Just a question about the door to door searches

[achiro]

So in Boston they have been doing walk throughs during their door to door searches and I was wondering if someone was opposed to that could they go in anyway? Is there some sort of marshal law that allows for this? I'm pretty sure you can't just get an open warrant for that sort of thing so I was curious.

[Jacie]

I thought they said it was voluntary.

[Midtowner]

If they're voluntary, no big deal. If not, I guess they may be in a shoot first/ask questions later mind set.

[FaninAma]

That's one of the images I was talking about in the other thread. Camaflouged military going door to door without a warrant.

[Sooner Eclipse]

If they're voluntary, no big deal. If not, I guess they may be in a shoot first/ask questions later mind set.

You would be the kind of cop that people really despise.

[cleller]

Just more common tactics. They spot the suspect, and establish a perimeter they feel he is likely contained in. Then you go about the tedious task of clearing that perimeter.

After informing the resident of the situation, rarely would someone object to the house being searched. Should the suspect be seen entering a house, it is "exigent circumstances" where no consent is needed.

[SicEmBaylor]

If they're voluntary, no big deal. If not, I guess they may be in a shoot first/ask questions later mind set.

Ends justify the means, right?

Not that I'd be insolent just for the purpose of being insolent, but I'd never let a cop search my home without a f'n search warrant. I don't care what the circumstances are. If they really feel I have something to hide they can take it to a judge.

[SicEmBaylor]

Just more common tactics. They spot the suspect, and establish a perimeter they feel he is likely contained in. Then you go about the tedious task of clearing that perimeter.

After informing the resident of the situation, rarely would someone object to the house being searched. Should the suspect be seen entering a house, it is "exigent circumstances" where no consent is needed.

I'd be the exception to that rarity.

[SicEmBaylor]

You would be the kind of cop that people really despise.

He's already the type of poster everyone despises. ;)

[cleller]

I'd be the exception to that rarity.

And I assume the potential upside for the bomber, and downside for you fits with your theology?

[SicEmBaylor]

And I assume the potential upside for the bomber, and downside for you fits with your theology?

I don't see the downside for me though admittedly there is the possibility of an upside for the bomber. What I likely would have done is invite ONE police officer to sit with me in my living room while someone else went to get the warrant. If they wanted to search my entire house bad enough then that's what they'd have to do. If they'd be satisfied enough to step in my living room and have a seat and then leave without the warrant then all the better.

[SoonerInFortSmith]

Dude you are delusional. You would be the one difficult pain in the *** that would impede a search for a terror suspect wouldn't you? I'd think you would realize its your duty as a citizen to help (or at least allow) the police to secure their perimeter.

[cleller]

I don't see the downside for me though admittedly there is the possibility of an upside for the bomber. What I likely would have done is invite ONE police officer to sit with me in my living room while someone else went to get the warrant. If they wanted to search my entire house bad enough then that's what they'd have to do. If they'd be satisfied enough to step in my living room and have a seat and then leave without the warrant then all the better.

There are several potential downsides for you in the scenario.

Supposing the bomber is, in fact hiding in your home:
The police leave, the bomber then kills you after repeatedly exploring his muslim sodomy fantasies.
OR
The bomber leaves your house, and kills more innocent people. Juries do not believe you didn't know he was there and:
a. send you to prison
b. award every penny you own to victim's families

Or, maybe you do make it out of all your court cases, completely broke, and your neighbors show their gratitude by burning you alive in your home. Your home would obviously be vandalized repeatedly, costing you lots of money and anguish.

Now lets suppose the bomber was never in your home:

The police feel you are acting strange, and go the search warrant route. You and your home are going to be subjected to intense observation, and anything remotely unlawful going on with you will be prosecuted. You'll probably find you are a very bad driver in the future.

None of which would have never come to light had you allowed the search for an obviously dangerous man during a manhunt under some of the most extraordinary circumstances in the history of Boston.

[SoonerInFortSmith]

Cleller, you thought out and worded that so much better than me. Thank you for the assist.

[olevetonahill]

Cleller, you thought out and worded that so much better than me. Thank you for the assist.

Except in his 3rd sentence the Bomber has done Kilt Sicem after butt raping him so None of the other shat matters :very_drunk:

[cleller]

Cleller, you thought out and worded that so much better than me. Thank you for the assist.


Except in his 3rd sentence the Bomber has done Kilt Sicem after butt raping him so None of the other shat matters :very_drunk:

Doh!
Alteration in order.

[SicEmBaylor]

There are several potential downsides for you in the scenario.

Supposing the bomber is, in fact hiding in your home:
The police leave, the bomber then kills you after exploring his muslim sodomy fantasies.
The bomber leaves your house, and kills more innocent people. Juries do not believe you didn't know he was there and:
a. send you to prison
b. award every penny you own to victim's families

Or, maybe you do make it out of all your court cases, completely broke, and your neighbors show their gratitude by burning you alive in your home. Your home would obviously be vandalized repeatedly, costing you lots of money and anguish.

Now lets suppose the bomber was never in your home:

The police feel you are acting strange, and go the search warrant route. You and your home are going to be subjected to intense observation, and anything remotely unlawful going on with you will be prosecuted. You'll probably find you are a very bad driver.

None of which would have never come to light had you allowed the search for an obviously dangerous man during a manhunt under some of the most extraordinary circumstances in the history of Boston.

First, even if I allowed the police to search my house and the search subsequently revealed that the bomber was hiding -- the cops would still suspect me regardless of the fact that I allowed them to search without a warrant.

Second, proving that I knew the terrorist was there would be very difficult in a court of law. There's also the matter of him having to break into my home to hide there in the first place. Signs of a break in would likely not go unnoticed by the police who likely would have already had a look around the outside of the home. In which case, I'd let them search without a warrant.

Third, there's nothing illegal in my home that I would need to worry about. If the police are able to take the time to nit-pick a clearly innocent citizen in no way connected to this bomber then clearly the bomber isn't as dangerous as they make him out to be when they demanded to search my home without a warrant in the first place. I would think they'd have bigger fish to fry at that point.

[olevetonahill]

but Personally just on general principals I would never consent to a warrant-less search.

To me thats sayin you trust the PoPo to be above all suspicion and to me I've seen enough of em to Know better.
While I believe MOST cops are honorable People. there are those few that spoil things for everyone.

[SicEmBaylor]

but Personally just on general principals I would never consent to a warrant-less search.

To me thats sayin you trust the PoPo to be above all suspicion and to me I've seen enough of em to Know better.
While I believe MOST cops are honorable People. there are those few that spoil things for everyone.

Yep. I'm not anti-cop or a cop hater by any means. My family is full of cops and my best friend is a cop. My cousin is a sniper with Tulsa SWAT.

I just happen to believe you should always protect your rights even if you don't believe they're in immediate danger. It's best that everything be done properly in order to fully protect yourself.

[radio]

It's called DUE PROCESS u dumb f@%s.

If you dont like it GO TO CHINA.

Then you dont have to weigh out the pros and cons.

[rock on sooner]

Just to point out, the Boston Police said that if no one was home they
would NOT enter the home and search it, if it showed no signs of a
break in. Probably the same if the home owner said no. Having said
that, think back to the California cop/manhunt. Those cops said that
they wouldn't enter a "no one at home" in their search for the rogue
cop. Guess where they cornered him? In a "no one at home" cabin
that showed no signs of a break in.

[SicEmBaylor]

I will give all those Feds credit....I've always had a lot of trouble finding the little man in a boat.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

He's in your house and the cops are looking for him.

But they OR you won't find him because you won't bend over and let them shake you down without a warrant.

Geeeez.

[SicEmBaylor]

He's in your house and the cops are looking for him.

But they OR you won't find him because you won't bend over and let them shake you down without a warrant.

Geeeez.

If I knew he was in my house, obviously I'd either shoot him myself or let the cops haul him away.

[achiro]

He's in your house and the cops are looking for him.

But they OR you won't find him because you won't bend over and let them shake you down without a warrant.

Geeeez.
If he's in a house and hiding well enough for the owner not to know he's there then a walk through(without K-9)isn't going to find him.