DC asking citizens to VOLUNTEER to a search

Status
Not open for further replies.
What exactly will they be searching for?
Click to expand...

Illegal guns and drugs. Supposedly from early news articles they will offer "amnesty" to anyone who cooperates and they find illegal stuff.

Not the point though. Point is they are going door to door looking to search houses. Chances are they are not going to tell people they can just say "no". If the house says "yes" they just gave permission so bypass the need for a warrant. They are skirting the illegal search and seizure thing in that they expect people to not realize they can just say "no" and the search teams have to go to the next house.
 
It's an amnesty program. You give up your 4th Amendment rights and they won't charge you for anything that they find that you shouldn't have, like drugs and guns.

Basically, it's their way of trying to pull an end-around pre-Heller and seizing as many firearms as they can.
 
Two thoughts occured to me today:

What's to keep the BG's from adopting this tactic? Especially if the police are using plain-clothed officers for the "inspections".

How thorough are the "inspections" going to be? How much of a mess will the officers leave after searching the residence? Will they be looking behind the wallboard? I had a cousin who kept his legally owned guns inside the wall, in case of a home burglary.
 
Zundfolge said:
Get rid of the widow in the first paragraph (either bring "Safe Homes Initiative" down to the next line, or if you can adjust the kerning to get the "-tive." back up on the previous line.
Click to expand...



I'm considering doing some work on saturation and lightness for the guy, front left, carrying the sledge, but it seems dishonest.
 
That looks better.

I wouldn't worry about trying to alter the race of any of the cops.
1) it would look hokey/dishonest
2) DC is predominantly black ... blacks are more likely to be frightened by a bunch of white cops (yeah, that sounds evil, but its true)
 
From the press release linked in a previous post:

As part of Chief Lanier’s ongoing community policing strategy, the Metropolitan Police Department will launch the Safe Homes Initiative on March 24, 2008. Parents or guardians will be encouraged to voluntarily allow their neighborhood foot beat officers to enter their homes to search for weapons without risk of arrest. Beginning during this year’s spring break, officers will go door-to-door in the Focused Improvement Areas (FIA) of the Seventh Police District to ask residents if they will allow officers to do security checks of their homes. If weapons are recovered, they will be tested and destroyed if the weapons are not found to be linked to any other crimes.
Click to expand...

If I didn't know better - I'd think this was a spoof! Is this what the rest of the country has to look forward to when these kind of folks are allowed to have their way with the 2nd Amendment? Armed patrols going house-to-house to destroy law-abiding citizens defensive weapons in order to make their houses "safe"? Wow...just wow!

You'll have to excuse me, I'm kind of new to all this having recently awakened from a 40-year slumber (Rip Van Winkle's got nothin' on me!). I finally joined the NRA yesterday and, as a recent convert would urge you all to do the same if you haven't already. For a limited time, you can go the website of "America's First Freedom" magazine and purchase a $35 annual membership for $25.
 
Erm, I really don't think race is an issue. When I see a police officer, I see the uniform first.
 
The thing about warrantless searches is that you then don't have to specify where and for what you're searching. I wonder if they get a yes and get past the front door will they be stopping when asked? I would say don't risk it, just on principle. The more people get used to this sort of thing, the easier it will be next time, which may be the point.

Not wishing bad things for DCMPD, but I hope they don't find anything at all and the city has to pay overtime. Good idea on the poster. If we don't stand up for our rights, we don't have any.
 
They are doing the same Boston Ma. Bunch of commies
Click to expand...
Yeah, they stole the idea from Boston. And the Boston PD has a lot of nicey-nicey sounding words about how completely voluntary the program is, and how it's not a violation of anyone's Constitutional rights, and ...

It's all clap-trap. Once the program has been operating for awhile, I think we can rest assured that we'll be hearing horror stories about how the program is being abused. Once they get their foot in the door WITH THE OWNER'S PERMISSION, anything and everything will be fair game.
 
Seems to me this has happened once before in about 1776. The British had to learn the hard way. Maybe those DC thugs need the same lesson. In this case the police are nothing more than thugs!
 
It is because the parents can't control their kids. Funny, why don't they press charges against the parents for negligence? They are responsible for thier kids so hold them responsible. It never ceases to amaze me that we condone bad parenting over and over and over.
 
The Fourth is quite specific about searches. In order to be secure from unreasonable searches, it is necessary to have probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and etc., and no warrant shall issue without such. No warrant; no search. Government does not have nor has it ever been given power to even ask to search sans a warrant. I don't see it in the Constitution anywhere.

Even an arrest post Miranda with the "reading of your rights", government doesn't have power to ask you if you will forgo your right to remain silent. The reading just says if you do speak, what you say can be used against you. Say "No" and then keep your mouth shut.

Not to worry. If there is something against you, you will be arrested, searched with a warrant, or whatever, without you having to utter one word.

Woody
 
The Fourth is quite specific about searches. In order to be secure from unreasonable searches, it is necessary to have probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and etc., and no warrant shall issue without such. No warrant; no search. Government does not have nor has it ever been given power to even ask to search sans a warrant. I don't see it in the Constitution anywhere.
Click to expand...

Not true. The Constitution gives the United States Supreme Court the power to interpret the Constitution and the law. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that probable cause and warrants applies if someone doesn't give their consent to being searched, but if a police officer asks to search a home and the resident gives their voluntary consent, then no warrant is needed. One time my uncle in California was scared because someone kept on saying he was going to kill him. So he started carrying a gun with him. One time he was pulled over and a police officer saw a holster laying on the passenger seat and asked him what that was and where the gun was located. My uncle said that it was in the glove department. The police officer asked if he could look inside, my uncle said yes. When he saw the gun in glove department, he then arrested my uncle and he went to jail :mad:

The FBI on their website point out that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that voluntary consent searches don't violate the 4th Ammendment.
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2003/mar2003/mar03leb.htm#page_27 from the FBI says
The Fourth Amendment preserves the “right of the people to be secure their persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”1 It is well settled that “searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment—subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” 2 The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that a search conducted pursuant to lawfully given consent is an exception to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment.3
Click to expand...
Wikipedia says that police officers aren't legally required to tell the civilian that they can legally refuse the search in voluntary search situations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_searches
 
Never ever, ever invite law enforcement into your house. Once their in, its a free for all. They don't even have to stop if you change your mind. And anything and everything can and will be used against you. Kind of like posting your picture on the internet.

I've always thought the police going from door to door searching, unless their hoofing it right behind 'em, is and always has been a heinous activity. It smacks of Royal Troops searching homes without cause.
 
I am willing to bet money that the majority of the people of DC don't care about their rights to be secure in their person and their dwelling. That they will cooperate with the government fully. This is how a social democracy operates. They have the government they voted for.
 
Never ever, ever invite law enforcement into your house. Once their in, its a free for all. They don't even have to stop if you change your mind.
Click to expand...

Wrong! You have a perfect right to withdraw consent at any time and tell them to leave. Your failure to do so allows them to keep searching, but when you withdraw consent do so clearly in front of neutral witnesses. That's the key. (How does this myth keep going?)

If you don't stand up for your rights, you don't have any.
 
If you had some extra time and money and nothing better to do, wouldn't it be fun to live in DC with a hundred or so legal guns and ammo for all of them. Then, stash them all over the house (trigger locks in place) and call them up and say you think there may be some guns in your house. Please come take a look.
 
Mom: "Who's at the door, sweety?"

Daughter: "I'll go check."

Mom: "I hope it isn't those Jehovah's witnesses"

Daughter: "Nope, it's the police. They want permission to search the house."

Mom: "Oh, why couldn't it have been the Jehovah's witnesses?"
 
when you withdraw consent do so clearly in front of neutral witnesses. That's the key. (How does this myth keep going?)
Click to expand...
Maybe the myth keeps going because the neutral witnesses don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
DC Door to Door Searches
Replies
1
Views
530
Coronach
C
S
  • Locked
BOSTON: Police limit searches for guns
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
3K
ctdonath
C
Z
  • Locked
DC's new anti-gun plan
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
lawson4
lawson4
S
  • Locked
NRA fighting against DC Personal Protection Act?
Replies
2
Views
338
themic
T
B
  • Locked
Right to carry in Washington DC - follow-on court case to Heller
Replies
1
Views
613
Yellowfin
Y
Back
Top