Not right. Police ARE allowed to "go undercover" in certain circumstances. Right?
Trying to arrest 'Johns' while in uniform? Not likely unless they have a cosplay fetish :> But dress normally, sexy outfits will get the charges thrown out, and then arrest Johns who approach her? Perfectly legal.
The female officers usually wear the same outfit in court to show the judge they weren't "enticing solicitation".
I've also heard that they won't arrest someone who just asks, then goes away. They'll arrest Johns who are persistent in spite of being told "no".
You're missing the point - You're talking about what 'they' consider to be legal. Not what is just, or within the basis of actual law.
Its the UK female cops wearing short skirts, and then arresting the people that comment on it. Same thing.
Sure it might be 'legal' in the sense that it those with the guns will enforce that - but there is no basis of actual "Law" there, because it treats people differently based on who/what they are.
Unless the law is blind, it isn't the law.
We all know this to be true.
My point is that the ACT of going undercover is fine. It's part of normal police work.
The ACT of targeting Whites is NOT fine. That's a perversion of Law. Same as targeting Blacks, or troopers pulling over out of state plates & illegally searching their cars.
So going undercover isn't entrapment. Doing so to catch a specific demographic who otherwise aren't breaking any laws IS. Targeting drug sellers is ok, that's illegal and they know it. Someone WHITE whistles at a pretty girl? And they arrest them? That's not ok.
Not right. Police ARE allowed to "go undercover" in certain circumstances. Right?
Trying to arrest 'Johns' while in uniform? Not likely unless they have a cosplay fetish :> But dress normally, sexy outfits will get the charges thrown out, and then arrest Johns who approach her? Perfectly legal.
The female officers usually wear the same outfit in court to show the judge they weren't "enticing solicitation".
I've also heard that they won't arrest someone who just asks, then goes away. They'll arrest Johns who are persistent in spite of being told "no".
You're missing the point - You're talking about what 'they' consider to be legal. Not what is just, or within the basis of actual law.
Its the UK female cops wearing short skirts, and then arresting the people that comment on it. Same thing.
Sure it might be 'legal' in the sense that it those with the guns will enforce that - but there is no basis of actual "Law" there, because it treats people differently based on who/what they are.
Unless the law is blind, it isn't the law. We all know this to be true.
My point is that the ACT of going undercover is fine. It's part of normal police work.
The ACT of targeting Whites is NOT fine. That's a perversion of Law. Same as targeting Blacks, or troopers pulling over out of state plates & illegally searching their cars.
So going undercover isn't entrapment. Doing so to catch a specific demographic who otherwise aren't breaking any laws IS. Targeting drug sellers is ok, that's illegal and they know it. Someone WHITE whistles at a pretty girl? And they arrest them? That's not ok.
Cheers!