Family ripped from their home at gunpoint; Police storm the property looking for terrorists

reply to post by guymontag

Washington DC was "terrorized" for 3-weeks straight by a sniper team killing civilians. They didn't shut down the nation's capital, patrol the streets in armored vehicles & columned marches - stomping all over everyone's rights, and they shouldn't have done it now.

Big difference, yes. The DC sniper didn't kill an officer, though. These guys did. Its like stomping on a nest of hornets. They respond differently when its one of their own. Therein lies the message.

reply to post by Donahue


Actually, they berate him with commands and hoist him out at gunpoint. They proceed to march him down the street, still at gunpoint, and then off camera. If they were politely going about this, I really wouldn't have a problem with it, but they way in which they treated this citizen is deplorable and must not stand as acceptable behavior from law enforcement.

reply to post by Gazrok


I want to know how many Bostonians were busted for possession two days later .

You are correct that you should always rebuff and then if you have nothing to hide allow a search but I still think it was very lucky, in fact incredible, that there are NO reports of someone not allowing them in the home. People are nuts and you know that. You mean to tell me in that many block area there was not one card carrying NRA member who answered with a gun. It would be within their rights. Not saying they should...but very, very surprised.

Hopefully, they sue their city.

reply to post by esdad71


I don't think there are any reports for anyone letting them IN their homes either; the media, at least from what I remember, didn't mention this kind of behavior by the police and this is the only video I've seen of it. Surely they'd want to keep something like this on the down-low, so they wouldn't give it any attention.

Hilarious! Slowly but surely the freedom dished out by the USA to Iraq is coming to the USA.

Next step. The whole USA is locked down and every house searched when the news of some armed fugitive (who shot and killed some LEO for parity with this scenario) at large is announced.

The big difference with Iraq is that once the capture/killing of the suspect is announced, people fill the streets chanting "USA! USA!"!

I positively love the script.

reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy


There are multiple videos out there including ones that show military doing the deed. It is over. The kid was Mirandized, he will clam up and no death penalty now on the table. He won without even talking.

reply to post by esdad71


I was listening to scanner traffic during the manhunt. There were a few folks who didn't allow the search. For the most part, they just skipped it, marking it down for followup once the zone was cleared. There were a couple of times they searched anyhow, like if the guy seemed nervous, etc. One of those was likely the same case as the family ordered out.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Nuff Said!

Originally posted by kosmicjack
You know what is totally messed up?

We are about a click away from citizens being deemed "suspicious" simply for exercising their constitutional rights...

If I hear one more time "Well, if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't be worried..." I'm going to puke.

AMEN. I keep seeing this argument being made over and over again and well before this incident. When youtube decided that they wanted people to use their real names and started the whole "internet anonymity" debate, it was used to basically say that anyone who chooses to remain anonymous does so for a reason that probably means that they are choosing to do ill. Before that, it was used to defend the violations of the Patriot Act. ACLU actually has a really good argument about it. Excellent read:
www.aclu.org...

There was a case not that long ago where three anarchists were detained for refusing to answer questions by the FBI pertaining to Seattle's May Day riots and anarchist groups in the area. It did not get any coverage in the MSM outside of Salon and LA Times. One of those individuals detained was a 24 year old woman who wasn't even present in Seattle at the time that the riots occurred. She simply volunteered at a bookstore that featured anarchist literature. She and two others were held in contempt for what could be basically construed for their political ideology and utilizing their Fifth Amendment right. Plante, the young woman who wasn't in Seattle was held for about a week. The other two were held until Feb 28 of this year. They were held in solitary confinement...
articles.latimes.com...
www.salon.com...
www.thestranger.com...

They hadn't committed a crime. They were not charged with crimes. It's a disturbing case that kind of flies in the face of "well, if you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about" as what is perceived as wrong can be subjective and flexible. Could be a wrong religion, political ideology, working at the wrong bookstore. I am very active and defensive of the Bill of Rights. With that kind of attitude that people keep espousing, it makes me wonder if, because I do care about our constitutional rights, am I going to be viewed as being in the wrong someday? I hear you absolutely, kosmicjack, and it worries me to no end.

reply to post by Gazrok

I was listening to scanner traffic during the manhunt. There were a few folks who didn't allow the search. For the most part, they just skipped it, marking it down for follow up once the zone was cleared. There were a couple of times they searched anyhow, like if the guy seemed nervous, etc. One of those was likely the same case as the family ordered out.

So if the LEOs are looking for X, knock on a door and the occupant, who is definitely not X, looks "nervous", they can treat him/her like a criminal?

reminds me of life in the former soviet union or east germany before the wall came down ... and a few other places been over the years ...
saw it coming years ago nobody believed me when told them it would happen there in america ... now its there on video and people still dont believe it ... maybe they'll wake up when people start getting disappeared or arrested and dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night ... nah .. they'll continue to believe the lie that its all for their protection as they get dragged off on whatever pretext the state deems to tell them ... freedom is a thing of the past in america ... now the state controls all ...

Are there any reports that the police knocked down doors to gain access if the citizen residents were too slow to comply or simply not home??

reply to post by intrptr

The Washington DC sniper incident did instill fear in most people in the DC area - far more than would have been terrorized by the Boston Bombers remaining at large....but it was a larger area and included 3 separate state/district jurisdictions (Maryland, District of Columbia and Virginia and the various cities in the metropolitan area)...that went down as far as Fredericksburg, VA (nearly an hour south) as I recall.

reply to post by Observor


When there is a public safety exclusion to the 4th in play, yes...though later, the home owner could always sue (assuming he refused the search) his rights were violated, but good luck. Not agreeing with it, just stating it's the law.

To be frank, if I were a LEO, I'd be more concerned if they WEREN'T nervous!

reply to post by CosmicCitizen

Are there any reports that the police knocked down doors to gain access if the citizen residents were too slow to comply or simply not home??

I never heard it, but early on in the day, I was only on the scanner off and on.

Reading some of the replies here...
Who needs a 4th Amendment anyway?

Citizens should leave their doors unlocked so that the authorities can just stroll in anytime that they please.....
AFTER ALL:

If you have nothing to hide... what is the problem????

^^^^^Why not just replace the original wording of the 4th with that?^^^^^

Well, I just cannot believe that people are actually defending the police for stomping on our rights like we're slaves. I suggest people read this article on why people defend the system, even if the system is corrupt, and doesn't even care about us.

When we’re threatened we defend ourselves—and our systems. Before 9/11, for instance, President George W. Bush was sinking in the polls. But as soon as the planes hit the World Trade Center, the president’s approval ratings soared. So did support for Congress and the police. During Hurricane Katrina, America witnessed FEMA’s spectacular failure to rescue the hurricane’s victims. Yet many people blamed those victims for their fate rather than admitting the agency flunked and supporting ideas for fixing it. In times of crisis, say the authors, we want to believe the system works.

www.psychologicalscience.org...

I would've demanded a warrant, and what was with yelling at the little boy!

P.S. Were they having a family reunion? That was a lot of people in that house.

I am surprised this thread isn't getting more attention.