Roadblocks to catch a murderer, cooperate with being searched or not.

[Fallschirjmäger]

I don't think you're out of line at all.
I think that if we take a look at the two most notable 'over the top' reactions by law enforcement lately (Dorner, Boston Marathon) we would find something quite interesting that they have in common besides the loss of civilian life. Dorner is alleged to have shot and killed Officer Michael Crain, and Officer Sean Collier was alleged to have been killed by Tsarnaev.

It can't positively be said that if officers hadn't been killed that the same fervor would have been displayed but the lack of the same fervor when only citizens are killed speaks volumes.

 

[OC for ME]

The op is not very far from the Aurora CO incident where ~40 some odd citizens were "road blocked" en masse, unlawfully, in the search for a bank robber. The only difference between the road block(s) and the Boston Constitution Suspension event is houses vs. vehicles. The singular sameness between the op, Aurora, and Boston is the very obvious threat of violent physical force being employed by LE for any non-compliance.

"Let a judge sort it out later." is the clarion call for the anti-liberty crowd. The citizenry would do well to remember that most cops do not like the tactics being related in this thread, yet all cops will not work to mitigate the practice.

There are those amongst us who decry the affront to liberty after it has been exposed. Then there are those amongst us who work to mitigate the affrontment.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

The op is not very far from the Aurora CO incident where ~40 some odd citizens were "road blocked" en masse, unlawfully, in the search for a bank robber. The only difference between the road block(s) and the Boston Constitution Suspension event is houses vs. vehicles. The singular sameness between the op, Aurora, and Boston is the very obvious threat of violent physical force being employed by LE for any non-compliance.

"Let a judge sort it out later." is the clarion call for the anti-liberty crowd. The citizenry would do well to remember that most cops do not like the tactics being related in this thread, yet all cops will not work to mitigate the practice.

There are those amongst us who decry the affront to liberty after it has been exposed. Then there are those amongst us who work to mitigate the affrontment.

Very well put.

 

[Yard Sale]

Allow a warrantless search or not? Been there, done that, got the conviction. Still voted no.

 

[ron73440]

What are those pictures from? I'm disgusted by the blatant pointing of guns in people's faces.

 

[OC for ME]

The first two are likely from the Donner event. The last is the Aurora event.

I would have said to the cops "searching" the car (the first one), get a warrant, I'll wait.

Record record record!

 

[scott58dh]

timing is everything.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

If I'm alone in my vehicle, it depends ,?,!, on extenuating circumstances (location, legality, attitudes,, etc.) play it by ear but play it smart.

However, IF my family is with me, then by all means search away, for I am not about to endanger my family for the sake of "proving a point".

Yet, this is not written in stone, timing is everything.

Would it not be endangering your family to teach them to compromise principle for immediate perceived mercy from abusive authoritay? Not trying to criticize you or your decisions, but this is the way that I would look at it. Lead by example, as they say. If I don't want my family/friends to compromise their rights for perceived mercy or safety, I don't do it in front of them.

On the other hand, there is another saying - pick your battles

 

[scott58dh]

Decisions, decisions,,,

Yeah

 

[OC for ME]

Record every encounter with any cop(s). Even when your family is with you. There is always the time to exert your rights. The photos above are not normal cop encounters and those are the times that liberty must triumph over tyranny. A cop walks up to you and your family while at the DQ? Being somewhat more "cooperative" is likely a more time saving choice.

No warrant, no search. I don't care what the consequences, I'll see every one of those cops in a courtroom. My kids will learn that a cop with a gun pointed at them is not how citizens are to be compelled "cooperate" in those types of situations. If you choose to "cooperate", fine, I will not.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Record every encounter with any cop(s). Even when your family is with you. There is always the time to exert your rights. The photos above are not normal cop encounters and those are the times that liberty must triumph over tyranny. A cop walks up to you and your family while at the DQ? Being somewhat more "cooperative" is likely a more time saving choice.

No warrant, no search. I don't care what the consequences, I'll see every one of those cops in a courtroom. My kids will learn that a cop with a gun pointed at them is not how citizens are to be compelled "cooperate" in those types of situations. If you choose to "cooperate", fine, I will not.

+1 You sir are willing to Move out and Draw fire! Kudos.

 

[wimwag]

Lol I knew that was coming

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Nothing funny about it. Without a warrant being served, I am well within my rights to defend my family from violent armed intruders. We can all die. MOLON LABE!

Failure to obtain a warrant is acting outside the color of law. That means it's illegal. Forced entry is a crime, possession of a firearm while comitting a crime is a multiplier and a violent felony. If you argue against this logic you are saying that you believe laws do not apply to public servants.

Did you take an oath?

Sent from my ZTE V768 using Tapatalk 2

 

[marshaul]

...you are saying that you believe laws do not apply to public servants.

And…?

The courageous defenders of our freedom don't need laws limiting their heroism.

 

[OC for ME]

Those courageous defenders have actively worked to exempt themselves from laws that limit the citizenry, they too being citizens, or so I have been told. Also, asserting that they, the courageous defenders, were engaged in their official duties, while violating a law typically relieves them of the burden of that law that does apply to them, even when on the job.

 

[wimwag]

And…?

The courageous defenders of our freedom don't need laws limiting their heroism.

Police do not defend freedom. Show me any LAPD uniform engaging hadji in Iraq or Afghanistan. Show me the deputy that pulled over Nazis in Germany.
You're a *****.

Sent from my ZTE V768 using Tapatalk 2

 

[KYKevin]

So the guy they were chasing was a murderer? Convicted murderer? How about innocent until proven guilty?

Then they are chasing an innocent man, right? He's not guilty yet, right?

Now they want to search your trunk because there is an innocent man on the loose.

So they search your trunk anytime.

One is either innocent or guilty.

+1 I hate the way every one is presumed guilty now days and every one just goes along with it.

 

[ron73440]

Police do not defend freedom. Show me any LAPD uniform engaging hadji in Iraq or Afghanistan. Show me the deputy that pulled over Nazis in Germany.
You're a *****.

Sent from my ZTE V768 using Tapatalk 2

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm.

 

[wimwag]

No. The wag is not that witty or subtle.

Wag: witty person.

Wimwag...wi..Wisconsin...mwag...man with a gun...

Sent from my ZTE V768 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Primus]

Nothing funny about it. Without a warrant being served, I am well within my rights to defend my family from violent armed intruders. We can all die. MOLON LABE!

Failure to obtain a warrant is acting outside the color of law. That means it's illegal. Forced entry is a crime, possession of a firearm while comitting a crime is a multiplier and a violent felony. If you argue against this logic you are saying that you believe laws do not apply to public servants.

Did you take an oath?

Sent from my ZTE V768 using Tapatalk 2

First, there is a thing called exigent circumstances. I say this to correct your notion about "within my right to defend my family.....".

Second.... the photos posted were them ordering people out of the house.... don't need a warrant for that. Need a search warrant to do exactly that... search and enter. I'm not familiar with what the officers did once they came out. I wasn't there.

Third, I do believe laws apply to public servants. What you fail to realize is THEY WERE SERVING while looking for that dude. Were they wearing body armor for fun? No.. they were wearing body armor because they just had a dude murder someone, car jack someone, throw BOMBS at them, engage in a full blown shoot out with them then run away. All after this dude set off an IED right at a little kids feet.

So knowing this they actively went to find this guy so he wouldn't hurt anyone else.

Did you go? Would you have? Without a lot of friends and body armor and trucks? Didn't think so.

I'm not justifying their actions I'm putting it in perspective. You or anyone can post photos with comments all you want. It wasn't your city that got blown up. It wasn't your neighborhood that got shot up. It wasn't your family that got killed or injured from the IEDs.

I always ask the same question and never get a response... did those families sue? Were any of them outraged? I haven't seen it yet. All I've seen is third parties using it to further their agenda.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[OC for ME]

First, there is a thing called exigent circumstances. <snip>

I categorically rejected your appeal to emotion and authority.

I could be wrong, and MA may be different, but exigent circumstances needs to have "almost certain bad consequences" if the cops don't go in that house right now. Going into every house, or almost every house, and justifying it by inserting exigent circumstances is down right despicable. Anyone, this now includes you, who attaches exigent circumstances to justify what those citizens endured in MA is despicable.

The absence of civil actions against those cops means nothing other than the violated citizens did not sue the cops. Ascribing any motivation without asking each one of them is ridiculous and arrogant. Knowing what I know now about those cop shops I would not sue either.

Exigent circumstances.....phht!

Those cops did nothing to protect the public, in fact they irreversibly harmed the public. There is no other perspective except to those who condone and you do via your "perspective" claim.

Saying you don't condone/agree with is rejected.....you speak with forked tongue.

Unfortunate really, by your words you seemed like a good cop.