What's Bad About a House-to-House Search?

"What's Bad About a House-to-House Search?
Please. Try to understand."

I do. Do you?

Occasionally, it is referred to in case law as "hot pursuit" .... and it is...

... based on the rather old 4th amendment exception ....

...of "exigent circumstances" provided by the Supreme Court!

If you want to fight terrorism as an LE function and/or on the home turf ...

.. get used to it.

I'm assuming you know from your experiences overseas in the military.


And if you have a "no shoes in the house" policy ..

..... I'd also craft an exception for that policy, if you want to remain dignified.

Cuz da boots ain't comin' off! Originally Posted by LexusLover

what was so special about this house that a dozen police officers had to converge on it?

Or better yet, marry this one and get on the band wagon ...(not so fast, she has a condition)


gritsboy, the quote here (from the lady) is, "Yours had better be TWICE as long and half again as thick as this one, especially when we practice butt-luv-birth control!" Sorry, even if you have decided to come out of retirement and represent her/them in their quest for truth, justice and the Chechnyan Way, you'll still have to qualify. I can't wait until she gets a load of granny's bathrobe.
Originally Posted by LexusLover

Uhhh, the "piss off the police" law was probably in effect. Besides, since they are all sheep and probably, at least according to gritsboy, merely sitting on the couch quaking in fear, what else have they got to do other than let the police in? I mean, hell, with crystal logic like that, what's the problem?

gritsboy, I liked you better when you were going steady with Corneyhole. Please patch up that bromance, get right or at least get a grip.

Boy, you people are going to love the police state. I guess the question I'd ask is how many Bostonians opened the door to the police saying, "May we please search your house?" No, they were met with guns and ordered to stand aside.

And you don't see anything wrong with this? There is no hope for the country.

And Old Dingbat, Libertarian means just that. You have rights, and the government can't trample on them. End of story.

What happened in Boston was a tragedy. The way the people reacted was a travesty.

Be sure to run out with your broom and chase the police away from your home in case they are looking for a armed robber killer ect.

When the Mayor of Boston closed down the city, did he declare martial law? Is there a power of being the Mayor that allows you to close down a city? Even when we evacuated Houston for two different Hurricanes, the mayor didn't order the city "closed down."

Lexus?

When the Mayor of Boston closed down the city, did he declare martial law? Is there a power of being the Mayor that allows you to close down a city? Even when we evacuated Houston for two different Hurricanes, the mayor didn't order the city "closed down."

Lexus? Originally Posted by gnadfly

the Gov went on the air and ASK not ordered residents to remain sheltered .. pretty sure the Gov can declare Martial Law, but he didnt

Be sure to run out with your broom and chase the police away from your home in case they are looking for a armed robber killer ect. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Yeah right dumb ass Armed Robbers always run into people's houses in an effort to evade the police. Happens all the time doesn't it. I suppose you also believe it's common for the Police to go door to door looking for Felony suspects, and have the right to gain entry without consent or probable cause. You are such a fucking dupe, it's pathetic.

Would I have given consent for a search if in such a situation? That's debatable. Would I have allowed myself to be treated as a criminal when I'm 100% obviously not the guy for whom they were looking? No way. I'd have filed a lawsuit somewhere in the five figure range if they arrested me for not fully complying with their directives, six if they tried to do that to my mother, since she has some mobility issues, including not being able to raise one of her arms more than halfway without severe pain due to an injury that she suffered a few years ago.

Yeah right dumb ass Armed Robbers always run into people's houses in an effort to evade the police. Happens all the time doesn't it. I suppose you also believe it's common for the Police to go door to door looking for Felony suspects, and have the right to gain entry without consent or probable cause. You are such a fucking dupe, it's pathetic. Originally Posted by acp5762

A problem with these types of discussions, they tend to drift away from the facts.

"Reasonableness" is based on the information known and reported at the time ...

... as opposed to "Monday morning" ... in this case what the media was passing out.

What we don't know is what LE knew at the time.

These two guys were suspects in terrorist bombings that indiscriminately killed innocent bystanders and by the time a search was on cop killers, car jackers, and kidnappers, who had just engaged in a running gun battle with LE ... in which they were apparently tossing bombs ("grenades") along with way ... and also apparently had another pressure cooker bomb in their possession.

.. one of them was on foot and "losse" in residential neighborhoods ..

Now you can "modify" that information all you want to make your point about how this country is going into the "police state" shitter, but your modified facts are irrelevant to the reality faced with LE .... and some of you have already started whining about they should have prevented the event in the first place ....

.. what would you be saying if this guy had taken out another family or two on the loose?

I suppose (although they way some of you post I'm not so sure) that had you lived in the neighborhood, and this turd was in your home holding your family hostage and the police came to the door, you would want them to come in (as many as they could cram inside your house) with OVERWHELMING force to neutralize the situation and render your family safe from this turd ... as opposed to taking your word at the door that "everything" is "ok" while the turd had a pistol pointed at your kids head!

If you lied and said "everything is ok" and LE didnt' come in, how would you feel when you saw your kid's brains on the wall after the police left, then your wife (SO), or perhaps you would be first so you would be spared of that horror.

What do you think?

The guy that ultimately called 911 about the blood on his boat ... was close ... and apparently he was inviting them to come over and investigate. He's a hero as far as I am concerned ... more interested in the community good of securing the community than worrying about this country becoming a "police state" or using this horrendous event to "make a point" in furtherance of a "social-political" agenda on a Sex Biz Board.

COG you're the kinda guy who screams first and loudest when the cops don't show!

Gnad ... the "mayor" has little to nothing to do with the daily police operations and techniques and shouldn't ... that injects poltics into the decision making, and few mayors have sufficient LE comprehension to even have a clue. There are lots of "mayors" posting on this board. The "old Mayor Daley" did, and LBJ used the FBI.

Of all places in the United States the people in the Houston metro area ought to understand ... "sheltering" in place .... lately with repeated school violence .. we have schools "locking down" when violent events occur nearby to assure that the alleged "actor" does not get inside the school and use that venue in a standoff. It's common.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly exempted compliance with the literal language of the 4th amendment to provide for emergency situations, police saftey, and PUBLIC SAFETY.

To use this scenario (Boston BOMBINGS) to whine about a coming "police state" is to say the least IGNORANT, and reminds me of the childhoold "chicken little" story!

I'll repeat again: You folks who want to fight terrorism "at home" .... you got it! And the rest of you who whine about "pre-emptive strikes" .... you are now going to learn something about why the old "hue and cry" policies of LE changed.

COG you're the kinda guy who screams first and loudest when the cops don't show! Originally Posted by LexusLover

As long as he is bitching and moaning, he is happy!

Lets take this a step further. Lets assume Joe Q. Citizen grants the police permission to search his house for a wanted terrorist. In the course of that search, lets say the police uncover a cache of stolen goods, or perhaps find a stash of drugs. Hell, lets say the police find a dead body. Guess what? Thanks to our trusty Constitution if the police were to pursue charges against the homeowner based on their search, even the most incompetent judge in the country would throw the case out on its ear. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

Not to get off topic too far ... I disagree with this statement. #1 "our trusted constitution doesn't have a "voluntary" exception, one is etched by the U.S. Supreme Court, which has said on numerous occasions for YEARS that if the police have permission to be in or on the premises and they see evidence of other crimes in "plain view" they can confiscate the evidence and with probable cause arrest the suspected perpetrator .. "plain view" is established by the nature of the permission to be looking and for what the police are looking ....

.. I wouldn't want some on here to believe what you are saying and act upon it.

Of course they could always say to the Judge (or their lawyer):

"SinsOfTheFlesh said that on Eccie! It's the law"!

#2: Having said the above, LE made not pursue charges, depending on the circumstances or the DA might not as well ... but that would probably depend on how large the stash ... I don't think you'll get a pass on the "dead body" though ... particularly if one doesn't have a "really good reason" to have a "dead body" hanging (lying) around the house. That would be a discretionary decision .. not a "constitutional" or legal one.

Would I have given consent for a search if in such a situation? That's debatable. Originally Posted by SpinShooter

LE goes into homes on regular basis when there are reports of "commotions" (loud shouting and screaming going on) without "permission" when a guy answers the door and says ... "everything is ok here" ... and they have reason to believe that there is someone else in the house ..... (why would the guy be screaming at himself?) .... they are tasked with the responsibility of PROTECTING the victim or a potential victim.

If the trail they are on leads them to your house (dog or otherwise .. like infrared sky cam ...) .. they are going to come in whether you like it or not. ... and if they have reason to come in and can articulate that reason factually to a judge (later on)... it will satisfy the requirements of "resisting a search" ...

..... which is like "resisting arrest" in law as far as the consequences.

LE goes into homes on regular basis when there are reports of "commotions" (loud shouting and screaming going on) without "permission" when a guy answers the door and says ... "everything is ok here" ... and they have reason to believe that there is someone else in the house ..... (why would the guy be screaming at himself?) .... they are tasked with the responsibility of PROTECTING the victim or a potential victim.

If the trail they are on leads them to your house (dog or otherwise .. like infrared sky cam ...) .. they are going to come in whether you like it or not. ... and if they have reason to come in and can articulate that reason factually to a judge (later on)... it will satisfy the requirements of "resisting a search" ...

..... which is like "resisting arrest" in law as far as the consequences. Originally Posted by LexusLover

That's different. I was talking about what happened in Watertown, where they treated an entire neighborhood as criminals, and locked down an entire city to find just ONE man. So you want to search my place to make sure that a criminal involved in multiple deaths and injuries who bombed a major sporting event isn't in there? Maybe, but making me come out with my hands up while you and several other officers are pointing automatic weapons at me, and ordering me to keep them up, even though I'm already outside? Yeah, I don't think so.

I'd like to add that the scenes of troops and armored military vehicles on the streets in that area was incredibly disturbing. All for one man.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

That's different. I was talking about what happened in Watertown, where they treated an entire neighborhood as criminals, and locked down an entire city to find just ONE man. So you want to search my place to make sure that a criminal involved in multiple deaths and injuries who bombed a major sporting event isn't in there? Maybe, ...

..... but making me come out with my hands up while you and several other officers are pointing automatic weapons at me, and ordering me to keep them up, even though I'm already outside? Yeah, I don't think so.
Originally Posted by SpinShooter

I think so.

Until you are identified to their satisfaction, keeping your hands up and visible to the investigating officers is what is going to happen. Whether you realize it or not ... it's safer for you in that context.

Of course, if you want them to rip your house key from your cold, stiff hand, (or kick down your front door) ... exercise your "constitutional rights" and "ignore" their commands ... stick you hands in your pockets and yell ..

"kiss my ass pigs"!

You sound too much like Obaminable (and his law professor buddy) who whined about a BOSTON police officer appearing at the professor's house to identify him based on a report of a burglary in progress at his house. The professor decided (law professor?) he didn't have to properly identify himself ... oh, yea?



Of course, this would have been a different story had the cop just walked away and the professor came home to an empty house (cleaned out) house and found out that the cop didn't "id" the person who came to the door.

What do you think?

A problem with "liberals" is they want it both ways. And the problem with egotistical liberals is they "assume" that everyone knows "who they are"!!!