Posted on 09/29/2020 12:19:09 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Of course you can. When pipes get broken it’s vitally important to be able to turn off water. To apartments. To buildings. To neighborhoods. Can’t really fix pipes that are still active, water kind of gets in the way. No they didn’t announce themselves. For one thing they didn’t do it. That’s what the water department is for. Really guys, I don’t know why you’re so incredulous. It was common practice. Flushing was a non-issue. Still is a non-issue.
Actually apts are the place to be. So easy to bury who is there. Somebody’s 2nd cousin “rents” it and you put your operation there. Way easier to hide rental than ownership. And the more run down the less the owner cares, so the less paperwork.
“””I do know how plumbing works. And actually there ARE valves to cut off the water flow on a property, both in the inbound and sewage.””””””””
I have been in the construction business my whole life.
I don’t recall ever seeing a valve for sewage that can be turned off from the outside of a building.
Of course you can shut off the water, but that mostly defeats the purpose of a surprise warrant and puts more people at risk because of the time involved sneaking around the plumbing. If you shut off an entire building, you are probably violating the warrant limitations specifically naming the place; and the rights of all the other residents.
People flush drugs and swallow drugs all the time to avoid being caught. I agree with you, usually small-ish quantities not kingpin size stashes. Doesn’t always work... they will find it in the pipes, bowls etc... and sometimes ends up killing the suspect via overdose.
Ok but tell us what you learned about how drug dealers operate? I'm specifically asking what you learned that makes it worth getting innocent people killed in forced entry raids? Many completely innocent people as well as police officers have been killed serving warrants in this manner. What is the benefit that justifies these deaths?
You say Breanna Talor lived the thug life. What are you basing that statement on and what evidence backs that up?
Breonna Taylor has no criminal record of any kind. There were no drugs found in her apartment and keep in mind they would have gone over every square inch of this residence looking for even traces. There was no drug paraphernalia, large amounts of cash, illegal weapons or anything else related to drug trafficking found. The only reason they police even got the warrant to search the property is her ex boyfriend who apparently IS a known criminal had a package sent to her address that was suspected to be drugs. I'm not saying conclusively Taylor was not involved in some way but the fact is it's pretty darn hard to "live the thug life" and have a squeaky clean record and a residence so clean of drugs not even an extensive forensic investigation can turn up a trace.
I find it far more likely the ex boyfriend thug was using Taylor's clean record, clean address, rental cars and bank accounts as cover for HIS drug dealing. Which makes her death completely senseless.
Not at all. It’s a matter of timing and preparation. I used to live in an area where the cops staged for raids all the time. I don’t know why my street was safe but there were so many raid near but there it was. Every few months there’d be a ton of cops in battle gear and an evidence van and prisoner van. And they’d just be hanging around talking and then somebody would give the signal and boom off the went. So for these raids that included water cutoff it’s the same thing, so they all gather, guy turns off the water as everybody loads in, boom boom. Water is off for maybe 30 seconds before the bust hits.
That’s what I was saying. If you’re a big time dealer you don’t go near the stash. Keep it in someone else’s name and possession. Let your lackeys take the rap. But you’d also not keep all your eggs in one basket. If you are transporting 20 kilos in a car, you probably have 3 or 4 cars two of which are used to create an intentional diversion or crash if the heat comes on.
There seems to be a lot of confusion about this case, and one of the elements that is often mistaken is which boyfriend was the one who shot at the police. Taylor's drug-dealing boyfriend was not at the apartment, but was with another boyfriend, who has no criminal record, and was a legal gun owner.
Completely. Of course you have the rat problem. But that’s crime for you.
A legal gun owner should know it is not wise to shoot at cops. They shoot back.
I disagree on one aspect, but I agree on a more fundamental aspect that I have not given enough thought to.
And part of my rationale outlined below is because I have taken a knee jerk reaction to what has been going on, and that it is both nauseating and repulsive to me that I would in any way aid and abet a single-even one-aspect of the anti-American scumbag Leftists and Marxists who have been pushing for just this goal, the abolition of no-knock raids. Of this intransigence, I am fully guilty.
In my post, I specifically said the process needed to be improved, and part of that improvement would involve ratcheting down the eligible situations that no-knock raids would be able to obtain approval for. I readily agree that doing it for drug raids would not apply. And another improvement would be the requirement of rigorous application of intelligence used to authorize the “no knock” raid with respect to positive intelligence of the presence of someone in a location, and the people who have to approve it.
That is what I was referring to when I said it could be improved.
However, in the process of looking at it, I have been so focused on the mechanics of those things that I have overlooked the fundamental truth that I should have been keeping in mind, and it is the lesson that has been burned into me by the FISA abuses that have taken place for some time, coming to a head with the FISA-approved spying on a Presidential candidate (Trump) by the opposing political party that was in power (the Obama Administration)
I have come to the conclusion with FISA that, no matter how many safeguards are put in place to protect the citizenry, if the party wishing to subvert the process wishes to engage in the safeguarded process by simply ignoring, bypassing, or blatantly stepping over the safeguards, and they pay no price for it, then the safeguards will be useless.
And if there is no moral obligation to obey the law, then no amount of safeguarding will protect the citizenry.
Upon reflection in the light of that conclusion I have come around to the hard way, I have to agree that a no-knock raid falls into that category, no matter how many “safeguards” are put in place.
The approval for a no-knock raid by an organization that is populated by human beings who will break the rules to obtain them for either nefarious purposes or because they feel that it is the right and moral thing to do, is still going to bypass the safeguards because rationalizing an exception will empower someone to do just that.
And there lies the rub-human beings are flawed and corruptible. In this Republic, it is apparent that the power to approve or obtain a no-knock raid is, like the FISA process, too open to flawed human manipulation to be granted safely, and there are no humans that can safely and morally wield that power. It can’t be granted to anyone.
I had come to the point that I would rather take my chances with terrorism of any kind rather than support a “fixed” FISA process.
So, if I reach that conclusion for the FISA process, if I am to be intellectually consistent, I have to abandon my knee-jerk opposition to no-knock raids because I feel that it rewards the Leftists and Marxists for something they have had a tantrum over, and I have to reject the concept of a no-knock raid as well, because it cannot be adequately safeguarded.
And so I grudgingly have to admit I am wrong and be in agreement. And that is painful, because that possibly means there is nothing in this Republic we can depend on, and as such, we are doomed.
John Adams said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” It breaks my heart to realize that what he said all those years ago is not irrelevant and obliquely consequential today. It drives straight to the core or our Republic, which is half-populated by people who are neither moral nor religious...the Left.
What was she doing with a dead guy in the trunk of her rental car? She was a murderer who needed to be executed for her crime. It came sooner rather then later.
A+
That was just damn hard to swallow as I wrote it.
Well you are slandering him. The shooting boyfriend was Kenneth Walker and has no criminal record of any kind and was not named on the warrant. The dealer EX-boyfriend was Jamarcus Glover, who was taken into custody at a different address the same night.
Lots of people are confused on that point and seem to think it justifies stupid middle of the night raids. It doesn’t.
Maybe the cops should make appointments during normal business hours when they need to search a place. We wouldn’t want to inconvenience criminals or catch them off guard.
I’ve come to understand Adams quote from a different level. It’s not really the morality of the civilians that matters. It’s the morality of the government. From the elected officials down to the lowliest clerk. These are the people that truly need to understand the intended roll of our government. It’s not there to be efficient, it’s not there to rule, it’s not there to dictate our lives. It’s there to be officiate, to enable, and to get out of the way. Putting things in place to make it easier for the government, whether it’s the police, or tax collector, or even the mailman, is the wrong path. Because that creates rulers, that creates dictators.
So the people need to be moral because it’s the people that wind up in the government. And when immoral people wind up in the government it becomes bad.
Or they could pick him up on the street or at barber’s or whatever and escort him to the place to be searched.
The sure as shit don’t need to be doing it in the middle of the night as a regular practice. It’s the very definition of “unreasonable”.
It’s called the element of surprise.
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.