Posted on 04/22/2013 5:56:56 PM PDT by LucyT
Friday, April 19, 2013, during a manhunt for a bombing suspect, police and federal agents spent the day storming people's homes and performing illegal searches. While it was unclear initially if the home searches were voluntary, it is now crystal clear that they were absolutely NOT voluntary. Police were filmed ripping people from their homes at gunpoint, marching the residents out with their hands raised in submission, and then storming the homes to perform their illegal searches.
This was part of a larger operation that involved total lockdown of the suburban neighbor to Boston. Roads were barricaded and vehicle traffic was prohibited. A No-Fly Zone was declared over the town. People were "ordered" to stay indoors. Businesses were told not to open. National Guard soldiers helped with the lockdown, and were photographed checking IDs of pedestrians on the streets. All the while, police were performing these disgusting house-to-house searches.
No, yours. California gave all their electoral votes to Obama.
BTW, what about your own corrupt government politicians up there in tundraville? What's up with that mr. woof?
For all your purported legal knowledge - and apparent refusal to respond to actually cited cases up thread deliminating limits on this exception to the Fourth - you still apparently are not grasping the difference between limited permitted searches and forced invasions of many people's homes. People whose only crime was living in the wrong place.
Let me give you a little primer: the most recent case on this topic was King v Kentucky. It involved a contemporaneous search of ONE house. The emphasis of the case was on "reasonable." Extracting multiple uninvolved people from their homes at gunpoint because of where they live was not reasonable. In addition, it was not effective. Or do you want to argue that it was reasonable and effective (an ancillary to "reasonable").
Please, go for it. I'll even make this simple: the police could have knocked, asked for entry, and only escalated if denied entry. Instead they just escalated. That is UNREASONABLE.
In other words, the issue isn't the warrantless sarches, it was how UNREASONABLY they were conducted!
To be blunt, you are just wrong.
Not because he received our electoral votes like he did California's.
***** “Regarding militarization, the idea of excellence has been traded for capacity at the expense of liberty. The notion of the classic detective, armed, ready, and intelligent is no longer a perceived reality — the remedy today is seemingly tactical, apathetic force.” ******
Well said ... thought it, but you put those thoughts into words.
Are you related to Lazmataz? He is another that seems to be able to wordsmith my thoughts.
TT
Um “sarches” should be “searches.”
It’s a united country woof..Remember? If it werent for the rest of us, and Alaska were on it’s own, the Russians would own your butts and the Koreans and Japanese would eat all your fish. So shut up with that BS.
**** Members of my family and extended family are LEO’s, State Police, one attorney, and a Deputy District Attorney, a brother in law a Deputy Sheriff and brother in law who is a Battalion Fire Chief. Habeas Corpus was not rescinded and the search was not one of pursuit. The manner in which many of those searches were conducted were illegal, based upon expert opinion and from those that serve and protect and oversee and advise or instruct others that due. They got away with this in Boston so far, but lawsuits may be pending when people calm down.
I can tell you in the part of California I live in the Law Enforcement Community would not execute such actions to protect their officers and the public for fear of being shot, but they felt no fear in the near gun free zone of Boston, plain and simple” ******
Posting to Eternal is a waste of time... but I will bump your sentiments as they are very close to mine, just don’t have the pedigree that you have. ;^)
TT
Exactly! It was the manner in which the searches were conducted! See my post at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3011135/posts?page=363#363 for my view if you are interested.
In name only.
If it werent for the rest of us, and Alaska were on it’s own, the Russians would own your butt
LOL! Put the bong down! The Mexicans, without a military incursion, have wrested California without so much as a skirmish!
If there were the slightest chance that the police action in this case were illegal, the ACLU would be on it like maggots on carrion.
No doubt about it.
I just posted that as a stand-alone thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3011207/posts
Why would you ever think that? Obviously, you are putting your thoughts into my post as you read it.
Everyone who was looking were unsuccessful and he goes out with only the thought to have a smoke and wandered over to his boat as something looked amiss and bingo!
Everything Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao and Pol Pot did was perfectly legal also - even though it looked bad.
The road to tyranny and genocide is paved with the promise and delusion of public safety.
Haven't you been reading the posts about people being 'ordered' by authorities to remain in their homes and 'martial law'? I guess you have to believe those posters were all overly dramatic then also, correct?
Who is it that has promised or promises public safety? The NHTSA, OSHA, FAA, NSC, NTSB, NIOSH, NPSIB, FBI, CIA, NPCA, etc., etc., etc.?
There was a lockdown, it happened, so that news wasn’t fabricated. Do you know the time when they lifted the lockdown? do you know the time when he went to his boat? If not, don’t accuse this Patriot of anything! How weird of you not be happy how it all played out w/him instead you zero in on the hero with accusations. Go shovel some snow.
Today, I’m going with ALL OF THE ABOVE ALPHABETS you mention.
They serve the Statists, not the Constitution, or the People any longer.
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.