Posted on 04/24/2013 10:12:21 AM PDT by KentuckyTim
The terrorist attack in Boston and ensuing events in Watertown had everyone on edge, but shocking new home video from Massachusetts show law enforcement officers trampling over the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution – which guarantees “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures… 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.”
A video recently uploaded to YouTube by residents whose home was searched reveal that earlier accounts of ‘voluntary searches’ were nothing more than an outright lie.
(Excerpt) Read more at constitutionschool.com ...
You’re point is?
Search has guidelines, not just the seizure part.
My point is that after 14 gazillion threads no one has linked to any E V I D E N C E that lawful firearms were confiscated, or owners of lawful firearms were detained anywhere in Watertown.
So far, all that can be gleaned from the postings is that warrant or not, the only thing searched for was the suspect. A suspect that had already shown more than once a desire to combine "Firefight" and "Whoop ass" into one main event. This is something that tends to make LE Bellybuttons pucker, yet there is a surprising lack of evidence that personal possessions were seized from anyone. Not even dopers have complained that a stash was lost. What happened in New Orleans did not happen in Watertown.
Foe the record, I am not a fan of LEOs, period. I highly respect Peace Officers. There is a difference. Similar to the difference between Sheriff Arpaio and LAPD Officer Dorner.
Certainly. The 4th Amendment provides protection from illegal search and seizure. In additiin, the SCOTUS has ruled that there must be probable cause for a law enforcement agency to conduct any search of yourself or your property.
So, since when did purchasing an airline ticket constitute probable cause? What crime has Mr. and Mrs. American flyer committed that allows them and their property to be searched and treated like criminal suspects prior to boarding an aircraft?
In addition, a lot of the stuff pulled by the TSA under the guise of "protection" is stuff they made up. I have taught classes at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in New Mexico and I can assure you that they make a lot of stuff up on the fly. They were not taught this stuff at the FLETC.
“How about the TSA? The TSA has been violating the 4th Amendment since their inception and NO ONE has complained about it, we just meekly subject ourselves to whatever crap they make up so that we won’t miss our flight!”
Care to back up your claim?
This doesn’t have to be about firearms, but warrantless search in a persons home. Forget the firearms, entering is enough.
No. Since you, apparently didn't understand what you read, any further effort on my part to explain it to you would only be a waste of JimRob's bandwidth.
I perfectly understand what I read. You are electing not to defend the latter half of your claim.
I specified firearms because another poster compared it to Katrina.
Was it a warrant-less search? Do we know that?
We DO KNOW they formed a perimeter of an area to create a “Containment Zone”. Then they did a systematic sweep & search of that zone. When they called for the “shelter in place” and everyone stay off the streets stuff, did some Judge somewhere issue a sealed warrant for the general containment zone looking only for the suspect and any additional IEDs? Considering all the big shots involved, from the Governor on down, are they that stupid not to cover their collective asses? How much of the behind the scenes activities were never publicized so as to not tip off the terrorists?
Or, do you contend that a warrant can only be for a specific area of a specific size? 500 square feet and no larger?
As I said above, there is no evidence anything was confiscated that I have seen. No guns, no dope, no moonshine, no untaxed baked beans, no Cuban Cigars, nothing.
I can’t even find a record of any Tea Party Activists being detained during that search.
“Boston Strong “
—
That’s Watertown,not Boston. Get your facts straight.
.
So you’re fine with unconstitutional searches, as long as nothing is taken. Got it.
No Proof.
Proof that searches occurred? I’m not sure what you’re getting at. They need not seize anything to violate the Fourth Amendment.
Can you prove to me a sealed warrant for the general containment zone looking only for the suspect and any additional IEDs was never signed by a Judge on call?
It does not even have to be sealed. Can you PROVE that no warrant was ever issued to search the containment zone?
Honestly, I understand both perspectives. My main concern is what would the reaction from the LEO’s be if a resident said “no”( if a warrant was not issued.) I think the community was ok, alarmed, but ok to let the LEO’s do the search. I’d probably do the same under the circumstances, however, if someone said no..I hope all hell wouldn’t have broken lose.
KMA
I think some of the confusion can be cleared up. Back in Post # 20 someone introduced Katrina to the discussion. That triggered my jumping in, because I have seen no proof that guns were taken from anyone. (or anything else illegal)
Next, I also had concerns about how residents were treated during the search. Then I saw THIS POST on another thread relating an actual encounter.
As to the 4th Amendment stuff, reading the actual text tells me size of a search area is not limited.
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.
Let's pick it apart.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated
I agree this is the main issue up for discussion.
no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
Well, the suspect was last seen in this area, and at the time last seen was armed & shooting at folks. That can describe probable cause . . .
and particularly describing the place to be searched,
In this case a 15 block radius containment zone including all buildings and structures within the zone.
and the persons or things to be seized.
One armed and dangerous whack-a-nut and possible Improvised Explosive Devices.
There has been lots of talk that "Speedbump" and "Flashbang" were part of a larger cell. If that is the case it is prudent not to tip your hand too early & give the rest of the cell a chance to escape. A sealed warrant would do just that. Ironic that "Flashbang" spent the whole day hiding less than 2 blocks outside the containment zone.
.
My main concern is how would things go if ===> I <=== was in that zone that day. I own a number of firearms and a minimum of 1000 rounds for each. I don't think I would willingly allow a search without some written guarantee that me & mine would not be harmed and that ALL my property would stay with me when they left.
Well, they are the ultimate M@$$holes...unionthug RATcops.
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.