn’t make their initial suspicion invalid.
That initial suspicion gets them the stop, the detention. That initial stop gets your ID in their hands, their questions in your ears. While stopped on that initial suspicion, they get to evaluate your actions and behavior for nebulous “crimes” like “disorderly conduct” and “disturbing the peace” and “resisting arrest”. They get to issue contradictory orders, then arrest you for the one you didn’t follow.
The solution to “ACAB” is to strip them of the justifications they have to act, not to expand their scope.
I’d love to hear them articulate reasonable suspicion that your plain old mechanical bike is an ebike…
“Reasonable suspicion” would indicate that they identified a battery or motor, which they simply would not on a mechanical bike.
Either way, I think we’re arguing 2 sides of the same unconstitutional coin, and they don’t give a shit about what’s “valid” or “reasonable” anyway.