X-Post: Man arrested for not showing officer his License

[Hopey]

In reading the law, my understanding is that police officers are the only members of the public who have the right to temporarily detain a private citizen due to "reasonable suspicion". This right does not extend to private citizens detaining other private citizens.

Copernicus keeps repeating that store employees (in some states) have a right to detain and search their customers due to "reasonable suspicion". I believe that he is mistaken and that only police officers have this right.

The store employees would be permitted to detain a person due to "reasonable cause", but the manner in which they arrive at "reasonable cause" is clearly spelled out and leaves very little to interpretation.

AMIRITE?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
In reading the law, my understanding is that police officers are the only members of the public who have the right to temporarily detain a private citizen due to "reasonable suspicion". This right does not extend to private citizens detaining other private citizens.

Copernicus keeps repeating that store employees (in some states) have a right to detain and search their customers due to "reasonable suspicion". I believe that he is mistaken and that only police officers have this right.

<font color="red"> That is not correct. When I started researching it last night I found many states where reasonable suspicion was the standard for search and detention, but at 2 am I wasnt taking notes, especially after getting knocked out of a tourney on a 2 outer on the river!. I'll look back again tonight </font>

The store employees would be permitted to detain a person due to "reasonable cause", but the manner in which they arrive at "reasonable cause" is clearly spelled out and leaves very little to interpretation.

AMIRITE?

[/ QUOTE ]