Hacker News Reader

Comment by thaumasiotes | Hacker News Reader

> In almost the entire US, being armed is not against the law.

So what? Cops don't know the law and aren't expected to know the law. The fact that a cop didn't know the law is a legal defense if you accuse him of messing up.

View on HN

Cops aren't expected to know the law? Does that hold for civilians as well?

As a comparison, here in The Netherlands, all citizens are expected to know the law. Not knowing it is never an argument as far as I know.

Not knowing that what you are doing is illegal is not a defense for you, true. But when a cop arrests you for doing something they believe is illegal but in fact is legal, you are not allowed to resists arrest. You must allow yourself to get arrested (and searched) and then explain later, at the precinct. You'll lose a few hours, people will be worried about you, you might lose your job, and the police don't owe you anything, because cops do not have to know the law. Only prosecutors are supposed to know the law, and then only if a judge is willing to shame the prosecutor (not a given).

Yes, cops in the US are expected to have an above-average working knowledge of the law. If you have a question about the legality of something, you're more likely to get the correct answer asking a random cop than a random civilian.

Where are you are taking this from? There is a recent Supreme Court opinion (the name of which I forget) relating to the 4th amendment that I recall touches on this, but the exclusionary rule of evidence isn't what we are talking about here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com