Just got a visit from the cops

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chill out.

Being outraged is good when there is something to be outraged at. Being outraged for the joy of it takes years off ones life.
 
Sorry to hear that.

I really am.
I choose to zealously guard my constitutional rights and not to discard them based on "trust" in total strangers with unknown motives.

I treat cops the way I treat hitchhikers.

Not all hitchhikers are serial killers. Some are.

Not all cops commit crimes and violate the 4th and 5th Amendments. Some do.

I can't just look at a hitchhiker or a cop and tell if he's another Richard Ramirez or Jason Smith. That means I would NEVER pick up a hitchhiker or let a cop into my home without a warrant, much less search without one.

I'm sure that hurts the feelings of some hitchhikers and cops. I've learned to live with that.
 
I'm going to ask this again, because it might have gotten lost in the back and forth.

For the people who are critical of the OP's actions, have you ever personally been in the same situation? Multiple LEOs from multiple jurisdictions standing at your door asking to be let in, asking to search.

What specifically did you do?
And what specifically was the outcome?

I would really like to hear from people who have actually denied a request for a search of the home.
What did the police do? Did they come back?
Did they have a warrant this time?
Did they tear up your house? Or did they respect your property and leave it as they found it?
Did they no-knock? Or did they knock?

So far I've read a lot of theoretical advice. And I'm not impugning theory. It's just that theory (>100 posts) without practical experience (< 10 posts) where we can study the outcomes makes it almost impossible to determine the best course of action.

I'm not looking for YouTube videos. I want to hear from the people here, ON THR, about what you did in similar circumstance.


Hearing some actual, first-hand experiences of the many alternatives posted here would make it a lot easier to make a decision as to the best course of action.
 
gossamer said:
...
For the people who are critical of the OP's actions, have you ever personally been in the same situation? Multiple LEOs from multiple jurisdictions standing at your door asking to be let in, asking to search.

What specifically did you do?
And what specifically was the outcome?

I would really like to hear from people who have actually denied a request for a search of the home.
What did the police do? Did they come back?
Did they have a warrant this time?
Did they tear up your house? Or did they respect your property and leave it as they found it?
Did they no-knock? Or did they knock?

So far I've read a lot of theoretical advice. And I'm not impugning theory. It's just that theory (>100 posts) without practical experience (< 10 posts) where we can study the outcomes makes it almost impossible to determine the best course of action.

I'm not looking for YouTube videos. I want to hear from the people here, ON THR, about what you did in similar circumstance.


Hearing some actual, first-hand experiences of the many alternatives posted here would make it a lot easier to make a decision as to the best course of action.

This is similar to the question about if someone had to actually use their gun in SD. While some may well be willing to share, there may still be others who are not. A difference between the two is that in the latter case the offenders are law enforcement officers who have much more power over the citizen than does a common street thug. Thereby prompting the code of silence.
 
This is similar to the question about if someone had to actually use their gun in SD.

Really? How so?

If you mean in terms of the trauma or negative feelings at the outcome then I have to say, if the experience of asking the police for a warrant results in an outcome anywhere as traumatic as I imagine using my gun in SD would be, I much prefer the outcome the OP had.

If someone feels their experiences in a similar situation where they rejected a request for search were too traumatic, too negative, or there is too much potential jeopardy to repeat them then I certainly understand if they do not want to.

And, if that is the case, it does serve as it's own cautionary tale for the rest of us should we decide to adopt that tactic.
 
My younger brother (retired leo) will tell you that anyone who agrees to a police interview or search without consulting their attorney is a fool. He always said: "we aren't talking to you because we like you or because you are good company".
 
And, if that is the case, it does serve as it's own cautionary tale for the rest of us should we decide to adopt that tactic.
If you believe that, does that mean that since I've personally seen police decline to investigate a vandalism/attempted burglary because the perpetrators were White and the crime committed in a neighborhood which recently became majority Black, that I should never call the police to report Whites committing crimes in a Black neighborhood?

Negative outcomes in both cases.
 
gossamer said:
Really? How so?

If you mean in terms of the trauma or negative feelings at the outcome then I have to say, if the experience of asking the police for a warrant results in an outcome anywhere as traumatic as I imagine using my gun in SD would be, I much prefer the outcome the OP had.

If someone feels their experiences in a similar situation where they rejected a request for search were too traumatic, too negative, or there is too much potential jeopardy to repeat them then I certainly understand if they do not want to.

And, if that is the case, it does serve as it's own cautionary tale for the rest of us should we decide to adopt that tactic.
Probably more of the latter than the former. It could also involve matters which surround legal proceedings, which would most likely require silence.

Your last point is well noted, and commonly accepted. Many people waive their rights for exactly this reason. Sadly enough, if a person is afraid to exercise their right for fear of repercussions from LE, then that person is not truly free to do so, be in their own mind, or reality.
And, if that is the case, it does serve as it's own cautionary tale for the rest of us should we decide to adopt that tactic.
It also serves as a cautionary tale for the rest of us that it is high time we started stepping up to the plate and start exercising such rights lest they wither away altogether. If you can't exercise your freedom, then you really don't have it.
 
gossamer,

Not for my home, but for my car. They scratched their heads for 15 minutes and let me go.

Remember, to get into your home, they need one of three things. Exigency, a warrant, or permission. If they had probable cause for a warrant, they wouldn't have showed up without one in the first place. If they don't have the first two, they will use every trick in the book to get the third.
 
I just had to...

The Power of a Badge

*
A*DEA officer stops at a ranch in Texas and talks with an old rancher. *He tells

the rancher, "I need to inspect your ranch for illegally grown drugs."*The rancher*

says, "Okay, but do not go in that field over there," as he points out the location.


The DEA*officer verbally explodes saying, " Mister, *I have the authority of the

Federal Government with me."* Reaching into his rear pants pocket, he removes

his badge and proudly displays it to the rancher.* "See this badge?* This badge

means I am allowed to go wherever I wish.... on any land.* No questions asked or

answers given.* Have I made myself clear?* Do you understand?"

The rancher*nods politely, apologizes, and goes about his chores.


A short time later, the old rancher hears loud screams and sees the*DEA*officer

running for his life chased by the rancher's*big Santa Gertrudis*bull.*
**
With every step the bull is gaining ground on the officer, and it seems likely that

he'll be*gored before he reaches safety.* The officer is clearly terrified.*

The rancher*throws down his tools, runs to the fence and yells at the top of his

lungs..... "Your badge. Show him your BADGE!"
 
A tip for everyone:

people refuse consent everyday across the US and nothing happens to them. Some of you need to loosen the tinfoil some
 
Consenting to a search is just as smart as giving someone permission to shoot past you, because you trust them and they know what they are doing.
Or like swallowing an unidentified pill handed you by a random stranger at a party because he says he's a "doctor" and it's "good for you".
 
I think this is one of the more frustrating and contentious topics that can come up on the net.

The idea of asserting and protecting your rights or asserting your rights for your own protection is one of those concepts you either get or you don't.

I believe that some of us have been so indocrinated that "Officer Freindly" is our friend from childhood that their mind simply will not grasp any other reality.

How many of us remember learning to read on "Peter Pat and the Policeman"?

Bottom line, I protect my rights, I decline all voluntary contact W/ the local Constabulary. I deny all requests for searches and do not speak to the police W/out an attorney present.

If you choose not to avail yourself of these protections then don't. But, don't come back here whinning when you stick your penis in a beartrap

Or like swallowing an unidentified pill handed you by a random stranger at a party

Mea Culpa but it was years ago
 
When in doubt let the Constitution be your guide.
I may not carry a gun, but I got a carry permit. Why? Because if you don't exercise your rights, they go away.
So, for me? Sorry, officer. I must stand up for my rights.
 
Hope the OP has gotten what he needed out of this thread at this point. It seems to have run a couple of pages past the '3 page rule' now, so we're going to say goodbye to it in its current incarnation.

If the OP still wants/needs more discussion on the topic, he can start Chapter Two...

lpl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top