Cut that out Day. I keep thinking of SMBC now. DD:
Cut that out Day. I keep thinking of SMBC now. DD:
or pets "who cares if they shot your territorial dog when they forced into your unoccupied house, they were looking for a terrorist!"
weird how none of these things happened though
Well, the issue that "searching a broad area because you don't know where the guy is and as it turns out you violated people's right to privacy without any gain" thing happened.
that town seems super pissed
So you're saying that if noone in watertown is bothered, noone else should be wary of the precedent it sets?
This is why they have insurance though, isn't it? Archie makes all valid points, but at the end of the day the things they did had to be done to make sure he wasn't in the area. Hindsight doesn't work in the present, they didn't magically know he was really out of the search zone. If laws were broken, or homes destroyed, then insurance will cover it. It's just part of the cost of protecting society from maniacs like this.
Cops bust in my house without a warrant? I'm assuming the worst, they are here to kill me.
They knock and ask permission? Denied.
Have some god damned respect for other people's rights even if you have no respect for your own.
You do not wait till something happens to stop it. holy hell lol my mind is going in circles. I understand if your fine with what they did, thats cool but the fact that you can not see that just because they where not pissed means everything is fine is bullshit and you know that.
Its one thing to defend it with "they had every right to do it" as someone did to me by showing that unwritten law. But to just say "well no one said anything, so who cares" is such a flawed way of thinking.
this reminds me of michael jackson dangling his baby out the window.
I didn't read everything since my post earlier. Did anyone mention exigent circumstances to Archi?
Also, even if exigent circumstances didn't exist here, practically speaking, it doesn't matter that the police violated anyone's rights.
A civilians remedy in this situation is a section 1983 claim. Good luck getting a jury to feel sorry for you if there wasn't serious damage to your property. Even then, I'm sure the government could argue some sort of necessity exception, i.e. the necessity exception in torts.
Exigent circumstances do not apply here.
The Dorner case was mentioned, San Bernardino County Sheriffs office led much of the week-long manhunt. They did not break down any doors. They searched the exteriors of properties looking for signs of forced entry. If residents were home they continued the search elsewhere.
Exigent circumstances would have applied in Watertown only if there was information on which structure the suspect entered (signs of forced entry, credible testimony) Pulling people out of their homes at gunpoint sends a clear message to me: The police will do whatever the fuck they want in an emergency scenario, the law does not apply to them in the performance of their duties.
This is unacceptable. I do not want the police to "rescue the shit out of me".
Hypothetically there is a wanted suspect in my neighborhood. Police are looking for him with SWAT teams. My gun is definitely out of the safe and loaded. I have about 2 seconds after hearing the door being smashed in to react. How is this going to play out for me being a "man with a gun". SWAT members are trained to react quickly, if I am seen i will probably be shot.
Even if they knock nicely how are they going to react when i open the door with a shotgun or pistol in my hand (as is probable with a dangerous suspect on the loose)?
Dont hold the gun in front of the fucking cops? Holy shit dude. Do you think they were fucking sneaking around before they busted into houses? You would see and hear them marching down the fucking street. Then when they knock, you look out the fucking peephole or a window. Then you put your gun down before you answer the door.
inb4 MAH RIGHTS SAY I CAN WAVE GUNS IN MY HOUSE AT ANYONE I WANT