This REALLY Concerns Me.

[Ken]

No warrant.

No probable cause to believe the bombers were in THAT house.

And this:

[Ken]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

[Ken]

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.

[rebel]

Only the city-idiots would go with that. If I looked in my boat and saw this F. Well, I'd have a new belt and wallet.

Clarification: I wouldn't leave my house.

....muslim belt.

[ElevenBravo]

Ken, I share your concern.... what happened there.... can happen ANYWHERE.

Post Katrina, same story.. Oh, I know... the back and forth "We didnt do it..." BUT.... *SOME* Military & LEO *DID*, and that is enough for me.

This is unquestionably a total violation of personal security.

But it was for a good purpose, right? So where does the line get drawn? Well, warrentless searches are illegal but they happen. Whats the recourse? None, I believe. This means... today's exercise may be tomorrow's standards.

Keep this in your memory, it is the things to tell your grandchildren about. About how we once had security in our property and homes....

EB

[LowKey]

I hope the citizens feel 'safer'.
Did you notice, not only were the residents sent out into the street hands-up, they were made to run up to the plainclothes cop who then frisked them. Can you imagine if any of them were practicing their constitutional right to carry?

[Sarge47]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

This has been in my signature for years now!.....

[Winter]

Did I mention that how a government acts in times of trials in what defines it. Any group of assholes can rule when it's easy.

[BENESSE]

REALLY, Ken?!
This is what concerns you at the height of a door to door search for a mass terrorist killer on the run when time is of the essence? (I don't see the owners of the house complaining, btw.)

Hey...STOP everything! Y'll halt it right there! Anybody got a search warrant? No?
Well go and GET one now, we'll just sit here on the curb and wait. Now, who's turn is it for a Starbucks run?

[Cast-Iron]

Troubling indeed. I guess if you lived in that particular area your civil liberties were just suspended indefinitely. Tough situation for law enforcement considering all the allegations of violence against the suspect, but treating those civilians like criminals did seem excessive. Don't know how wise it would have been to refuse them entry without a search warrant. And what about the incidents where either gunfire or flash bangs were heard during the house to house searches? Has anyone heard of any collateral damage or has it all been swept under the rug?

[BENESSE]

Has anyone heard of any collateral damage or has it all been swept under the rug?

Yeah, some innocent civilians in foreign countries have...but I guess that's different. That be them, not us.

[Ken]

Here's an EXCELLENT atricle on the suject:

http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/485...oston-lockdown

[Rick]

How do we know they did not have a search warrant or probable cause? How do we know someone didn't phone in that they saw the guys go in that house. Maybe a disgruntled neighbor saw a way to get even. In this day and age can't an officer have a judge electronically sign a warrant and send it wireless? I know those guys have printers in some of their cars. At least they do around here.

That aside that house was a bit like clowns in a car. I didn't think they were gonna stop coming out.

[Ken]

From what I understand, EVERY search in that area, by that team at least, was conducted in the same fashion. If they actually had a search warrant, which is highly unlikely, they were required to announce that fact as soon as the door opened. I doubt that they received calls giving them "probable cause" for every house on the street.

We've discussed Katrina here in the past. This is virtually the same thing.

[Rick]

I don't know one way or the other or how many houses were searched. Just responding to the video. I don't know the proper way to make a door to door search but however you do it I can't imagine it's gonna be pretty.

[Ken]

FROM THE ARTICLE:

What can we learn from what happened in Boston?

1.Whenever there is a crisis, there is always the risk that innocent people’s rights will be violated.

2. State and municipal governments need to be better prepared to handle crisis in an effective, Constitutional manner. The 4th Amendment still applies, even during a crisis situation.

3. The American people need to be proactive in petitioning their representatives to push for better legal guidelines during times of crisis. These guidelines should be in place to protect the rights of innocent people.

4. Without proper legal guidelines for law enforcement, we run the risk of having an entire country full of TSA checkpoints. This is unacceptable. We need to have this discussion on the front end of a crisis so that the government doesn’t make up the rules as they go during a crisis.

5. Police officers need to have better training about the Constitutional limitations of what actions they can take. Treating innocent people like criminals is unacceptable. Just because a person lives in the vicinity of a crime does not give law enforcement the authority to strip ignore that person’s rights.

6. Lockdowns are incredibly costly. As mentioned before, Boston likely flushed $1 billion down the toilet on Friday. This doesn’t just mean that the municipal government lost $1 billion. It means that the business owners and workers in Boston lost $1 billion. They lost this money because of a government action, not because of a terrorist action.

7. A heavily armed citizenry would have made Boston a safer place. Boston isn’t exactly a gun-friendly environment. The terrorists certainly had guns, but most of Boston’s citizens were helpless, locked in their own homes with little means of defense. Once again, the only people who were inhibited by Boston’s gun control laws were the innocent citizens.

[cowgirlup]

I work with someone who's husband is on one of the SWAT teams. He told her they found 3 bombs during the Watertown search. There is a tiny news article somewhere that ICE arrested 3 other suspects. Other than that no info floating around out there.

I don't agree with ordering people out of their houses like criminals. And I also wondered what they would do if you were carrying when they forced you out of the house.

[Rick]

Photo ops are done for a reason. I don't have a clue what the reasoning behind her visit to the Saudi patients was but one can guess that it was sending a political message to the Saudi government as well as Saudi's (naturalized or otherwise) here is the U.S. Just a guess.

[Davidlastink]

Preaching to the Inquisitor.

I staunchly argue against all forms of infringement of this magnitude. I really don't care what reason they had, I did not see the signs of hot pursuit nor would I call a phone "tip" enough to go door to door in an entire neighborhood. Dicey is as Dicey does. We need a more assertive Judiciary what we have now are limp noodles compared to the Justices of legend.

They make a big deal over silly things well lets see how many cases get granted cert in the upcoming year dealing with the fallout of these events.

[Rick]

How would you have handled the search?