|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
There are not a lot of U.S. Supreme Court cases that get mainstream press, but I was disappointed that the 2015 case Rodriguez v. United States didn't get a lot of publicity, simply because that case interacts with a popular Jay-Z song.
The second verse of "99 Problems" goes like this:
Year's '94 and my trunk is raw
In my rear view mirror it's the motherfucking law
I got two choices y'all, pull over the car or,
Bounce on the devil, put the pedal to the floor
Now I ain't trying to see no highway chase with Jake
Plus I got a few dollars I can fight the case
So I, pull over to the side of the road
I heard "Son, do you know why I'm stopping you for?"
Cause I'm young and I'm black and my hat's real low
Do I look like a mind reader, sir? I don't know
Am I under arrest or should I guess some mo'?
"Well you was doing fifty-five in the fifty-four"
"License and registration and step out of the car"
"Are you carrying a weapon on you, I know a lot of you are"
I ain't stepping out of shit, all my papers legit
"Well do you mind if I look around the car a little bit?"
Well my glove compartment is locked, so is the trunk in the back
And I know my rights so you goin' need a warrant for that
"Aren't you sharp as a tack? You some type of lawyer or something?"
"Somebody important or something?"
Tuh, I ain't passed the bar, but I know a little bit
Enough that you won't illegally search my shit
"Well we'll see how smart you are when the K-9 come"
I got ninety nine problems but a bitch ain't one
Though the verse is somewhat mistaken about whether or not the cops can get Jay-Z to step out of the car, it's true that when the cops were told that they couldn't search the car, they could not in fact search the car without reasonable suspicion that there was some kind of contraband. But at the end of the verse, the cops call in the drug-sniffing dogs, who are presumably going to find the drugs! Oh no!
Well, Jay-Z doesn't have to worry anymore, because the Supreme Court in Rodriguez v. United States said that it's not OK to call the K-9 unit and extend the length of the traffic stop to wait for them. Once the cop is done with the initial purpose of the stop (writing the ticket or whatever), they have to let the driver go or find some other justification for searching the vehicle.
|
So he's got 98 problems but the K nein one?
|
On December 17 2016 02:00 hypercube wrote:
So he's got 98 problems but the K nein one?
I will hunt you down and take away your keyboard.
|
They gotta do something about those 54-mile-per-hour speed limits. That's just hard to follow when so many speed limits start at 15 and increment by 10.
|
Hmmm. From my personal experience, US traffic stops seem to take helluva long ass time for whatever dem cops are doing back there. I get that they're running both the driver and the vehicle through the system, and if they're writing up a ticket that also takes time. Seems to take forever, though. Like they're dragging it out way longer than needs to be. Maybe it's just relativity cuz you're forced to sit on your thumbs waiting the whole time. (Maybe also cuz when I drive in the states, it's rentals and carshares -- bonus red flag.)
And if it's night time -- those post mount spotlights, ugh, the intensity. Kills your night vision too, so you have to recover your eyesight before you can continue on when they let you on your way.
I hate traffic stops. >_<
Anyway, this is a good ruling that strengthens suspect's rights and forces tighter police procedures.
Police are the good guys but sometimes they can get too eager, yah?
On December 17 2016 02:00 hypercube wrote:
So he's got 98 problems but the K nein one?
*slow clap*
|
On December 17 2016 03:42 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2016 02:00 hypercube wrote:
So he's got 98 problems but the K nein one? I will hunt you down and take away your keyboard.
You're talking loud as a motorbike, but wouldn't squash a grape in a food fight.
|
|
|
Belgium9942 Posts
On December 16 2016 21:04 motbob wrote:
But at the end of the verse, the cops call in the drug-sniffing dogs, who are presumably going to find the drugs! Oh no!
I respectfully disagree. Jay-Z knew his rights and in His allknowingness predicted the outcome of the legal case that would happen 12 years later, that's why he concluded "a bitch ain't one". He knew he needn't worry about the drug sniffing dog being called.
The K9 unit was never one the 99 problems, therefore we can not say he's only got 98 now.
|
you have combined two of my favorite things, rap and case law, and made it into a single post. Thank you
|
On December 17 2016 11:48 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2016 03:42 a_flayer wrote:On December 17 2016 02:00 hypercube wrote:
So he's got 98 problems but the K nein one? I will hunt you down and take away your keyboard. You're talking loud as a motorbike, but wouldn't squash a grape in a food fight.
But saying "I will make this comment and do nothing else to indicate my mockery of your bad pun" is not as effective to discourage bad puns.
|
|
|
this is good news for me. I have actually had this experience. So this is good news.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
