The Controversial Moment SWAT Teams Ordered Innocent Neighbors Out Of Their Houses At GUNPOINT

Mail Online ^ | April 23, 2013 | Daily Mail Reporter

[NautiNurse]

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.

[muawiyah]

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.

[muawiyah]

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!

[papertyger]

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."

[muawiyah]

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!

[muawiyah]

The movie maker claims those people are victims. yet we don’t know that and they aren’t complaining.

[papertyger]

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."

[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.

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.

[Repeal The 17th]

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?

[papertyger]

The movie maker claims those people are victims. yet we don’t know that and they aren’t 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."

[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.

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.

[palmer]

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.

[muawiyah]

Paul Revere did his own house to house looking for Brits.

[muawiyah]

Weve gone over that territory. Find a complainant. pay his way to court.

[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.

Next you'll be telling us we can't have a valid opinion on abortion unless we're female.

[muawiyah]

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 ~

[palmer]

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.

[Repeal The 17th]

Hey man, (pssst) don’t look now, but your ignorance is showing.

[muawiyah]

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.

[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.

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.