Posted on 09/04/2012 11:12:10 AM PDT by Altariel
Interesting logic. They’re not REALLLLY a problem yet. Only when people disappear.
Next it will be “well, obviously, it’s only *them* who are disappearing, not us; therefore, the disappearing people aren’t reallllly a problem.”
Followed by “well, the Freepers who have “disappeared” obviously deserved it. Just cleaning up the riffraff here.
Of course, when it comes your turn to “disappear”, no one will be left to protest.
“If you’re performing a raid that involves forcibly entering a property, you must be 100% sure that what you are looking for is inside and that no innocent people will be harmed in the process. Not 99.99999%, but 100%. It’s called investigation, surveillance and police work.”
No it isn’t, that there is called fantasy.
“Interesting logic. They’re not REALLLLY a problem yet. Only when people disappear.”
I didn’t say that. You were using a t4erm that has a different meaning than you may be aware of. I was just pointing that out. Try a little comprehensions before you shoot from the hip.
Maybe the cops are training to be the footsoldiers in Obama’s civilian force, you remember:
“We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” Barack Hussein Obama,”
But you’ve already established that you believe it acceptable to raid, without a warrant, a woman’s home.
All the police have to do is *say* you are connected to [insert criminal activity], and plenty of people will be just as willing to justify a raid on your home.
If you aren’t willing to have it done to you, don’t justify it or defend it when it is done to others.
It's better for a criminal get away because of constitutional protections than the country descend into a police state.
99% of these raids are unnecessary anyway. They should only be used when a person inside is in known and immediate danger or if a suspect is barricaded inside during hot peruit. Anything else can be handled with real police work. There was a time when most towns didn't even have a SWAT team and big cities only used them a handful of times per year.
“But you’ve already established that you believe it acceptable to raid, without a warrant, a woman’s home.”
You didn’t get the whole story. There was a warrant. There was a coke dealer. This wasn’t me Ma’s house, boyo.
“It’s better for a criminal get away because of constitutional protections than the country descend into a police state.”
That’s what the ACLU keeps telling us. We’re so far from a police state, it’s ridiculous. You ever been in one? You wouldn’t say such a foolish thing.
The address on the warrant was for the boyfriend’s residence.
“Probable cause” was the ‘justification’ used to enter her residence unlawfully.
But thank you for verifying that you believe it’s hunky dory for police to enter houses simply based on ‘probable cause’.
Even the police spokesperson isn’t willing to lie and say they had a warrant, simply “probable cause”.
****
“A spokesperson for the sheriff’s office said they had probable cause to search Hairston’s residence because Thompson’s alleged drug activities were suspected to take place from Hairston’s house on occasion. The home which she rents to Thompson was also searched. “
I have not used the term “jackboots”.
Moreover, you seem unfamiliar with the relevant definition of “Jackboot” : “the spirit or policy of militarism or totalitarianism “
( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jackboots )
Thank you for confirming that you would rather government employees ignore constitutional protections simply because you disapprove of the behavior of the accused.
“Probable cause” is not sufficient, constitutionally, to search that woman’s residence.
The woman’s name was NOT on the warrant. Lance Thompson’s name WAS on the warrant. “Probable cause” does not mean “we get to invade homes of anyone we THINK or BELIEVE might be connected to Lance Thompson”
The *only* residence they could legally search was Lance Thompson’s residence.
“The address on the warrant was for the boyfriend’s residence.”
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Watch the video of the local news (at about the 1:46 mark) it is clear that the warrant was for BOTH her tenant’s home and her personal residence.
“Thank you for confirming that you would rather government employees ignore constitutional protections simply because you disapprove of the behavior of the accused.”
Well, I’d say you are welcome, but it ain’t what I said. At all. You’re so convinced that you’re right you aren’t hearing, reading or even SEEING the things I pointed out. See you around.
YES, I was born in and lived in the USSR.
My grandparents were alive during the beginning and rise of the Soviet system. They also spent time in the Gulags and Hitler's death camps. I have many friends and family that live under the KGB state that still exists today. I know a f’n thing or two about police states.
It didn't happen overnight, but through small increments. I am seeing the same incremental things in the USA today.
They generate false fear in people like you to gain power and control in the name of fighting criminals, enemies, evildoers, terrorists, etc, etc, etc.
Remember, you have far more to fear from a corrupt government than even the most evil and determined street criminals. When government and police have too much power, THEY ALWAYS BECOME THE #1 CRIMINALS. 100% of the time. Government must be kept on the shortest possible leash and we must constantly look for ways to shorten that leash, not extend it.
“It didn’t happen overnight, but through small increments. I am seeing the same incremental things in the USA today.”
No you aren’t.
That’s about right Arrggghh
I worry (slightly) about the cops thinking the old owners of our property still live there and have some reason to come looking for them. We still, 3 1/2 years later, get mail for them, no matter that I’ve called the post office several times to have it stopped.
I and many people I personally know have been affected by the corruption, injustices and abuses of power in the USA. Some have had their freedom taken or lives ruined forever. It feels more like we're heading “back home” every day.
We need to stop it and tighten the leash of government as much as possible.
Less government + less laws + less cops = more Freedom
Only one address, not both, is shown on the warrant.
A *claim* that both addresses were on the warrant is made by the reporter (this claim is not corroborated by showing both addresses), just before the same reporter launches into the police’s defense.
I remind you that the same people who broke into her house are also the same people pretending that a dog in a closed bedroom *needed* to be shot because it was vicious.
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.