PD Forcing Residents From Home During Boston Manhunt

[billvon 3,090]

>Are there many like you that are willing to lay down the constitution when you see fit?

Nope. Nor do I support that, as you know. Someone pee in your wheaties this morning?

[billvon 3,090]

>And yes, they had to come up with actions to catch him, but the rulebook they
>had SPECIFICALLY told them what NOT TO DO without justification.

Could you post a copy of that rulebook? I'd like to see it.

[DougH 270]

You don't think that police departments have written procedure and policy books that cover:

Fugitive searches.
Hostage scenarios.
Terrorist attacks.
Procedures on search and seizures.

They had to make a new procedure book for this instance, but I am sure that it had stuff that conflicted with restrictions on all of their other ones!

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[billvon 3,090]

>They had to make a new procedure book for this instance

Exactly! And you can be assured that it was not as well thought out as the others were since they had to come up with new procedures on the fly.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>No. Come back with a warrant.

Homeowners do indeed have every right to be assholes.

I would say it more like this

Homeowners can be assholes

Cops claim the right to be assholes (in this case)
I would not let them in
If that makes me an asshole then so be it

But the cops have NO right to enter my house without a warrent or reasonable cause

Period

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DougH 270]

Quote

>They had to make a new procedure book for this instance

Exactly! And you can be assured that it was not as well thought out as the others were since they had to come up with new procedures on the fly.

I don't disagree with you Bill. Which is why I think we need to circle back around and really take a hard look at this.

We need to consider that in the heat of the moment all the other rules can and will be cast aside, and we need to come back to some bedrock principles that are respected no matter what.

What if this was ten terrorists in ten cities. What if they were attacking civilians and police actively.

I can only imagine the disruption to everyday life, and I think the biggest disruption would be from our response.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

They had to make a new procedure book for this instance

Exactly! And you can be assured that it was not as well thought out as the others were since they had to come up with new procedures on the fly.

I'm still looking for someone to explain a clear line where suddenly it's ok to throw out all the rules and trying something/anything. We can and have dealt with robbers, murders, cop killers, bombers, and worse in the past. Where do you draw the line that suddenly, THIS is so bad that the old rules don't apply and we need to make up new ones.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[billvon 3,090]

>I'm still looking for someone to explain a clear line where suddenly it's ok to throw
>out all the rules and trying something/anything.

It's not. They screwed up. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

>I'm still looking for someone to explain a clear line where suddenly it's ok to throw
>out all the rules and trying something/anything.

It's not. They screwed up. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Oh, I understand, and I agree that they screwed up. However, I don't understand why you are, or agree with anyone else, calling residents assholes if they call the cops on it while the screw up is in progress.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[jakee 1,571]

Quote

>I'm still looking for someone to explain a clear line where suddenly it's ok to throw
>out all the rules and trying something/anything.

It's not. They screwed up. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

He's probably referring to the stuff that quade's been writing.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 3,090]

> However, I don't understand why you are, or agree with anyone else, calling
>residents assholes if they call the cops on it while the screw up is in progress.

If you fight with the cops while they are trying to clear an area where there is a terrorist hiding, you are being an asshole. If they insist on coming into your home and pulling you outside in the process, they are being assholes as well. Assholeness does not cancel. You cannot be a big enough asshole to cancel someone else's out.

However, if you tell them quite clearly "you can't come in" then stand back if they force their way in - then you win. You:

1) do not impede a search for a terrorist
2) have an excellent court case that you will likely win afterwards.

[quade 4]

The real issue as I stated several days ago though is, how else are you going to do it?

At some point, the cops have to enter the property to search it. That's not a Constitutional question or an asshole question or anything else. It's simply a practical matter. One way or another, they have to do it.

It is, impractical to get individual search warrants for every house in a ten block radius on a moment's notice.

Is there some legal method for getting a blanket warrant for the entire search area?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skypuppy 1]

Quote

>And yes, they had to come up with actions to catch him, but the rulebook they
>had SPECIFICALLY told them what NOT TO DO without justification.

Could you post a copy of that rulebook? I'd like to see it.

It's the constitution, specifically the part about unreasonable search....

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

>And yes, they had to come up with actions to catch him, but the rulebook they
>had SPECIFICALLY told them what NOT TO DO without justification.

Could you post a copy of that rulebook? I'd like to see it.

It's the constitution, specifically the part about unreasonable search....

Define "unreasonable." In this case, I personally think it was reasonable.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DanG 1]

Quote

At some point, the cops have to enter the property to search it.

You're assuming that only the cops have the ability to search. The perp was identified by non-LEOs, and he was found by non-LEOs.

- Dan G

[skypuppy 1]

Quote

The real issue as I stated several days ago though is, how else are you going to do it?

At some point, the cops have to enter the property to search it. That's not a Constitutional question or an asshole question or anything else. It's simply a practical matter. One way or another, they have to do it.

It is, impractical to get individual search warrants for every house in a ten block radius on a moment's notice.

Is there some legal method for getting a blanket warrant for the entire search area?

obviously they didn't have to search it, because he wasn't there. So the entire exercise was a waste of everyone's time, and serves as a template for other terrorists who want to shut down a major metropolis with a minimum of resources.

It would have been more effective to ask people who are able to inspect their own properties and people who are unable to do that to ask police to come in to do it for them...

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 3,090]

>The real issue as I stated several days ago though is, how else are you going to do it?

"Can we come in?"
"OK."

"Can we come in?"
"OK."

"Can we come in?"
"No."
"OK. Davis and Stevens, you stay here and keep watch in case the bomber shows himself. Sit tight folks. I'll be back with a warrant."

[normiss 872]

Unreasonable = without warrant.

[quade 4]

Quote

Unreasonable = without warrant.

Except that's not true at all.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Kennedy 0]

Yep. Don't know why some folks have such an issue with that. Do you really think it'd take long to get a warrant for this one? I'm sure there'd be a magistrate just waiting to sign off on it. There's nothing wrong with the rules and regs that were in place before they detonated the IEDs at the finish.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[quade 4]

Quote

>The real issue as I stated several days ago though is, how else are you going to do it?

"Can we come in?"
"OK."

"Can we come in?"
"OK."

"Can we come in?"
"No."
"OK. Davis and Stevens, you stay here and keep watch in case the bomber shows himself. Sit tight folks. I'll be back with a warrant."

You forget to add the shot where the cops are walking away in slow motion as the house explodes.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 872]

It is precisely 100% accurate and true.

[quade 4]

Quote

It is precisely 100% accurate and true.

No, it isn't.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,090]

>You forget to add the shot where the cops are walking away in slow motion as the
>house explodes.

Uh, OK. In that case good thing they weren't in the house when it exploded. Going with that angle, the Fourth Amendment kept five people alive.

[Kennedy 0]

I put this in a reply to bill, but it was really aimed at you.

Quote

I'm still looking for someone to explain a clear line where suddenly it's ok to throw out all the rules and trying something/anything. We can and have dealt with robbers, murders, cop killers, bombers, and worse in the past. Where do you draw the line that suddenly, THIS is so bad that the old rules don't apply and we need to make up new ones.

So, tell me, what is so bad that everything changes and you're ok with shredding the bill of rights just a little bit more?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*