Skip to comments.
The Controversial Moment SWAT Teams Ordered Innocent Neighbors Out Of Their Houses At GUNPOINT
Mail Online ^
| April 23, 2013
| Daily Mail Reporter
Posted on 04/23/2013 2:20:24 PM PDT by Biggirl
A startling home-made video now shows the terrifying moments where Watertown residents were forced out of their homes at gunpoint as SWAT teams performed door-to-door searches as they hunted the second marathon bomber. While millions of Bostonians waited in their houses on Friday during the city-wide lockdown, the people of Watertown were faced with SWAT officers yelling at them to get out of the buildings immediately.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: boston; housesearches; police; terrorism; watertownfamilies
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 201-214 next last
To: muawiyah
You're damn right--none of us have anything when the U.S. Constitution is trampled by jackbooted government thugs--and bootlickers like you argue for warrantless searches.
I wouldn't expect any less from a US postal worker.
To: palmer
Do you understand the difference between complaining about cops and complaining about criminals?
Seriously.
Explain it to us. I really want to see how you come up with the idea that people should complain about a manhunt to find a mad bomber.
To: NautiNurse
you sound like a fascist pig yourself. Read the 14th and tell me where it says ALL searches must have a warrant.
BTW, clue ~ it doesn't!
To: muawiyah
The video, without testimony from those involved is little more than hayseed propaganda!Actually, it's primary source material.
Testimony, in this case, is just "spin."
124
posted on
04/23/2013 6:36:56 PM PDT
by
papertyger
(Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
To: NautiNurse
you sound like a fascist pig yourself. Read the 4th and tell me where it says ALL searches must have a warrant.
BTW, clue ~ it doesn't!
To: papertyger
The movie maker claims those people are victims. yet we don’t know that and they aren’t complaining.
To: muawiyah
I really want to see how you come up with the idea that people should complain about a manhunt to find a mad bomber."He's not here, Officer. I've checked my house and grounds, and I didn't have to shoot anyone."
127
posted on
04/23/2013 6:39:42 PM PDT
by
papertyger
(Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
To: papertyger
none of you were in the homes in the search area. you're someplace else kvetching about a search for a dangerous fugitive in a residential area.
We'd just shot the guy and been done with it ~ maybe call the cops to get the body. But we sure wouldn't be arguing like you are that the mad dog bomber had better rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness than we do.
Watch out how you come down on the side of letting the low life get away.
To: muawiyah
You are right.
This is the Boston area, after all.
Why, Old King George could have done house-to-house searches in that same area
looking for Paul revere and the likes
and it would have been perfectly legal at the time, right?
129
posted on
04/23/2013 6:41:21 PM PDT
by
Repeal The 17th
(We have met the enemy and he is us.)
To: muawiyah
The movie maker claims those people are victims. yet we dont know that and they arent complaining. So what?
I once had a woman dejectedly tell me she had to take a mandatory, unpaid, vacation by her employer.
I had to inform her the rest of the workforce calls that a "layoff."
130
posted on
04/23/2013 6:43:02 PM PDT
by
papertyger
(Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
To: papertyger
So the cops go away, and i'm living next door to you and now, all at once, my life and safety are dependent on your ability to discern whether or not your property has been invaded by a mad dog killer who uses bombs.
Frankly, with your expressed attitudes i don't think i'd trust you. We'd keep the cops around our property for a while watching your house just in case you've made a deal with the perp and are serving him tea and crumpets.
To: muawiyah
Explain it to us. Us? You seem to be only one who doesn't understand searches. But anyway, the way it works is that the 4th protects all persons and property from search and seizure with specific exceptions. The only applicable exception in this case was hot pursuit but when the cops lost the perp they lost hot pursuit.
The punishment for violating the 4th is very simple, all evidence gathered illegally is tossed. Unfortunately for homeowners like in Watertown there is very little recourse. But if one were charged with a crime such as drug possession due to the cops stumbling across them last Friday, that case would be laughed out of court. So basically the 4th does protect criminals and while you may not like that, the criminals are the canary in the coal mine here.
132
posted on
04/23/2013 6:43:24 PM PDT
by
palmer
(Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
To: Repeal The 17th
Paul Revere did his own house to house looking for Brits.
To: palmer
Weve gone over that territory. Find a complainant. pay his way to court.
To: muawiyah
none of you were in the homes in the search area. you're someplace else kvetching about a search for a dangerous fugitive in a residential area. Next you'll be telling us we can't have a valid opinion on abortion unless we're female.
135
posted on
04/23/2013 6:45:26 PM PDT
by
papertyger
(Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
To: palmer
The criminal they were looking for was a mad dog bomber. Have you seen anywhere that they also did drug raids while they were on that business?
Get serious ~
To: muawiyah
One more specific exception that could apply: any cop walking through Watertown last Friday can look into any property and upon seeing anything suspicious could perform a legal search. Even a hunch would be considered legal as long as there is a reason for the hunch (as explained to the judge). The fact that the cops went door to door pretty much proves there was no such evidence and all the searches were illegal.
Of course there is one more exception which is when the owners give permission to search. But from the looks of it, some were under duress to give permission so that does not count.
137
posted on
04/23/2013 6:48:11 PM PDT
by
palmer
(Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
To: muawiyah
Hey man, (pssst) don’t look now, but your ignorance is showing.
138
posted on
04/23/2013 6:48:18 PM PDT
by
Repeal The 17th
(We have met the enemy and he is us.)
To: papertyger
Why, are you planning on an abortion? Go ahead, have the baby. Give it to somebody. Go kill yourself if you've gotta' kill someone.
Stick to the topic ~ mad dog bomber, man hunt, hot pursuit doctrines, human behavior, guns, whatever.
If this puke had been anywhere my neighborhood I"d have wanted him killed.
To: muawiyah
So the cops go away, and i'm living next door to you and now, all at once, my life and safety are dependent on your ability to discern whether or not your property has been invaded by a mad dog killer who uses bombs.If you're so concerned about your "safety," move to a country that doesn't have our Constitution.
What makes the cops so much better at securing my property than I am? Their concern is keeping their own butts safe, not yours or mine.
140
posted on
04/23/2013 6:50:33 PM PDT
by
papertyger
(Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 201-214 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson