I support common sense, and do not support rhetorical or visual excess.
The Nazi picture was a common place event in a police state where ethnic minorities were rounded up. The Watertown incident was a case in which police were looking for a desperate, armed terrorist who had killed a police officer and maimed innocent citizens.
These situations are not at all similar.
No police officer wants to die, especially needlessly. What is the problem with cautiously clearing houses with overwhelming force?
“I support common sense, and do not support rhetorical or visual excess.
The Nazi picture was a common place event in a police state where ethnic minorities were rounded up. The Watertown incident was a case in which police were looking for a desperate, armed terrorist who had killed a police officer and maimed innocent citizens.What is the problem with cautiously clearing houses with overwhelming force?”
A little document called the “Constitution”. It bothers socialists of all stripes, including ones in police uniforms.
Thank you for verifying your defense of the unconstituional encroachments in Boston.
There are murderers loose in every city in America; there are “terrorists” (Freepers, conservatives) across the country.
It is all too easy to justify such actions in every city, town and village in the nation, and as you demonstrate, no shortage of people short-sighted enough to defend them.
Your little defense is most helpful in ensuring this becomes widespread, Komrade. The State appreciates your support.
In any city in this country, there are currently on the loose murderers who have brutally attacked others, who have left a trail of destruction in their wake. Some are overrun by gangs.
So in any city, the police could use the same argument you are making to go door-to-door through every neighborhood, looking for any one of these currently at-large killers.
Unless the police had some indication that the perpetrator had entered one of those houses, without a warrant they had no business clearing the houses with force, overwhelming or not. They could knock, and politely ask if they could look around. If they were told no, they had to move on unless they had a clear indication that there was an imminent danger within the house.
In the end, this particular terrorist hadn't even killed as many people as the DC Sniper.
But we have seen that police love to use excessive force when one of their own is killed. Which is fine if they use it on the murderer, but not when they take it out on innocent civilians.
Look at what happened in California -- cops shooting up cars with innocent people in them. "But there was a brutal killer on the loose". Yep, always is, always will be.
And yes, if you lock everybody in their houses, and then send a platoon of military folks to roust everybody out of their houses and search them, one at a time, you will eventually find every known suspect that is hiding in a city. You could well round up thousands of miscreants, and even stop some murders, rapes, and brutal beatings in the process.
But that's not how our country works. We'd rather let some people die so we can be left a peace in our own homes, and be free to leave them whenever we want. That is why it is written in the constitution. We aren't the safest country. But we should be the freest.