Is the third amendment under attack??

Explain how I am a traitor, CBJ7. That would be interesting.

Explain how I am a traitor, CBJ7. That would be interesting. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

laud government emloyees that turn over classified government information to CHINA and think it would be [sic] COOL if some lowlife sob infiltrated the DOJ and IRS and does the same thing

"Snowden Took a Job To Leak NSA Secrets? Cool. Let's Have More Like Him at the DOJ, IRS "
"


you're a traitor ..stfu

So, I didn't do that. But I support someone who reveals secret illegal operations by government against its citizens, so I am a traitor. Snowden reveals secrets that we have EVERY RIGHT TO KNOW, and he, and I by association, are traitors.

You really love government, don't you, CBJ7. Anytime anyone says something against government, beware! CBJ7 will get upset. He is an "authority worshiper" and a world class Obamaton.

Government uber alles! Right, CBJ7?

You do realize, I hope, that EvaEkim keeps you from being the stupidest poster on this board. Assup and BiSex don't count. They don't even try to sound smart.

So, I didn't do that. But I support someone who reveals secret illegal operations by government against its citizens, so I am a traitor. Snowden reveals secrets that we have EVERY RIGHT TO KNOW, and he, and I by association, are traitors.

You really love government, don't you, CBJ7. Anytime anyone says something against government, beware! CBJ7 will get upset. He is an "authority worshiper" and a world class Obamaton.

Government uber alles! Right, CBJ7?

You do realize, I hope, that EvaEkim keeps you from being the stupidest poster on this board. Assup and BiSex don't count. They don't even try to sound smart. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I don't love the government as much as you hate it

you're a traitor and a communist Chinese government lover.. kiss my ass

You have never opposed any government action, CBJ7. Never.

posting cartoons isn't opposing anything other than the intellect of the people you force them on.


get a life

I have a terrific life, and it doesn't include bowing to every edict issued by your Almighty and Omniscient (look it up) government.

Not to get off the subject. But is Judge Napolitano by chance related to Secretary of DHS, Janet Napolitano?

read my post again

and at the end of the day, good, bad, right, or wrong, if the homeowner answered his door the cops couldn't have broke it down.

Period

what part of that very simple equation escapes you ?

had the homeowner opened the door the cops couldn't have broken the door down. When the cops told him they wanted in he could have refused, and shut the door ,,, THEN if the cops tore his door down and entered against his will he would be 100% within his rights to sue. Originally Posted by CJ7

Your response is laughable! Did you even bother to read the police plan as spelled out by Officer Cawthorn in his report? (See post 39) It said (and I am paraphrasing) their plan was that if the homeowner refused to leave and allow them entry, he would be arrested. If the homeowner had opened the door, I doubt the police would have allowed him to shut the door so they would have to break the door down to gain re-entry. Their plan was to gain entry into that house, one way or another.

Another point here is that the homeowner had already told the police over the phone that he did not want them in his house. So he had already refused them entry into his home.

The police had no warrant. They violated this man's 4th amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The homeowner is already suing. And I suspect that they (the police and the city) will be paying for a lot more than the replacement of the homeowner's front door.

Not to get off the subject. But is Judge Napolitano by chance related to Secretary of DHS, Janet Napolitano? Originally Posted by acp5762

No, Judge Napolitano has said that he is not related to Janet Napolitano.

And if he was, I doubt he would admit it! LOL. (Jk)

posting cartoons isn't opposing anything other than the intellect of the people you force them on.


get a life Originally Posted by CJ7

Face it, CJ. . . you are an avowed statist. You sold your own liberty over to The State, long ago.... it is evident in every argument you make.... so be it.

Explain how I am a traitor, CBJ7. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Face it, Hanoi COG. . . you are an avowed traitor. You sold your own soul over to the enemies of America, long ago.... it is evident in every ridiculous argument you make and every stupid picture that you post.... so be it.

CJ7, it appears he wanted no involvement in the matter, was in his own home, had done nothing to become involved in the matter and should have been left alone. We have a Constitution for a reason and the main reason was to limit the government, not to limit the rights of the people. This is the type of tyranny that we fought a revolution over.

Face it, CJ. . . you are an avowed statist. You sold your own liberty over to The State, long ago.... it is evident in every argument you make.... so be it. Originally Posted by MrGiz

apparently you are an avowed libertarian ... so be it.


CJ7, it appears he wanted no involvement in the matter, was in his own home, had done nothing to become involved in the matter and should have been left alone. We have a Constitution for a reason and the main reason was to limit the government, not to limit the rights of the people. This is the type of tyranny that we fought a revolution over..

nah, when someone knocks on my door I answer it,, if I don't want any I tell them no ... if they insist, then they have problems

novel concept isn't it ?

nah, when someone knocks on my door I answer it,, if I don't want any I tell them no ... if they insist, then they have problems Originally Posted by CJ7

OK, let's spell out what that means.

You seem to think - for no apparent reason - that answering or not answering the door is the key to this whole issue.

But, the cops were coming into this guys house no matter what. They need their "tactical advantage" over the neighbor, whatever the fuck that means.

So, if he (or you) answers the door and the cops say "We need to come in and occupy your place for a while", and he (or you) refuses to let them in, WHAT THEN?

You say "if they insist, they have problems". What does that mean? Are you telling us you were going to shoot it out with armed cops?

And most importantly of all, how would opening or not opening the door make ANY FUCKING DIFFERENCE?

You keep saying if he had answered the door, there would have been no problem. I say bullshit, there was going to be a problem NO MATTER WHAT if he (or you) had refused to let them in.

And the article clearly states that the cops called Mitchell BY PHONE and told him they needed to occupy his place. The article also says that he told the police that he did not want to become involved and did NOT want them to enter and occupy his home.

So, at that point, the cops know they do not have his permission to enter. So they bring a BATTERING RAM to the door and smash it in.

So, explain to me again how answering the door would have changed anything. If he opened the door even a crack and said "you cannot come in", then they would have just kicked it open into his face. They already had the battering ram for that purpose.