Enforcement Actions in Boston

[Plow]

so, just to make sure...

Isn't archi one of the many people that weren't particularly bothered by the cops opening fire on what they thought was the suspect in the dorner incident, but super duper upset that they had misidentified the truck?


As to the unarmed thing, I'm not sure that it particularly matters given they had every reason in the world to think he was armed, but literally every article in your google search states that the commissioner has already said he was armed, and "dozens" of reports and sources say he had things like an M4 and some handguns, but that now "2 officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk about the ongoing investigation" say otherwise.

[Plow]

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".

Also didn't they completely shut down the area around big bear and do exactly this same shit there once they knew he was in the area?


Not to mention the fact that at one point he created exactly the scenario people are occasionally mentioning here with hostages but the cops weren't searching there yet...

[archibaldcrane]

so, just to make sure...

Isn't archi one of the many people that weren't particularly bothered by the cops opening fire on what they thought was the suspect in the dorner incident, but super duper upset that they had misidentified the truck?

Wat

[Suvhater]

Also didn't they completely shut down the area around big bear and do exactly this same shit there once they knew he was in the area?


Not to mention the fact that at one point he created exactly the scenario people are occasionally mentioning here with hostages but the cops weren't searching there yet...

Not quite. He was holed up in a rental cabin 80-100 yards from the command HQ. They were searching the whole mountain community (about 20 sq miles). Roving patrols and peeking into empty cabins, not breaking down doors or entering occupied cabins. When he was discovered by some cleaning ladies sent to service the cabin they were tied up and he stole the car. One of the ladies managed to get free immediately and call 911. Dorner made it about a mile when the radio call went out to every officer of every agency up there. A chase was on, some carjacking, he shot two officers halfway down the mountain on a 2 lane road and went into a small community. The probable cause as to where he was and which cabin he was in after that point was the automatic gunfire coming from the cabin at officers. There was no need to go door to door at that point.

[hey]

Ya heaven forbid I deal with reality, rather than what you wanted to happen.

Think about this. Let's imagine that the cops only went into occupied houses from owners who gave permission. The scenario would have still happened because the kid went into a boat of an owner who GAVE permission.

You want to be upset about the kid being unarmed? then be upset about the kid being unarmed. Houses being searched without permission WOULD NOT have changed the outcome.

Sure, that particular kid would still have been shot. It's a shame the cops weren't told to go away, or maybe he wouldn't have been.

Telling the police to go fuck themselves could have saved a life!

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

is plow using the boston bombing to save face on dat truck

[Ksandra]

Sure, that particular kid would still have been shot. It's a shame the cops weren't told to go away, or maybe he wouldn't have been.

Telling the police to go fuck themselves could have saved a life!

uh...you know he's not dead...right?... right?

[NynJa]

Just when i thought this thread couldnt attract anymore stupid people...

[noblemountain]

I'm sure that Neph and JMC are good guys. I'm sure they joined the police force to uphold the law and help the helpless. I'm sure they have high moral standards and are just great people overall. Let's not pretend that is the norm when it comes to cops. A lot of cops are people who barely made it through high school with a bully complex. Having been in combat with highly trained men that I trusted to have my back and react the proper way in super high stress situations, I have seen the best trained soldiers fuck up and shoot innocent people. I do not trust Barney Fife to make those decisions.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

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".

You might be right, but isn't because LAPD cops didn't do it BPD cops can't, You need to have some legal basis for it.

[Blubbartron]

I'm sure that Neph and JMC are good guys. I'm sure they joined the police force to uphold the law and help the helpless. I'm sure they have high moral standards and are just great people overall. Let's not pretend that is the norm when it comes to cops. A lot of cops are people who barely made it through high school with a bully complex. Having been in combat with highly trained men that I trusted to have my back and react the proper way in super high stress situations, I have seen the best trained soldiers fuck up and shoot innocent people. I do not trust Barney Fife to make those decisions.

So, so much this. It's a lot like the wisdom from MIB. "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it." I feel like an individual cop would probably do the right thing 75% or more of the time. When a bunch of cops get together, that number drops fucking fast, though. Bullies are always more brazen when they have numbers on their side.

[Churchill]

[dejet]

Odd not showing the full gif...

[Xajii]

Since this discussion has branched off in many and many stupid directions I will provide a summary of what I am trying to argue that includes responses to some of the things that Ksandra, Day, and whoever else were saying.

I am concerned that the actions of the police forces involved in this scenario sets an unconstitutional precedent that it is okay to search private property without the necessary legal recourse to do so.

It does not matter whether or not anyone did not consent. It does not matter whether or not you could get a judge to uphold your side of the case.

I say this because although there may or may not have been an instance of nonconsent (how the fuck do you claim to know whether there was one, btw?) it stands to reason that it would have made no difference to the police, especially considering they definitely searched unoccupied homes without consent. Hell, if someone had not offered consent, they probably would have grown very hostile towards that person. When you have decided to perform door-to-door searches, you are not doing so with the intent of only looking into houses where people respond charmingly and willingly. You're doing it to search every house in the perimeter. I do not consider this to be a big hypothetical and if you honestly think the police in this instance would have left a nonconsenting occupant alone, I'd love to hear why.

I also think the point about whether or not you would be compensated if you took your case to court is not only not a counterargument; it's a good example of the problem to begin with. It seems like the only way you're going to get justice for having your rights violated is by getting shot.

There are numerous reasons for which someone might not want the police to search their home. Maybe they have youung children; maybe they have a pet that would be substantially frightened; maybe they were having sex; maybe they themselves are in poor health; maybe they're growing pot. And yes, maybe they're doing much more illegal stuff.

Neither recent instance of perimeter, door to door searching turned up the suspect. Hell, the police in Boston cleared the place he was hiding in. Not only is it unlawful; it doesn't seem to be very effective. I'm not chastising the police for not finding him right away, but the employment of unconstitutional means that didn't even work is a very concerning precedent.

So generally when you search a home you need to have a warrant or probable cause at the very least. Is the fact that they were pretty sure the dude was somewhere in a pretty large perimeter "probable cause" to search every home in that area? If not, I'm sure whenever someone refuses consent, they would consider that probable cause. It's all pretty fucked up if you ask me.

[Day]

I think anyone that's read a page of this thread understands all of that already. We get it.

How would you handle someone who has killed an 8 year old with a bomb, a police officer, and is part of a fresh pursuit loose in a town? What's the plan on catching him before more children or adults are killed by him? Just let him go? How does that sit with the town? So you don't want them going door to door with guns and searching homes, whats the plan?

[Churchill]

people have been arguing against that? bunch of dumbs

[Churchill]

I think anyone that's read a page of this thread understands all of that already. We get it.

How would you handle someone who has killed an 8 year old with a bomb, a police officer, and is part of a fresh pursuit loose in a town? What's the plan on catching him before more children or adults are killed by him? Just let him go? How does that sit with the town? So you don't want them going door to door with guns and searching homes, whats the plan?

2 things:

I would handle it by taking my team and clearing every house in a large area as if every one of them contained the suspect. I would not ask nicely to enter, or knock on someones door. I would breach the door via mechanical or explosive, I would use flashbangs and callouts (megaphone telling people to get the fuck out) in homes with lots of women and children. I would detain everyone I encounter so that they are more easily corralled. I would systematically do this for every home within my perimeter while using aerial surveillance to cover areas of interest and paths of ingress/egress.

I was also trained to do this by the military and did do this in a time of war, so anything that police do even resembling this is probably not okay.

Second thing is that police aren't there to protect you, they are there to uphold the law. Who cares if he killed a cop? A child? It doesn't fucking matter. You can't (as a police officer) rattle off bullshit example after another when someone sues or gets angry you didn't protect x/y/z person because it's not a police officers job to protect the citizens from danger while simultaneously state that we need to for all intents and purposes suspend the 4th/5th Amendments to search for one 19 years kid. (Public safety)

If you catch him, great. He would have been caught anyway. He was a 19 year old kid, you knew his name, he wasn't financed by Stasi or AQ. He was dead or caught with very little trouble, and if you had actually done your jobs and searched the backyard he would have been caught by 0800 and spared the rest of the world watching tanks roll down US streets.

I'm sure that Neph and JMC are good guys. I'm sure they joined the police force to uphold the law and help the helpless. I'm sure they have high moral standards and are just great people overall. Let's not pretend that is the norm when it comes to cops. A lot of cops are people who barely made it through high school with a bully complex. Having been in combat with highly trained men that I trusted to have my back and react the proper way in super high stress situations, I have seen the best trained soldiers fuck up and shoot innocent people. I do not trust Barney Fife to make those decisions.

Pretty much. Though I'd expand upon that and say "best-trained" but little experience (still 19 year old kid) or that it wasn't an accident the civilians got shot lol. Very rarely did something happen like that. I trusted everyone except the AC-130 guys and that was a lesson I learned the hard way.

[Xajii]

I think anyone that's read a page of this thread understands all of that already. We get it.

How would you handle someone who has killed an 8 year old with a bomb, a police officer, and is part of a fresh pursuit loose in a town? What's the plan on catching him before more children or adults are killed by him? Just let him go? How does that sit with the town? So you don't want them going door to door with guns and searching homes, whats the plan?

Churchill responded to this fairly well but I would say: the same way the cops normally do their fucking job. Research, public notices, talking to people, following up on leads, strategic positioning and monitoring to minimize the chances of suspect leaving theoretical perimeter, use of technology when applicable to track, etc.

In this particular instance the 19 year old kid got away from cops MULTIPLE TIMES. Again, I am not trying to attack the competence of the police force involved, but I feel like that shit doesn't happen too often. And again, lo and behold, he was found through completely conventional (if not happenstance) means.

[Tyrath]

I could be wrong, but from I remember hearing on the scanners, they had low visibility when he got away and they were also told to back off a little bit and wait for reinforcements because the kids were literally throwing bombs at them.

[hey]

uh...you know he's not dead...right?... right?

Minor details.