If They Came To Your Door....

[RobertNashville]

Sometimes I think we take this "rights" thing a bit too far...we take it to far in that some are ONLY concerned about THEIR  rights while ignoring the very simple truth that no one's "rights" exist in a vacuum.

 

The "rights" we insist our ours because we are endowed by our creator (or if you prefer, simply by the fact that we are human beings) also, I would suggest, carry responsibilities to our fellow-man; something I believe our founders understood well.  In this case, that responsibility is to not be a pompous ass by refusing to let police search our home/property to look for a terrorist that planted bombs at a sporting event which killed three (including a eight year boy) and horribly maimed many others while you pontificate about your "fourth amendment rights".

 

I also think that some folks have an inordinate fear of law enforcement and assume that every LEO is going to screw us given any opportunity.

 

Just my opinion of course.

[Guest Emtdaddy1980]

As someone who works with LE on a regular basis, a lot of them are surprisingly decent if you are respectful from the get go. In this particular case If there was something in the house I didn't want them seeing, I'd pretty much make it invisible before they got to my house. Granted, a lot of what we may consider common might be illegal in MA, but that's why we don't live there, and also why jihadist types don't tend to attempt to dig in here.. Personally I'd have a couple pots of coffee and to go cups ready for em.

[45guy]

Sometimes I think we take this "rights" thing a bit too far...we take it to far in that some are ONLY concerned about THEIR  rights while ignoring the very simple truth that no one's "rights" exist in a vacuum.

 

The "rights" we insist our ours because we are endowed by our creator (or if you prefer, simply by the fact that we are human beings) also, I would suggest, carry responsibilities to our fellow-man; something I believe our founders understood well.  In this case, that responsibility is to not be a pompous ass by refusing to let police search our home/property to look for a terrorist that planted bombs at a sporting event which killed three (including a eight year boy) and horribly maimed many others while you pontificate about your "fourth amendment rights".

 

I also think that some folks have an inordinate fear of law enforcement and assume that every LEO is going to screw us given any opportunity.

 

Just my opinion of course.

What if they wanted to collect all your weapons so the terrorist could not get his hands on them and become more of a threat?  After all we have a responsibility to our fellow man to not allow your weapons to fall in the wrong hands.  I mean he could get into someone’s house and hold the family hostage to get them to open their safe. Would it not be better to let LE secure them? I am curtain you would get them back. After all a child was killed here people.   I do not think we take this "rights thing" to far.  If anything we are giving them up way to fast.

Edited April 20, 2013 by 45guy

[DaveTN]

What if they wanted to collect all your weapons so the terrorist could not get his hands on them and become more of a threat?  After all we have a responsibility to our fellow man to not allow your weapons to fall in the wrong hands.  I mean he could get into someone’s house and hold the family hostage to get them to open their safe. Would it not be better to let LE secure them? I am curtain you would get them back. After all a child was killed here people.   I do not think we take this "rights thing" to far.  If anything we are giving them up way to fast.

It appears they searched a lot of houses; how many guns did they confiscate? Protecting my rights does not require me to hamper a search for a terrorist that has just killed people. That was not the intent of our founding Fathers and it would not be if they were alive today.

The answer to your “What if” is really very simple. Can they have my guns? No.

[Guest drv2fst]

My concern here is the slippery slope.  

 

Sure it sounds pretty reasonable to allow LEO to search your property looking for a bomber suspect on the run after a shootout with LEO.

 

I would have no problem with waiving my 4th Amendment rights individually in that circumstance so that I did not impeded their search.  However, where does it stop?  Can they suspend the 4th Amendment every time a convict or suspect escapes police custody?  If so, that's all the time.  There is always someone on the loose.  

 

They get us to surrender our freedoms one "reasonable" step at a time.  That's why we can't buy Fully Automatic (made after 1986) weapons now.  People thought it was reasonable to allow the government to take that away from us decades ago.  Now the government wants all our rifles.  Next they will want all our pistols.  Next they will want all our knives......

Edited April 20, 2013 by drv2fst

[45guy]

If they want to ask me about my house fine. I can help them speed up the search by not needlessly spending time in my house.  Keep in mind all those searches did not turn up the suspect.  An aware citizen that was finally allowed to go outside their house found him. 

Edited April 20, 2013 by 45guy

[DaveTN]

My concern here is the slippery slope.  
 
Sure it sounds pretty reasonable to allow LEO to search your property looking for a bomber suspect on the run after a shootout with LEO.
 
I would have no problem with waiving my 4th Amendment rights individually in that circumstance so that I did not impeded their search.  However, where does it stop?  Can they suspend the 4th Amendment every time a convict or suspect escapes police custody?  If so, that's all the time.  There is always someone on the loose.  
 
They get us to surrender our freedoms one "reasonable" step at a time.  That's why we can't buy Fully Automatic (made after 1986) weapons now.  People thought it was reasonable to allow the government to take that away from us decades ago.  Now the government wants all our rifles.  Next they will want all our pistols.  Next they will want all our knives......

No one is asking to violate your rights. That would only be the case if you said “No” and they entered anyway. Allowing a search for terrorist does not put any of our rights in danger, and does not put a checkmark anywhere that someone has given up their rights.

If I’m a Police Commander and my Officers are going door to door checking houses, and they have someone refuse, I have a duty to protect both the occupants of that house and other citizens in the area. I would not need to violate your rights to make the area as safe as I could. I would secure the perimeter of your house with Officers and it would stay that way until I had a warrant, permission to search, intel that the suspect was not there, or the suspect was in custody. Saying “Oh gosh this guy knows his rights” and telling my Officers to move on and possibly leave the suspect holding a family hostage would not an option for me. Your rights have not been violated and I would have done all I could to make the scene secure. No slippery slope, no rights violations; just good Police work.

[Guest drv2fst]

No one is asking to violate your rights. .....

We are in agreement on that point.  That's why I mentioned that I (personally) would have no problem "waiving" those rights in this circumstance.  A specific and credible threat at a specific point in time, at a specific location, seems to pass MY personal test for "reasonable" search.  I think it serves the greater good to allow the search.  My only concern is how far "reasonable" can be extended in the future.  

 

As is posted in another thread, while all this was going on, our House of (ha ha) Representatives passed a bill to allow government to collect information on all of us electronically from public companies.  1984 arrived a little later than predicted but arrived just the same.

[tnhawk]

Wife brought up a good point, if it happened here and when searching they walked into my workshop(where I reload and store ammo and tinker with electronics projects) going by what most of she's seen on TV, I'm only a pressure cooker away from being a terrorist!

 

several pounds of powder - check

BBs, Lead shot, nails - check

miscellaneous wire, electronic circuits and components - check

 

So what keeps me from ending up face down in my front yard in cuffs as a suspected accomplice due to proximity other than refusing the search without a specific warrant?

Guess it's good that I don't have a pressure cooker in the house.

[DaveTN]

My only concern is how far "reasonable" can be extended in the future.

Each and every case of a claim that 4th amendment rights were violated will be heard and decided on its circumstances, merits and case law. That will be done in a court by a Judge. Cops on the street react to what is in front of them and they make judgment calls in seconds. Sometimes they get it wrong.

But my point is that if they went to 200 houses and ask to search and the people let them; our fourth amendment is still in the same condition it was prior to those 200 people saying yes. If I believe what I read on the internet for years cops have been stopping cars and asking to search with absolutely no probable cause. As a former cop I don’t understand that, but it isn’t a rights violation. I would guess most drivers let them search. Has that led to the relaxing of probable cause requirements to search a vehicle? I haven’t seen any evidence of that.

[southernasylum]

I once had a bunch of Deputies show up at my door in the middle of the night looking for a suspect. I refused them entry because my shotgun was in plain view and I didn't want to eat carpet or accidentally get myself shot. They seemed pretty tweaked.

But in this situation I would let them in in a heartbeat. I can't help them hunt down this piece of crap but I can help them quickly eliminate one more possible hiding place. I don't see that as giving up my right but as excercising my right to have guests.

-southernasylum

[RobertNashville]

What if they wanted to collect all your weapons so the terrorist could not get his hands on them and become more of a threat?  After all we have a responsibility to our fellow man to not allow your weapons to fall in the wrong hands.  I mean he could get into someone’s house and hold the family hostage to get them to open their safe. Would it not be better to let LE secure them? I am curtain you would get them back. After all a child was killed here people.   I do not think we take this "rights thing" to far.  If anything we are giving them up way to fast.

I stand by my statement (that you quoted)...you can "what if" it 'tll hell freezes over but it doesn't change my viewpoint.

 

Most of the time, I'm going to try and HELP law enforcement; not hinder them just as most of the time, law enforcement is comprised of good people trying to do a job that most of us couldn't qualify for and wouldn't do even if we did qualify.

 

Bad LEOs who willfully and knowingly violate individuals' civil rights are a different matter and should be dealt with (mostly in a court of law and not the front door of you home) but when folks proclaim that THEY aren't going to let police in to search because of THEIR fourth amendment rights it sounds a lot like a kid in a playground with a chip on his shoulder darting another kid to knock it off...sometimes that kid with the chip on his shoulder wins but as often as not he gets knocked on his ass.

 

As to my weapons...what weapons?

Edited April 20, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Will Carry]

I would have let them search my home in this case. Of course where I live everyone is armed, we all have dogs, we look out for each other.  We have each other's phone numbers. 

[Wyldk2]

Wouldn't answer the door. You don't have to answer the door for them. What would they do, break the door down. Then face a lawsuit by the owners?

I feel if I have done nothing wrong and haven't harbored a fugitive, they should have no right to search my house. In other words leave me be. I'd offer to help search but my house is off limits. Nothing to hide but the principle of the matter is at stake.

[zapfbroad]

I once had a bunch of Deputies show up at my door in the middle of the night looking for a suspect. I refused them entry because my shotgun was in plain view and I didn't want to eat carpet or accidentally get myself shot. They seemed pretty tweaked.


But in this situation I would let them in in a heartbeat. I can't help them hunt down this piece of crap but I can help them quickly eliminate one more possible hiding place. I don't see that as giving up my right but as excercising my right to have guests.


-southernasylum

No actually feinstein says it would be legal to hunt them provided you were sure to use your 30,50 or 100rd magazines.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2

[Oh Shoot]

Wouldn't answer the door. You don't have to answer the door for them. What would they do, break the door down. Then face a lawsuit by the owners?

 

100% chance in that situation ALL houses were gonna get searched, one way or the other.

 

Any house where no one seemed to be home would be of prime interest and one where someone seemed to be inside but wouldn't come to the door would get the most attention of all.

 

- OS

[Wyldk2]

Thankfully there wouldn't be a situation like that in the area where I live or am going to live. I have no desire to live where just anyone can get inside my home without my knowledge. In other words a suspect fugitive is not going to get in, period. And those searching have no right to search without a warrant. They can get a warrant, I won't be happy but they would have to get a warrant before I would let them in. I have nothing to hide but they plant things all the time.

[DaveS]

I once had a bunch of Deputies show up at my door in the middle of the night looking for a suspect. I refused them entry because my shotgun was in plain view and I didn't want to eat carpet or accidentally get myself shot. They seemed pretty tweaked.

But in this situation I would let them in in a heartbeat. I can't help them hunt down this piece of crap but I can help them quickly eliminate one more possible hiding place. I don't see that as giving up my right but as excercising my right to have guests.

-southernasylum

Why not just inform the officers "Officer, I have a shotgun leaning in the corner, for self defense purposes". All would be good....

 Would not be any differant than notifying an officer of having a HCP! No stupid actions, No stupid reactions...

Dave S

Edited April 20, 2013 by DaveS

[RobertNashville]

Thankfully there wouldn't be a situation like that in the area where I live or am going to live. I have no desire to live where just anyone can get inside my home without my knowledge. In other words a suspect fugitive is not going to get in, period. And those searching have no right to search without a warrant. They can get a warrant, I won't be happy but they would have to get a warrant before I would let them in. I have nothing to hide but they plant things all the time.

Now there is a someone who has a crystal ball with fully charged batteries.  ;)

 

Anyone who says "X"..."can't happen to me" or "can't where I live" is "can't happen at my age" or any other similar assertion often find out just who wrong they are.

 

Anything can happen to anyone, at any place and at any time...that "X" doesn't happen to most people doesn't and never will mean that it can't happen.

 

By the way, this dirtbag wasn't in anyone's "house" so whether he could get inside your home without your knowledge is not only probably not 100% accurate but, in this case, immaterial.

[southernasylum]

Why not just inform the officers "Officer, I have a shotgun leaning in the corner, for self defense purposes". All would be good....
Would not be any differant than notifying an officer of having a HCP! No stupid actions, No stupid reactions...
Dave S

"I have a shotgun..." May be my last words.

[RichardR]

Meh, there is no harm in allowing LEO's to search a home if a homeowner voluntarily submits/consents to it.

On the other side of the coin, there should also be no harm (or repercussions) in a homeowner denying/refusing such a request & asking for a warrant as the 4th requires.

That is how it is supposed to work anyway ...

[gregintenn]

 

Most of the time, I'm going to try and HELP law enforcement; not hinder them

 

 

 

I don't intend to help nor hinder law enforcement. I intend to leave them alone. Assuming I'm doing nothing wrong, I would like the same in return from them.

 

              

I have nothing to hide but they plant things all the time.
 

 

 

Now that's just silly! Most leo's I've met are leo's because frankly, they're too sorry to do much else, or else they get a thrill out of screwing with people. Either way, if they are busy searching for an armed and dangerous criminal, they're waaaaaaay to busy to be screwing with you.

[RobertNashville]

I don't intend to help nor hinder law enforcement. I intend to leave them alone. Assuming I'm doing nothing wrong, I would like the same in return from them.

Intent aside, if you refuse to let them search in this situation and you would be hindering them.

...Most leo's I've met are leo's because frankly, they're too sorry to do much else, or else they get a thrill out of screwing with people...

If that's a true statement then you either need to get out more or move.

Or perhaps better yet, if you think the job is so easy and the majority of LEOs so corrupt or so stupid that they "can't do much else" then perhaps you should try to go through a police academy and get hired on then come back here in a few years and let us know how it worked out.

[gregintenn]

Intent aside, if you refuse to let them search in this situation and you would be hindering them.

 

 

 

If you'll read my earlier post, I said as long as they were professional and courteous, I would invite them in to have a look around.

 

                          

If that's a true statement then you either need to get out more or move.

 

 

I said most; not all.

 

 

 Or perhaps better yet, if you think the job is so easy and the majority of LEOs so corrupt or so stupid that they "can't do much else" then perhaps you should try to go through a police academy and get hired on then come back here in a few years and let us know how it worked out.
 

 

 

 

Sounds like something a teacher would say. I guess union is union. Are you implying that I couldn't?

Edited April 21, 2013 by gregintenn

[Wyldk2]

We have a few "know it alls" here I see. Listen. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, just the possibility of it happening here is very small. Maybe a million or more to one. Any fugitive looking for shelter is going to look for the easiest and least resistance way in. Or move on to a less time consuming spent place to hide. Lock my doors up tight and my dad does it overkill. Any fugitive hurt in a gjn battle with cops isn't going to have time or be thinking straight to try to break in someplace and not leave a trail or any indication he was there to the homeowner or those looking for him. And if someone armed and bloody came to the door, I'd call 911 and let the police know about it.