THEY'RE OUTTA THEIR FRIGGIN MINDS!!!!

[BigBadStang]

This is unbelievable!
And the Boston PD acted like they were shocked that this plan was met with such resistance from the community!!


CLICK HERE (http://www.necn.com/Boston/New-England/Safe-Homes-initiative-delayed-in-Boston-/1206478178.html)

D.C. is planning on launching a similar program there...dear God, WTF will they try next?

[theyallslow]

thats crazy. go into a home and look for guns with out a warrant.

[Mista Bone]

So if you don't let them in, they have to come back with a warrant?

Try to come in without a warrant and there might be a few dead bodies.

[BigBadStang]

Police officers searching homes without a warrant?
The next "initiative" will be a bit more invasive...and the next even more. Haven't we learned anything? Crack the door open, and the government will push it open all the way eventually...a little bit at a time.

Tell me with certainty that if they find anything else, they won't try to charge you! After all, you would've INVITED them in.

Most folks in the presence of police officers would feel "pressured" to let them in. Don't believe me, watch an episode of COPS. The cops ask, and the people tell them "ok...go ahead" KNOWING they have contraband in their car.
If a cop is asking to search, you can tell them no, and make them obtain a warrant!

I get so tired of the powers that be, using the "it's for the children" bullshit to cram their crap down our throats. Some people buy that for the children garbage, but NOT ME!!
Leave us and our children the hell alone!
We've done a pretty good job with them so far!(majority of folks on here anyway! ;) )

[02mingryGT]

It's always the liberals trying to take away your rights if you don't conform.

[2-8-1]

Try to come in without a warrant and there might be a few dead bodies.

Thats a home invasion, and that's usually punishable by death.

[rsmurf04]

It's always the liberals trying to take away your rights if you don't conform.

what do you mean by liberals and trying to conform? To what?

[02mingryGT]

what do you mean by liberals and trying to conform? To what?

What I mean is THEY(Liberals aka Democrats aka Treehuggers aka MF'ers who need to worry about themselves instead of everybody else) do not believe in Gun rights. Since they know what is best for us they don't want us to have any either. So they want us to conform by taking what is rightly ours even if it means trampling on the CONSTITUTION.

[92BlackStang]

sorry but one comes in my house . there crisp

[dedpedal]

The moral majority strikes again! Id love to see a breakdown of who voted for the smoking ban vs how many of those people actualy went to bars. "We know whats good for YOU and will force you to bend to our will." Just another chip at peoples rights. A little here, a little there and the next thing you know, we wont have a president, we'll have a dicktator (yea, I spelled it that way on purpose)

[Waffles]

OKay... I'm usually the guy ready to tear a new ass in the government for shit. I hate lib/dem policies on each and every matter you can imagine. I read all these posts, then I watched the video and wondered if any of you had actually watched it or just jumped on the bandwagon. The only difference between now, and this policy, is that there would be a standard of immunity granted to the offender if the sole charge would be illegal possession of a firearm.

As the law stands EVERYWHERE, if the police get a tip like this it could go one of two ways. You can submit to a VOLUNTARY search or they can obtain a warrant (or they can have probable cause and need neither). With any of these options, if they find something, you're gonna get charged. Under this program, they offer the incentive of immunity to a weapons possession charge in the case you VOLUNTARILY SUBMIT to a search. This means you can tell them to pound salt and get the fuck off your doorstep when they show up. If you do however, you lose the immunity deal. They also appropriately draw the line at that charge, if the gun was connected to a crime, deal is off.

This program isn't the problem. The question we should be asking is about what constitutes "illegal possession" in the first place, and why.

[BigBadStang]

Yeah, I'd take their word for it. Once you invite them in, you may not get a weapons charge if they find a gun violation, but anything else they find is fair game.
It's the fact that when they show up, and ask, most people are intimidated into thinking they have no other option than to let them in. Anyone that thinks cops aren't deceptive to unknowing/uneducated citizens when it comes to getting what they want, are living under a rock.

[may93]

I watched the entire video and I disagree with the entire concept. Its sounds good but its just opening the door for more problems. We have 2nd and 4th amendments to the Constitution for a reason. The owner of a home could let the police search now without a warrant if they so decided. You do realize though that once the Police is in your house that if they see anything else while enroute to your childs room that is suspicious that under the plain sight doctrine they are free at that point to seize suspected items and or arrest you for such. Probable cause and reasonable suspicion is all thats needed and at that point your protection from illegal search and seizure is out the window. Now if they wanted to search my home I'd say go ahead because theres absolutely nothing illegal in my house to be found. Its the right to make the decison for myself and property that matters. If they suspect a person illeaglly has a gun then get a warrant, conduct the search and if found prosecute them to the full extent of the law. I'm all for that because I believe in having and owning guns but also in obeying the laws regarding firearms. Punish the criminals not me!!

[Waffles]

Yeah, I'd take their word for it. Once you invite them in, you may not get a weapons charge if they find a gun violation, but anything else they find is fair game.
It's the fact that when they show up, and ask, most people are intimidated into thinking they have no other option than to let them in. Anyone that thinks cops aren't deceptive to unknowing/uneducated citizens when it comes to getting what they want, are living under a rock.

Honestly, that's their own fault. Responsible citizenship requires one to NOT be unknowing or uneducated. Occassionally when I get stopped by the police they'll ask to search my car. I always say no. There is never anything I would worry about them finding, but it's the point that they have no legitimate need. If they did, they wouldn't need to ask. My entire point is, this program doesn't violate anyone's rights. Cops have to ask, and the citizens have the option of giving permission or not. Only difference is that this gives the citizen some immunity.


Its the right to make the decison for myself and property that matters.

And this program does not change that. If you don't want the immunity deal, don't grant them permission to search. Plain as that.

[may93]

If they have a firearm illegally they should be charged and not be granted immunity. By illegally I mean a convicted felon. I do think the program has good intentions but it will be abused just as probable cause and reasonable suspicion gets abused. Thats not a knock on law enforcement because 99.9% of all Police Officers are honest and they follow all rules and procedures but its that .1% that abuses the system and because of them we need protection from illegal search and seizures. This includes the federal goverment and all other areas of law enforcement. It seems everyone is always trying to decide for someone else whats best for them. Its either helmet laws, seatbelt laws, gun bans or something else. All of which may be a good idea but let me make that decision for myself .

[Mista Bone]

Abuse of the system.........

Riverside CA spent $503,000 to bust up a crowd of cars in a PARKING lot that they suspected might be planning street racing. No racing ever happen.

http://thenewspaper.com/news/23/2302.asp

Oh yeah, they had the permission of the shopping center to gather, they were anti-street racing and that was the message they were trying to get out.

Republik of Kaliforina

[e5shea]

The whole idea behind the Democratic party is to make big government, and spread the notion that we NEED government. Those peoples thought processes will never cease to amaze me (and piss me off).
Keep pushing buttons....I seem to remember a story or two that mentioned something about people wanting freedom, indepedence, and rights.

I think this about somes up the Hollywood, Liberal, Democratic, treehuggin f*cks in this country:

So how does it feel to know that someones kid in the heart of america
Has blood on their hands, fighting to defend your rights
So you can maintain the lifestyle that insults this family's existance
Well, where I'm from we have a special salute we aim high in the air
Towards all those pompous assholes who spend their days pointing fingers

All the way from the east to the west
We've got this high society looking down on this very foundation
Constantly reminding us that our actions are the cause of all their problems
Pointing the fingers in every direction
Blaming their own nation for who wins elections
They've never contributed a fucking thing to the country they love to criticize

[BigBadStang]

The whole idea behind the Democratic party is to make big government, and spread the notion that we NEED government. Those peoples thought processes will never cease to amaze me (and piss me off).
Keep pushing buttons....I seem to remember a story or two that mentioned something about people wanting freedom, indepedence, and rights.

I think this about somes up the Hollywood, Liberal, Democratic, treehuggin f*cks in this country:

So how does it feel to know that someones kid in the heart of america
Has blood on their hands, fighting to defend your rights
So you can maintain the lifestyle that insults this family's existance
Well, where I'm from we have a special salute we aim high in the air
Towards all those pompous assholes who spend their days pointing fingers

All the way from the east to the west
We've got this high society looking down on this very foundation
Constantly reminding us that our actions are the cause of all their problems
Pointing the fingers in every direction
Blaming their own nation for who wins elections
They've never contributed a fucking thing to the country they love to criticize

PREACH IT BROTHER!!

[may93]

PREACH IT BROTHER!!




AHMEN!!!

[02mingryGT]

+3! great post!

[Waffles]

If they have a firearm illegally they should be charged and not be granted immunity. By illegally I mean a convicted felon. I do think the program has good intentions but it will be abused just as probable cause and reasonable suspicion gets abused. Thats not a knock on law enforcement because 99.9% of all Police Officers are honest and they follow all rules and procedures but its that .1% that abuses the system and because of them we need protection from illegal search and seizures. This includes the federal goverment and all other areas of law enforcement. It seems everyone is always trying to decide for someone else whats best for them. Its either helmet laws, seatbelt laws, gun bans or something else. All of which may be a good idea but let me make that decision for myself .

Well, I think the idea is to get the guns out of the hands of kids and/or gang members. Convicted felons were not the target. Also, I still think you guys are pedalling backwards on this. There is no additional "power" here to be abused. There is only one thing added to what's already part of the system... a standard agreement of immunity for illegal possession.

Police can already get tips about illegal firearms. Police can already request permission to search. Citizens can still refuse permission. Police can already use probable cause if there is any. They can already seek a warrant if they need to. Citizens can still file suit for illegal search and seizure. So what's the problem?

[BigBadStang]

Okay, when the cops show up at someones door and ask the resident if they can search the home, do you think that the cops will advise the resident that they have the right to refuse the search? Maybe they will, maybe they won't. My money says they won't.
The next move by the cops would be the old "you can let me in now, and we'll go easy on you, or I can come back with a warrant and do it the hard way." bullshit. This tactic is used a lot. If you don't think so, then like I said before, you have been living under a rock.
This type of program opens the door just a bit. Once the governing bodies, get the door cracked open, they keep pushing it open a little at a time, until it is wide open.

[may93]

I took the time and watched the video twice more and I still think its a bad idea with questionable good intentions. Even the majority of the people in the communitys where they wanted to implement the program disagreed with it according to the video. That being said they still keep pushing for it. What ever happened to majority rules? Forget granting immunity, just get a warrant and press charges afterwards when and if a gun is found.

[Waffles]

Okay, when the cops show up at someones door and ask the resident if they can search the home, do you think that the cops will advise the resident that they have the right to refuse the search? Maybe they will, maybe they won't. My money says they won't.
The next move by the cops would be the old "you can let me in now, and we'll go easy on you, or I can come back with a warrant and do it the hard way." bullshit. This tactic is used a lot. If you don't think so, then like I said before, you have been living under a rock.
This type of program opens the door just a bit. Once the governing bodies, get the door cracked open, they keep pushing it open a little at a time, until it is wide open.

Isn't it true? And since when are cops responsible for someone's ignorance? Right now, I only have a few rifles in the house. If a cop comes to my door and says some shit like that, I'd laugh at him and shut the door in his face. Let him go get a warrant, after all... that's what they're for. I still fail to see how this program would make anything you mentioned any worse.


Even the majority of the people in the communitys where they wanted to implement the program disagreed with it according to the video. That being said they still keep pushing for it. What ever happened to majority rules? Forget granting immunity, just get a warrant and press charges afterwards when and if a gun is found.

Everything anyone here has mentioned, the problems have been more related to irresponsible citizenship than anything else. Ignorance. Then we're going to use "the people don't want it" as an argument? Also, we're NOT, contrary to popular belief, a "majority rules" democracy. We weren't designed that way. We shouldn't be that way.

Haven't you ever heard of "Tyranny of the Majority" ???

[02mingryGT]

Haven't you ever heard of "Tyranny of the Majority" ???

Yeah I have. It's called smoking laws.

[may93]

The thing is we already have a system in place where they obtain a warrant signed by the Judge so they can search your house. Its not a matter of whether its a good idea or not its more the point that the 4th amendment was set in place for a reason and they keep making ways around it and we keep losing ground on our fundemental rights regarding illegal search and seizures. If they get a tip that someone has a firearm then get a warrant and search for it. Forget immunity seeing as if they have it illegally they'll just get another one.

[Waffles]

Yeah I have. It's called smoking laws.

You are correct sir. While I am a not smoker and thoroughly enjoy the lack of smoke when I got out, I'm also firmly against the law. It's a violation of private property rights.


The thing is we already have a system in place where they obtain a warrant signed by the Judge so they can search your house. Its not a matter of whether its a good idea or not its more the point that the 4th amendment was set in place for a reason and they keep making ways around it and we keep losing ground on our fundemental rights regarding illegal search and seizures. If they get a tip that someone has a firearm then get a warrant and search for it. Forget immunity seeing as if they have it illegally they'll just get another one.

I'm not sure there's anything else I can say to help you understand.

[02mingryGT]

I'm not sure there's anything else I can say to help you understand.

Look at it this way. Your saying there is no difference between what they want to do and what we already have EXCEPT if you let them in to search they will have immunity against the gun charge. What about anything else? Probably not.
He is saying we already have a probable cause law. If they have enough proof to search your house they can get a warrant. Why is this other thing needed? I have to agree with may93 on this one.

[wolverine8490]

All the people who voted for the smoking ban, just wait until one of your rights are taken away, the day will come. Piece by piece we lose more and more everyday. I was not pissed at the fact I can not smoke in bars in Ohio anymore, since I do live in KY, but it was the fact that government took away a right.

Anyway, the fact that they think they can make a law to allow someone to walk into your house without a warrant is crazy. They can come in my house all day anyday as I don’t have anything to hide, but they had better have a warrant to step foot in my house.

This is happening all over. Car manufactures are coming out with sweat indicators that can detect alcohol in your system and shut down the car, or just notify onstar, they can detect speeds in which you are traveling via GPS, track where you go, when you go there, detect sudden movements that may indicate you have been drinking, or are tired. All of this info is great when used in a proper manner, but just wait, someday, it will be used against use. Good technology always turns against us.

I just love how the government always turns it around to make it look like they are doing us a favor. If they were doing us a favor, they would keep this country a free country, but day by day that is changing.

[BigBadStang]

Look at it this way. Your saying there is no difference between what they want to do and what we already have EXCEPT if you let them in to search they will have immunity against the gun charge. What about anything else? Probably not.
He is saying we already have a probable cause law. If they have enough proof to search your house they can get a warrant. Why is this other thing needed? I have to agree with may93 on this one.


Yes, they need to stop making new laws and enforce the ones that are already on the books. Make the cops plead their suspicion case to a judge, and obtain the warrant.
The best fix would be for these parents to take control of their children, and households and handle it "in house", rather than having to invite the cops in to search a kids room.

[may93]

I'm not sure there's anything else I can say to help you understand.

I understand your point of view on the matter I just have to respectfully disagree.

[Waffles]

Look at it this way. Your saying there is no difference between what they want to do and what we already have EXCEPT if you let them in to search they will have immunity against the gun charge. What about anything else? Probably not.
He is saying we already have a probable cause law. If they have enough proof to search your house they can get a warrant. Why is this other thing needed? I have to agree with may93 on this one.

Often times the parents of children would cooperate, but are afraid of the charges they themselves would face. Warrants are also not as easy to get as you say. This would save a lot of hassles.

[BigBadStang]

Often times the parents of children would cooperate, but are afraid of the charges they themselves would face. Warrants are also not as easy to get as you say. This would save a lot of hassles.

That's my point. A search warrant should be somewhat "hard to get". If not, the police would be kicking in doors more often than they do now.

I respect your view on this subject, and will fight for your right to say what you think, but I'll have to respectfully disgree with you on this.

THIS (http://www.topix.com/content/kri/2007/08/self-defense-argument-against-law-enforcement-serving-no-knock-warrant-to-play-out-in-bibb-court) is enough to make someone think.
As well as THIS TOO (http://www.wsbtv.com/news/10374909/detail.html)

Who is right and who is wrong in theses cases?
There are many more incidents that occur with these "no knock" warrants if you research it, and who is to blame?
If someone kicks my front door in, they better be ready to dodge bullets. I'm not going to hesitate to see who it is invading my home.

I'm not trying to veer off topic, just pointing out that if you give them a bit more power, bad things can happen.

enjoy your day!

[BigBadStang]

HERE (http://www.slate.com/id/2139458/) is another one I just found.

[may93]

HERE (http://www.slate.com/id/2139458/) is another one I just found.

In 1999, for example, the assistant police chief of El Monte, Calif., explained his department's preferred procedure to the Los Angeles Times: "We do bang on the door and make an announcement—'It's the police'—but it kind of runs together. If you're sitting on the couch, it would be difficult to get to the door before they knock it down."


This is exactly what happens when you give them ways around the 4th Amendment. It already gets abused so why make it easier. That was an excellent article.