PD Forcing Residents From Home During Boston Manhunt

[normiss 897]

Safety man!
We're suppose to be scared!
The nice police men will take care of everything.
Now get in line and shut up!
They're going to save lives man!

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

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.

Do they? Why? What about every other time a murder happens and the suspect isn't immediately apprehended? Do they have to search every house in the vicinity then?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[livendive 8]

Quote

>No. Come back with a warrant.

Homeowners do indeed have every right to be assholes.

I don't like guns pointed at me. I don't like people yelling at me. I don't like people treating me like a criminal. I don't happily give complete strangers unconstrained and unaccompanied access to my house. Which of these makes me an asshole?

If one cop who seemed emotionally stable knocked on my door and said "Could you please search your house for any strangers? Or allow us to?", I'd be a bit more cooperative than 12 guys with guns pounding on my door and trying to show off their erections. In this case, I'd have said no.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

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?

Good luck with that. Every time I've asked so far he's not even acknowledged the existence of the question. I think he knows his argument falls down as soon as it's not stated in terms of his precise hypothetical scenario so he's not willing to think about any alternatives.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 3,119]

>I don't like guns pointed at me. I don't like people yelling at me. I don't like people
>treating me like a criminal. I don't happily give complete strangers unconstrained and
>unaccompanied access to my house. Which of these makes me an asshole?

None of those things do. Slowing down a search for a killer by being an asshole does.

>If one cop who seemed emotionally stable knocked on my door and said "Could
>you please search your house for any strangers? Or allow us to?", I'd be a bit more
>cooperative than 12 guys with guns pounding on my door and trying to show off their
>erections. In this case, I'd have said no.

I wouldn't blame you. Who wants to see that?

But seriously, I think you'd be OK with what really happened there. It would be annoying but you would tend to put the search for the killer (and not hindering the cops in their attempts to do that) above your feelings of unhappiness.

It's one thing to be on the Internet talking about hypotheticals, quite another to be in a community where this happened, working with the cops to try to find the killer.

[livendive 8]

Quote

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.

Why do you think this is the case? Do they search dozens of random houses for other murderers? Did this door-to-door search do any good? There are plenty of constitutional options. This is not one of them.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[quade 4]

Quote

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?

It's not "shredding" the Constitution. It's recognizing that occasionally there will be situations that aren't covered. I realize you believe this situation was covered by the fourth. I also believe it was covered by the fourth due to the word "unreasonable." I do not believe this was an "unreasonable" search. I believe a well defined area and notice given by the government covering this extraordinary circumstance covered it. I'd call that a sort of blanket area search warrant.

The cops weren't busting into random houses looking for random people doing random crimes and sweeping up everything in its path. My guess is that the cops saw a LOT of criminal activity going on in a number of homes, but didn't give a shit about it (nor would they be allowed to) because they had a very specific mission; apprehending a terrorist and cop killer.

I do not believe what the cops did was "unreasonable." You can disagree if you like.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[livendive 8]

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."

A warrant requires probable cause, which these guys didn't have.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[normiss 897]

I will always refuse to lay down my rights in support of mass panic or bullying cops.

To me, this is but one shining example of WHY we have the Fourth in the first place.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[billvon 3,119]

>A warrant requires probable cause, which these guys didn't have.

Not up to them, up to a judge. She might grant the warrant based on the threat posed by the terrorist and the cop's assessment that he has an x% chance of being in the guy's house. She might not based on insufficient evidence. Up to her.

[billvon 3,119]

>I will always refuse to lay down my rights in support of mass panic or bullying cops.

Again, that's something cool to say on the Internet. Most people are pretty reasonable when stuff like this happens.

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

The cops weren't busting into random houses looking for random people doing random crimes

What's the difference between this criminal and a random criminal? What's the difference between this crime and a random crime?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[normiss 897]

Nope.

Been there and paid for it.
I know this one.

Grow a pair and stand up for yourself. Before you can't.

[livendive 8]

Quote

But seriously, I think you'd be OK with what really happened there. It would be annoying but you would tend to put the search for the killer (and not hindering the cops in their attempts to do that) above your feelings of unhappiness.

You underestimate the low regard in which I hold police who use their position to bully non-threatening people. I've taken a cop to the ground before for manhandling me with no good reason, and was allowed to walk away afterwards because he and the other two officers present knew he'd been way out of line. My demeanor is often a mirror. Courtesy, respect, and other sentiments are generally returned in kind.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

The cops weren't busting into random houses looking for random people doing random crimes

What's the difference between this criminal and a random criminal? What's the difference between this crime and a random crime?

no dice throws or coin flips

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,119]

>You underestimate the low regard in which I hold police who use their position to bully
>non-threatening people.

Not at all. I am sure you hold them in very low regard. I also think you're a reasonable person who would put his community above your own personal unhappiness even if some of the people involved were dicks.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>I also think you're a reasonable person who would put his community above your own personal unhappiness even if some of the people involved were dicks.

hey now, let's take it easy on the personal attacks, there, mister....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

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?

No, it IS a constitutional question
REGARDLESS of what is going on, they have no right, pratical or otherwise to enter my home with a warrent or permission

This is not debatable

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

[normiss 897]

It's actually quite comical given Massachusetts' history with unwarranted, general searches and the crafting of the Fourth Amendment. It was a spark in the Revolution.
This IS a big deal.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

It's actually quite comical given Massachusetts' history with unwarranted, general searches and the crafting of the Fourth Amendment. It was a spark in the Revolution.
This IS a big deal.

Yes it is
And if we the people do not flex our rights, they will go away

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Manhunts happen all the time.

Manhunts happen all the time. People shoot at cops sometimes. A group of bombers likely wearing suicide vests doesn't often drive down the street throwing bombs out of their car while shooting at cops. A somewhat unique situation out of the thousands of police manhunts that happen over the years in Boston.

Malfunctions happen all the time. CRW wraps happen all the time. 3-outs don't. Again a somewhat unique situation.

Quote

Your argument is that this particular manhunt was unique, but you haven't really supported that claim. Car chases with shooters are unusual, but hardly once in a decade events. Suicide vests are no longer (sadly) shockers - LEOs have been dealing with that scenario for over a decade. Throwing bombs out the window is hardly different than shooting

And let's not bullshit around - the door to door searches had nothing to do with the car chase. One happened after the other was over. This suspect was no more dangerous than any other manhunt for a guy that had been shooting at people. And that book has been written.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Well written. I was going to write up a similar post and you saved me the effort. In this case, I'd invite them in as long as they let me stay, didn't break anything, and promised no possible future action against me for anything observed during the search.

How exactly are you going to get this promise, and actually expect them to hold to it?

The don't break anything is the one I expect trouble with. A hurried search is going to be a sloppy one, not good for my possessions. And if the only reason they need to do it is they think I'm being held hostage, then the fact that I can hold a gun should end that. But if they're searching because they think I may be harboring the guy, then they're going to trash my place looking.

Without a written warrant excluding anything but the suspect, I have absolutely no trust in them not fishing for other shit. Too much case history with the Court in the past 20 years.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

And if we the people do not exorcise our rights, they will go away

So many straight lines, so little time.

[regulator 0]

Quote

>I don't like guns pointed at me. I don't like people yelling at me. I don't like people
>treating me like a criminal. I don't happily give complete strangers unconstrained and
>unaccompanied access to my house. Which of these makes me an asshole?

None of those things do. Slowing down a search for a killer by being an asshole does.

>If one cop who seemed emotionally stable knocked on my door and said "Could
>you please search your house for any strangers? Or allow us to?", I'd be a bit more
>cooperative than 12 guys with guns pounding on my door and trying to show off their
>erections. In this case, I'd have said no.

I wouldn't blame you. Who wants to see that?

But seriously, I think you'd be OK with what really happened there. It would be annoying but you would tend to put the search for the killer (and not hindering the cops in their attempts to do that) above your feelings of unhappiness.

It's one thing to be on the Internet talking about hypotheticals, quite another to be in a community where this happened, working with the cops to try to find the killer.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think those officers were asking for permission to enter the premesis?

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The cops weren't busting into random houses looking for random people doing random crimes

What's the difference between this criminal and a random criminal? What's the difference between this crime and a random crime?

no dice throws or coin flips

What's the most you ever lost on a coin toss?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?