Posted on 06/15/2006 7:53:40 AM PDT by NinoFan
Breaking... Major 5-4 decision. This case was reargued and apparently Alito cast the deciding vote.
Anyone suspected of owning firearms, for whom there would be some other basis for search.
If you suspect someone might be growing pot, and the person's armed, do you knock and announce or smash your way in? The person might in fact be entirely innocent of the drug allegations, but you can't know that until you're actually in their dwelling.
Oh you know, the other constitution where it says "knock three times, walk around the block, sit on the stoop for ten minutes, then knock three more times, give the password and secret handshake before entering the crackhouse." Dems da rulz, boyz.
Along with that, if an LEO harasses or harms an innocent person, the LEO wants that to just go away. When an LEO bags a crook, he doesn't want that to just go away. Given law enforcement agencies' ability to have things "just go away", the only things that won't are usually the ones the LEA doesn't want to.
Because I dislike the French...
Sorry, joking. For the same reason that we call 1, 2, 3 etc. Arabic numbers and not English numbers. We got them from the English, but the English got them from the Arabs.
Right, but how often are search warrants issued for people suspected of just being law-abiding citizens?
It was. But that was based on Roman law. The original basis is the one that should get the credit.
Handling a pen with your gun hand really slows down your reaction time.
Recreational drug use is a problem. Drug prohibition and the war on drugs immensely increases drug problems.
LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition). A fast growing segment of persons that have or have had careers in the justice system. In the trenches of the drug war.
You got it absolutely right--they won't do anything about him. Nobody crosses the union rep.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-1360.ZO.html
Link to decision.
That's an admission that rogue cops are permitted. Where permited they will grow in numbers and misuse of power.
They're permitted because there is no real sanction for violating the exclusion rule. Throwing the case out is not a sanction against the cop--at most, it's a sanction against the DA.
But just keep pretending that it wasn't your dope.
Agree with the ruling? Wait until it's your door that is broken down in the middle of the night because Billy Bob, the town Deputy, got the wrong house or the wrong street.
Innocent people will get killed as a result of this ruling when Billy Bob simply breaks through the door and grandpa pulls out the shotgun next to his bed.
The Fourth Amendment is there to protect grandpa and the "conservative" court just found him guilty because his house number is wrong.
Incidentally, I'm not sure the Arabs really did give us numbers:
You state, "its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption." The fundamental basis of modern mathematics had been laid down not hundreds but thousands of years before by Assyrians and Babylonians, who already knew of the concept of zero, of the Pythagorean Theorem, and of many, many other developments expropriated by Arabs/Muslims (see History of Babylonian Mathematics, Neugebauer).
Now, conversely, if you are engaged in activities of the sort that would earn a no-knock warrant, that's your problem, not mine. Being a criminal has always been perilous.
I have not posted in almost 2 years. I am very nearly in tears in reading this thread.
Are you really this shortsighted, sir? Do you own a gun, sir? Are you aware of the wholehearted efforts to outlaw ownership of any type of gun, sir? Have you ever, or might you ever own a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun, sir? Are you really so naive as to think that no-knock warrants will not one day be used on gun owners?
This thread is beyond insane. There is nothing "conservative" about 95% of the posts. It's like reading a book on handy totalitarian quotations.
They're permitted because there is no real sanction for violating the exclusion rule. Throwing the case out is not a sanction against the cop--at most, it's a sanction against the DA.
You know that if a LEO isn't punished for gaining evidence illegally when the court throws it out then for sure most of the time when the law enforcement agency knows the evidence was obtained illegally that too will not be punished. When the court catches the LEO with his hand in the illegally-obtained-evidence cookie jar is given a pass by the LEA for sure the LEA will give a pass when illegal evidence is obtained but not caught by the court with his hand in cookie jar.
But just keep pretending that it wasn't your dope.
Another of your completely inane comments. You off your meds again?
Hey, sometimes the bad guys yell "POLICE!" as they enter. This is happening already, and everybody on the bad end of the invasion reports great confusion. It's one direct consequence of raids, period. Never mind no-knocks. As for "Wild Bunch"-ing it out with a paramilitary assault force, chances are real good at gettin' got, and who knows what version of events a jury will hear?
This thread is beyond insane. There is nothing "conservative" about 95% of the posts. It's like reading a book on handy totalitarian quotations.
It's your fault you live in a place where police can't get it right. I've got two sons in law enforcement, one in SWAT, and they don't break in every chance they get. Most of the time, they never have to break in at all.
Too many on this thread are militia types who get their information in the middle of the night from shortwave goofballs.
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.