Enforcement Actions in Boston

[Niiro]

Someone, as in one person. If i meant multiple people, i would have said "some people".

So you're saying a judge is an amalgamation of people and not an individual person?

Is that what they're hiding under those robes?

[Helm]

Leprechauns.

[Hyuudo]

Just have to say, as a political science undergrad, this thread is fascinating. To clarify on Ksandra's point (regarding an earlier post by Nephlite), though...

Or the state will pay you.

Don't think for a moment this works in practice. I rent from a parent while in college and SWAT raided my house with a fundamentally flawed warrant (no-knock) that was signed less than 2 hours before the raid. They were looking for "handguns, sawed-off shotguns, AK-47." Their only cited reason? The videotaped word of a criminal (which no, you don't get to see) who was probably cooperating out of self-interest.

They throw a flash grenade into the front hall (thank god my dad's oxygen tanks were no longer there, or the whole block would've been at risk), burst in, threw us on the ground (and held us at gunpoint), then tore the house apart while making insulting comments like "DONDE ESTA LAS DRUGES?" (ignoring the fact that the warrant says they were looking for guns).

They demolished two windows which cost $125 to replace. Parent had to go to court and they still denied reimbursement. I also had to go to the emergency room because I was left in handcuffs long enough to cause semi-permanent damage (shoulders + I couldn't feel a few fingers for a few days). While this also involves very real cost, I'm on Medicaid, so the state had no choice but to pay for that.

tl;dr: State ain't gotta reimburse shit in practice. While there are instances where a strong police force is universally accepted as a good idea, there's no denying that their militarization since 9/11 (and even before) has turned much of them into scum, especially where police and the courts intertwine. They're mostly made up of Marine rejects who still want to pretend they're a soldier in a real-life FPS. And remember, a soldier's job is to kill perceived enemies.

[jmc]

Completely different circumstances for the warrants though.

You can't really compare a no knock warrant, to a event like this. I've done no knock warrants, and your right you won't get paid back unless officers severely fuck something up (like hitting the wrong address) and in cases like that, a lawyer from the department will drop off a check before we even clear the scene.

[Blubbartron]

Completely different circumstances for the warrants though.

You can't really compare a no knock warrant, to a event like this. I've done no knock warrants, and your right you won't get paid back unless officers severely fuck something up (like hitting the wrong address) and in cases like that, a lawyer from the department will drop off a check before we even clear the scene.

You're right. The situations can't be compared. In one situation there was a "reasonable" belief that there were criminals and their property inside a specific residence. In the other situation there was a "reasonable" belief that a specific criminal was somewhere in this big fucking area.

I don't know about other people, but I'm a lot more chill about cops invading one house and turning out to be mistaken than I am about cops systematically invading every house inside a totally arbitrary perimeter and just *hoping* they stumble across the suspect inside someone's house. As if there was reason to believe the suspect would have accomplices in that neighborhood to begin with.

[Day]

You're right. The situations can't be compared. In one situation there was a "reasonable" belief that there were criminals and their property inside a specific residence. In the other situation there was a "reasonable" belief that a specific criminal was somewhere in this big fucking area.

I don't know about other people, but I'm a lot more chill about cops invading one house and turning out to be mistaken than I am about cops systematically invading every house inside a totally arbitrary perimeter and just *hoping* they stumble across the suspect inside someone's house. As if there was reason to believe the suspect would have accomplices in that neighborhood to begin with.

Why does it have to be an accomplice? It seems pretty fucking reasonable and logical to me that an armed man on the run would bust into a house and hold the family at gunpoint until the dust settled. Instead he hid in a boat, but certainly wasn't something way out of the realm of possibility. Especially since they had just taken hostages and robbed them earlier.

[shepardG]

You said dish towel, lol. Women, kitchen, etc.

[Blubbartron]

Why does it have to be an accomplice? It seems pretty fucking reasonable and logical to me that an armed man on the run would bust into a house and hold the family at gunpoint until the dust settled. Instead he hid in a boat, but certainly wasn't something way out of the realm of possibility. Especially since they had just taken hostages and robbed them earlier.

If the police weren't pointing guns at the people answering doors, they would be able to use the anxiety level/behavior of the person they're talking to in order to make that judgment call. The average person that's being held hostage wouldn't be able to be cool and collected while he and his family are in danger and potential rescue is staring him in the face. If the police are pointing guns at the homeowners, their anxiety level is no longer any use, because it's just as easily caused by the police themselves. I'd fully support cops making a bad judgment call and searching a house because the homeowner appeared extra nervous or was behaving strangely.

Also, if he actually did bust into a house, there would be signs of forced entry (unless the homeowners are morons and left their door unlocked/opened it for him at 3 in the goddamn morning).

Again, the point is that there be *any* reason to believe he's actually in *this* house, other than the fact that he was last spotted in the vicinity. That's a bullshit excuse. Cops can bother everyone in the neighborhood and ask them questions, but it damn well better be without guns at the ready. People have a strong tendency to become 100% compliant when they're face to face with someone in full SWAT gear and a big gun.

[Day]

Seems like a lot of getting up in arms over something you weren't involved in personally. To me it seemed like everyone was happy to let them search in hopes they found the fucking guy with BOMBS running around their neighborhood. This whole thing is tired to me. It's not like we see this every day, a fucking bomber was on the loose, use some common sense, they aren't out there trying to rape everyones rights... so fucking annoying how people can be about things.

I can almost without a doubt guarantee if you were in that area when he was on the loose you wouldn't be all tore up over this.

If I'm a cop, I'm not going to stand at a door with a possible killer on the other side with my gun down like a moron. Come on.

[Eurell]

Yeah, we should trust 9000 different cops to make judgement calls based on the anxiety level of people in a town where a bombing happened and now the suspect is running around their neighborhood.

Amazing that you guys trust every single random civilian to know everything happening on their property at all times. Doesn't matter if they fell asleep at some point in the 20 hour man hunt. Doesn't matter that they may have headsets on and can't hear the police banging on the door, nevermind someone trying to sneak in stealthily to hide.

Just tell the cops to fuck off, you got this.

[archibaldcrane]

It's just weird, it almost seems like people are arguing that because the searches were without a warrant they should receive LESS scrutiny...

[Day]

It's just weird, it's almost as if people act like this is happening on the daily instead of when there was a "terrorist" running around the neighborhood.

[archibaldcrane]

Let's all just lose our minds and say fuck everything because of the word "terrorist".

[Eurell]

Except noone lost their minds. People there all worked together and got shit done. And noone cared about the word "terrorist". They cared that someone was literally running around throwing bombs at people.

[Day]

Hence the quotations.

[quannum]

whats the difference between a mass murderer and a domestic terrorist?

[Day]

when it comes to this discussion? nothing really.

[Blubbartron]

Terrorist elicits a much stronger patriotic reaction. Law enforcement agencies and congress take advantage of this fact by persuading people that "we're all in this together" and therefore it's not only ok to give up your rights (supposedly temporarily), but that it's what any good citizen would do. That then leads directly into threads like this, where the mere *questioning* of authority in a situation like this makes you un-American. Other backlashes include the "nothing to hide" argument, wherein you're automatically guilty because you disagree. The appeal to emotion is strong, and very effective, which is why trying to make logical arguments is so fucking ineffective, as evidenced by the last dozen or so pages of back and forth.

[Day]

You act as if the "terrorist" was a made up story for the cops to enter the house or something, but it was actually happening, everyone in that town was terrified. Again, if this was happening on the daily I'd be more inclined to agree with you. Are any rights given up if the home owner allowed access for the search? I think cooperating with the police to help find the guy is what any good citizen would do... is it not?

[archibaldcrane]

Unless that good citizen had something to hide, in which case does honestly telling the police "I'm sorry, I do not consent to a search without a warrant, however I assure you there is no terrorist inside my house" make him now a bad citizen?