Whitey: "You don't expect Mummbles to to go after those who murder informers, do you?"
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodies?
Posted on 11/19/2007 1:17:11 PM PST by neverdem
Associated Press
BOSTON — Boston police will ask parents in high-crime areas to let detectives search their children's bedrooms for guns without warrants in a new anti-crime program.
Police believe parents are so worried their teenagers will be caught up in gun violence that they'll be willing to allow police into their homes. If the parents say no, the police will leave.
"They don't know what to do when faced with the problem of dealing with a teenage boy in possession of a firearm," police Commissioner Edward Davis said of parents. We're giving them an option in that case."
Davis announced the program Friday in a meeting with community leaders.
During the next two weeks, teams of three plainclothes officers assigned to schools will go to homes where they believe teens have guns and ask their parents or legal guardians for permission to search.
The program, called Safe Homes, has raised questions about civil liberties.
Thomas Nolan, a former Boston police lieutenant who teaches criminology at Boston University, called it "an end run around the Constitution."
"The police have restrictions on their authority and ability to conduct searches," he said. "The Constitution was written with a very specific intent, and that was to keep the law out of private homes unless there is a written document signed by a judge and based on probable cause. Here, you don't have that."
Some critics said people may be too intimidated to say no to police.
"People might not understand the implications of weapons being tested or any contraband being found," said Amy Reichbach, a racial justice advocate at the American Civil Liberties Union.
The program is modeled after one that began in 1994 in St. Louis and ended in 1999, partly because funding ran out. Boston police said that in the first year of the St. Louis program, police were allowed into 98 percent of homes contacted and that guns were seized in half of them.
Davis said officers won't conduct such searches in the homes of teenagers suspected in shootings or homicides whom investigators are trying to prosecute. If officers find drugs during a warrantless search, it will be up to them whether to make an arrest. Modest amounts of drugs like marijuana will simply be confiscated, officials said.
The Rev. Jeffrey Brown, co-founder of the anti-crime Boston TenPoint Coalition, backed the initiative.
"What I like about this program is it really is a tool to empower the parent," he said. "It's a way in which they can get a hold of the household and say, 'I don't want that in my house.'"
Whitey: "You don't expect Mummbles to to go after those who murder informers, do you?"
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodies?
Yeah, this will really work.
“What ‘chu mean? That ain’y my baby’s. You pigs put that gun there!”
I think this is a bad idea for many, many reasons.
Once again, outlaws will have guns and guns will be outlawed. It’s just another step in that direction under the guise of “crime fighting” and “safety.”
Is he bleepin' kiddin'? Most of these parents are either clueless as to what their kids are into or just don't give a bleep. AND for the small numbers that do finally figure out what's going on, apparently they're not smart enough to turn their kid in..........
Are you kidding me?
Well, it is a plan (sort of).
Boston has successfully prosecuted about 8% of its homicides.
They can’t let THAT come out.
bump
bump
If those things weren't fouled up, there would be no motivation for this trampling of 2nd Amendment rights.
Anybody remember the good old days when the major parental concern about their kids and firearms was how to afford a really nice one to put under the Christmas Tree?
Consensual searches are completely legal.
No one or very very few are willing to finger gang members for fear of retaliation,,,,and as I said, most of the parents don't have a clue and the rest don't give a bleep. The "maya" of Boston does stupid things like handing out gift cards to Target in return for a gun, no questions asked, turn in a gun get a gift card,,,,,allowing said animal to sell said gift card and turn around and buy more guns,,,,way to go "maya". As for the police, you're right, they have little or no power here, they can't do much of anything without getting into a problem with the PC crowd.
Boston parents must be different from the ones around here.
Parents in most other places can toss their kids rooms, confiscate contraband of all sorts, dispose of it, and help teach the kid what good behavior is.
Somehow Boston parents don’t have that capability. Or, the Boston cops don’t think they, do, or the cops use subtle coercion to work their way inside for a search and all these assurances are just reassuring noises for the rest of the country so we don’t get riled up.
I think the St Louis experiment got 98% compliance because it’s difficult to say no to a bunch of beefy armed guys with body armor who say “We want in, OK?”
If they say they only wish to search the kids rooms, the kids must be pretty dumb to keep heat in their rooms and not under the living room couch, which apparently the cops are saying is off limits to their consensual searches.
Spoken like a person who has never feared the retaliatory murder of oneself, and/or their family.
This from the city that went to war over warrantless searches using Writs of Assistance.
I guess the Intolerable Acts are a lot more tolerable now.
No disrespect to the police; but it’s like letting the fox into the hen house.
Also, you let them in the door and you are never going to get them out. The government will find all sorts of ways to invade your privacy. You will lose it.
Advertise a special number parents can call if they want, but actively going to homes and flashing a badge can lead to abuse, because people are prone to make decisions based on fear of authority and not knowing the law rather than a informed, rational decision. The police know this.
The article gives away the fact that drugs will not be ignored. Nor will anything else, mind you. "Do you have any guns in the home, Mr./Mrs. ____________? Are they properly stored? Mind if we check while we're here?"
I'm against putting people in a position that by saying "no" to a search, the police officer can assume in any way that there's guilt. That's why I don't like sobriety checkpoints -- if you don't have time to wait in line and you turn around, you're presumed guilty until proven innocent.
What does a sobriety checkpoint have to do with this? Baby steps, that's all I have to say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.