Talk:Reasonable suspicion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why is this a separate article from the Fourth Amendment article? Wouldn't it be better to fold this into the Fourth Amendment discussion, and make this a redirect to the Fourth Amendment?

I don't think that's a good idea. There are lots of 4th Amendment subtopics with their own pages (probable cause, search and seizure, search warrant, arrest warrant, etc.) I think the topic deserves to be covered in more detail than what would be appropriate in the 4th Amendment article. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 19:35, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] US-centrism

The article deals with the subject "reasonable suspicion" as if we did not have similar issues outside the US. The US-specific stuff should be moved to a US-specific section while keeping the intro global in scope. --Palnatoke 11:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know of any other nation that uses the phrase "reasonable suspicion" as a legal term. If it were just 2 words, it wouldn't merit an article (any more than any other 2-word phrase), but it's noteworthy because it's a legal term. If it's a legal term in any other countries, we should discuss that, but I don't think it is. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I second the comments by Quadell. Unless someone shows that the term "reasonable suspicion" -- a technical legal term in the United States-- is a technical term also used in another jurisdiction (and it might well be), the article's focus on U.S. law would appear to be proper. Yours, Famspear 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)