Quantcast

Police Searching Homes

Discussion in 'Legal' started by 44-henry, Apr 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Blakenzy

    Blakenzy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    917
    I put it in quotes because it seems that every time legal and Constitutional guarantees are left by the wayside it's because of the label terrorism. Just say it's about terrorism (hell, it may very well be!), and suddenly the sky is falling and legal restraints no longer apply. The quotes indicate my contempt for, and that I no longer take the term seriously because it blows things out of proportion and is abused by those in power to justify doing things they should otherwise not be doing.

    I don't think we should, as a society or nation, change the way we do things because of the very, very rare violent acts of a very, very few, regardless of their intent to cause fear and terror.


    "Terrorism":what::uhoh::eek:
     
  2. bubba in ca

    bubba in ca Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    365
    first, my family had a cabin in big Bear and a burglar entered by prying up the edge of the garage door, One guy pried and let a kid in to unlock the door. No external damage to the house--the police or anyone else would have no way of knowing the house had a burglar inside without entering. (thereafter, the garage door sported a lock on each side, installed lower than comfortable for normal use so that they could not be pried).

    Anyway, in the boston situation I would have no problem cooperating with the police for a quick search for a terrorist who wasn`t there. I do, however, see the potential problem like the police in Islamomarxist New Orleans confiscating arms from law abiding citizens. Boston is no bastion or 2nd amendment rights.

    I also marvel at the show of firepower to catch 2 lightly armed terrorists when in other cases the national guard responds to massive rioting and arson and just sits there and watches people loot. priorities, priorities...
     
  3. Blakenzy

    Blakenzy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    917
    It's because the life blood of the current bloated security apparatus depends on funding destined to fight "terrorism". They HAVE to make a big fanfare of everything terror-related, lest their budget be questioned and eventually get cut.
     
  4. hmphargh

    hmphargh Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    335
    And about 40 of those 52 were made before that information was public.
     
  5. k_dawg

    k_dawg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2005
    Messages:
    816
    LEO can lie. You can say you only give them limited permission and they can say they agree. But they are not bound for it. A major reason never to give permission for any kind of search.

    btw: there is no reasonable probable cause to search an entire neighborhood of houses for one individual.
     
  6. tazcat2005

    tazcat2005 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    13
    I live west of Boston and watched the coverage. Those cops had battering rams at the ready as they were going up to people's houses. Not sure if consent would have mattered, I for one would not have let them in.
     
  7. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    And we all know how useful battering rams are for consensual searches.
     
  8. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    11,616
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    That would be up to a judge to decide, based on an analysis of all circumstances and applicable law, and not you.
     
  9. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    I can see it:
    Homeowner: No, officer. There's no terrorist here. No reason to search. Just be on your way.
    Officer: No problem sir. have a good night.

    Yeah, right.
     
  10. Salmoneye

    Salmoneye Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,905
    Location:
    The West Coast Of New England
  11. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,349
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    Convincing stuff. Very sad.
     
  12. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    Consensual searches for a terrorist don't involve police forcing people from a house at gun point, nor ordering them, with guns pointed at them, to keep their hands in the air.



    So yes, I say again that we are watching the demise of American liberty, and believe that I do so without being overly dramatic. This is treason against the constitution, committed by tens of thousands of LEO, with no outcry from any "good cops" from the area.

    So let's hear it, from the LEOs on this board, denounce it, let it be known that if this happened in your area you wouldn't stand for it, you would arrest the criminals committing home invasions. Do you stand for the constitution, or do you stand for "public safety"?
     
  13. itsa pain

    itsa pain member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,489
    beautiful post chaos but you will not hear police here denouncing that behavior and if they do they are not telling the truth
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2013
  14. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,865
    for the love of god quit your rabble rousing.

    its pretty easy to be an arm chair liberty commando when you dont have a terrorist running around your neighborhood, shooting cops and tossing bombs around.

    despite what you want to believe, police werent just up and searching random homes and dragging people out by their hair at gun point......they were searching areas where they had good reason to believe the suspect could be hiding.

    for goodness sake, theres a terrorist on the loose and you think they are interested in looking for your guns, illegal drugs, copies of your communist manifesto or whatever it is you think they care about more than finding a dangerous suspect.....get real.


    dont get me wrong, im all for liberty.....i dont know about your qualifications, but im sure as hell not trained to deal with an bomb chucking terrorist on my own.....so let the people who can properly deal with it do their jobs.
     
  15. itsa pain

    itsa pain member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,489
    mcameron you are not for liberty at all so why even say it. liberty for you is an hour of exercise out of your jail cell
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2013
  16. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    I'm not worried about what they will find, I'm worried about my constitutional rights. And searching an area where they "have good reason to believe he may be" means violating the rights of thousands of people.


    I don't know why I argue with you, if you care so little for your rights then don't complain when they take your guns for your own protection. If you are so willing to grant them your rights for a little security, don't complain when they do it in any area they choose.
     
  17. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,865
    so im a "sheeple" because i know my limitations and would rather have trained personnel deal with a terrorist.....fine so be it.

    i pray to god this never happens in your town, but if it does, itll be interesting to see how many of you arm chair elitist 'stick to your guns' and stick it to 'the man' when he comes looking for a suspect.
     
  18. sota

    sota Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2012
    Messages:
    831
    this has nothing to do with knowing ones limitations. this have everything to do with you not recognizing the needs of the citizens to defend their rights and liberties at all times from all directions. There were blatant violations of the soverign rights of those people when those searches were made of those houses. The 'justification' is irrelevant... the next time it won't be so "strong" a justifcation, which each subsequent event being less justified until such point as there's NO justification. And that's when they start arresting people for different-think and other such 1984'esque concepts. Once errosion starts around the foundations, if you don't immediately go in and shore up you'll soon find the foundations are crumbling and collapsing. We scream "NO!" and "ABUSE!" now, so as to stop the errosion before it becomes too great to deal with, without draconian measures which none wants.
     
  19. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,865

    please tell me what rights were violated?

    because to me, searching for a suspected terrorist in an area where he is believed to be seems pretty damn reasonable to me.....
     
  20. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    So, would it be reasonable to search every single house in a city for, say, a serial killer who killed 20 people over 20 years? What do you define as reasonable? If you think it is reasonable to be forced from your home at gunpoint, for your own safety, then welcome to the world of your own making. Don't be surprised when, in order to facilitate safety in your area after a natural disaster, they go through the process of "reasonable seizures" of your firearms.
     
  21. sota

    sota Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2012
    Messages:
    831
    you highlighted the wrong part...

    "madman in the area" does not qualify as probable cause, has no oath or affirmation to it, and does not describe a particular place to be searched. I'll give that they had a particular person in mind in their searches. However without PROBABLE CAUSE that the person in question was INSIDE the homes being searched there is no right for them to force entry into those homes. A door ajar, a footprint on the door, a blood stain on the stoop I would grant as just cause, but lacking something concrete such as that there is no justification for the searches inside. Nevermind they didn't find him... a HOMEOWNER DID because he saw... wait for it... BLOOD EVIDENCE on his boat and a torn cover, both of which are physical evidence and would qualify as probable cause.
     
  22. sota

    sota Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2012
    Messages:
    831
    ChaoSS: you mean like New Orleans.
     
  23. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    BTW, this is not armchair quarterbacking of a situation where cops were caught unprepared and had to make a snap decision. Since 9/11, and before, to some degree, these police agencies have been planning for these types of situations, running training exercises, simulations, so on and so forth. This has been planned for years, if something like this happened.


    And yes, Sota, I do mean Katrina. I see no difference between these two situations. If these searches were reasonable, then certainly, the gun confiscations were reasonable seizures.
     
  24. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,281
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Confiscating guns from the cops in New Orleans would have been reasonable, since so many of them were murdering civilians.
     
  25. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    13,233
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    "for the love of god quit your rabble rousing."

    No kidding. He must think the fire department and the game warden has to have a warrant to enter private property too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice