Would you let police raid your house without a warrant?
Yes
8.9% (36)
8.9% (36)
No
55.4% (225)
55.4% (225)
Depends on circumstances
35.5% (144)
35.5% (144)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Police State USA: Boston Area Raids

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

I don't know if you guys have been seeing the the house to house raids that were conducted in and around the Boston area, but it disgusts me. They were looking of course for the 19 year old Boston marathon suspect, who was found hiding in a boat outside the cordon, and later it would be admitted he was unarmed.

The video shows just one of the raids that were taking place all over town. It is shot from a neighboring home across the street. Wide cordons are being set up where these raids are taking place and the media are being kept FAR back. You won't find many videos, but these are happening everywhere. There are some other pictures out there, officers taking cover behind squad cars, taking aim at an old lady being forced from her home.

There are people who have been barred from re-entering their homes and were interviewed hanging around outside the cordons, with nowhere else to go. Families, senior citizens, being forced out of their homes through threats and intimidation. No warrants, no discussion, you are greeted with a gun in your face and shouting upon opening the door.

Now I have had guns pointed in my face before, I have been shot at before. It's a scary thing. But I would not let these thugs into my home. I would kindly ask for a warrant and if they did not have one, to get the hell off my property.

There are rumors floating around that anyone who resisted was threatened with being charged of interfering with a police investigation, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a fine... I'm pretty sure police investigations require a warrant, but hey, what do I know. So far there are no reports of anyone being charged. There are some rumors of people refusing and the police backing down, because they could easily be sued if someone clearly does not give consent.

What about you? Would you let these people kick you out of your home because you happened to be in an area where a suspect was last seen? No warrant? No explanation? Just- "Hands up! Let's go!"

Undoubtedly people will say this all justified when searching for a big, scary terrorist- but how far is too far? Who decides who's a terrorist? In one of the videos, there's some guy standing in the street, barred from his home, holding his young daughter- talking in front of the camera, but really talking to himself- looking conflicted and trying to convince himself, that this is keeping them safe.

In America, it's a disgrace.

It isn't justified. The only way would be if this terrorist had a nuclear device or some nerve gas, maybe some crazy virus, on a timed release detonator. That's it. Otherwise, no. Not even if it was the president they were looking for. What do people think this is, 24?

xDarc:
and later it would be admitted he was unarmed

I really don't see what that has to do with anything. Police wouldn't have known that he was unarmed at the time, and it was a pretty fair assumption on their part that he would be armed considering he'd just detonated 2 bombs.

But yeah, there's really no justification for this kind of police action. We have the 4th amendment for a reason, and the only way that a police officer should be allowed to enter a house without the owner's permission or a warrant is through the exigent circumstances of being in hot pursuit, that's it.

If the police really needed to they could ask the homeowners to search their house, and if they refused they could post officers to keep watch outside those houses which refused, and attempted to get warrants. What they did instead was intimidate and bully American citizens, which is completely unjustified, no matter the reason.

Gotta love how gun-hoe they were about these raids, most videos and pictures I've seen always have some soldier pointing his gun at them needlessly, settle the hell down Urban commando.

You do know that the police ASKED for peoples permission to search their houses in Watertown right? IF the person said no they just left.

kiri2tsubasa:
You do know that the police ASKED for peoples permission to search their houses in Watertown right? IF the person said no they just left.

Define ask. See what this resident has to say about being asked for permission at 1:28 in the video below. He doesn't seem to be aware that "no" was an option, as I'm sure many of the people who were raided weren't. Fear and intimidation.

Dirty Hipsters:

xDarc:
and later it would be admitted he was unarmed

I really don't see what that has to do with anything. Police wouldn't have known that he was unarmed at the time, and it was a pretty fair assumption on their part that he would be armed considering he'd just detonated 2 bombs.

More importantly, the manhunt started when they shot and killed a police officer. Assuming that the man was unarmed would be suicidally stupid.

Well, if there was a terrorist hiding in my neighbourhood, and the police asked if they could come in and look for him...unless they were in hot pursuit of him and they lost sight of him just as he turned the corner into my street, tat doesn't sound very effective. They'd have to search everywhere. If I'm at home to give police permission, I'd probably know a terrorist had broken in.

But...I guess so.

No I would not. And the fact that this thing is totally OK now in America makes me so glad that I left that shithole. Land of opportunity my ass. More like an Orwellian nightmare. Closing down the entire city to search for one unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager. Scaremongering is also a form of terrorism if you ask me. And that's what the American government with it's mass media did to it's own people after the Boston incident. It's despicable.

I have always been opposed too warrant-less raids (as they are unconstitutional), but what is worse is the "No-Knock" raids. I honestly believe that someone (civilian or police or both) will get shot someday because a false tip was called in, police charge gun-hoe bustin' down doors, and get shot/shoot an innocent resident who does not know these people but just had his front door knocked down.

I think Boston was a bit of a unique situation and I imagine a lot of people who live in Boston were quite happy with the robust police response. Besides, it isn't as if they rugby tackled a brazilian student to the floor and shot him in the head 5 times because he was running for a train.

What about all the Bostonians cheering at the end of it all? Came off as a little gauche if you ask me. Probably would have been better if they'd have done a cricket clap towards a passing policeman, but on the proviso that nobody looked anybody else in the eye.

Adam Jensen:
No I would not. And the fact that this thing is totally OK now in America makes me so glad that I left that shithole. Land of opportunity my ass. More like an Orwellian nightmare. Closing down the entire city to search for one unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager. Scaremongering is also a form of terrorism if you ask me. And that's what the American government with it's mass media did to it's own people after the Boston incident. It's despicable.

It is not that way in Kansas. In fact, depending on how you interpret the law, a police office might get shot for a warrant-less raid by the homeowner. Do not misunderstand, lawyers will be involved out the wazoo, but most Kansans would fall on the side of the homeowner.

"How was I suppose too know it was the police? They just barged right in."

Adam Jensen:
No I would not. And the fact that this thing is totally OK now in America makes me so glad that I left that shithole. Land of opportunity my ass. More like an Orwellian nightmare. Closing down the entire city to search for one unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager. Scaremongering is also a form of terrorism if you ask me. And that's what the American government with it's mass media did to it's own people after the Boston incident. It's despicable.

Not saying you're wrong, but the mass media's scaremongering is at least partially independent of government scaremongering.

The only time I'd ever deem this as even remotely acceptable is if the city was actually under some kind of attack that threatened the safety of the entire populace. They had already cornered the guy and it was clear he wasn't going to do anything else short of run away. They could have given the citizens the benefit of the doubt and simply questioned everyone in the neighborhood. Considering how pissed off everyone in the city was at the bombers, I don't see how any of the civilians would decline assisting their investigation.

This is a rare exception, IMO. The guy (and his deceased brother) detonated two bombs, then later, killed a police officer @ 2 in the morning, and from what I remember they were on the run, supposedly involved in at least 1 firefight that I recall, as well as having stolen a vehicle where they were jettisoning explosive material.

As to how much of that is 'for real' I don't know, This is everything I heard the day of. considering that much 'action' or media hyperbole, seems like a raid might be legit.

All in all heres how i see it: We had a bombing, the people were scared, memories of vulnerable time in american history reared its ugly head again. The Media preyed on those fears for ratings, the people reacted more and demanded action. They got this from the government which was trying to placate them as well as conduct an investigation. There is a lot of fault here, but truthfully i think its our own fault. We got scared so such action was acceptable for the circumstances, at least it was at the time. I don't hate those officers, they were trying to do their job with an american mob encouraging them.

We overreacted. Our bad. Maybe next time we'll do it better. The sky isn't falling. We got the bad guy(s), lets focus on Justice now.

The fact that an entire capital of Massachusetts was shut down, for a short while, while searching for this guy, always struck me as bit excessive. This door-to-door tactic of forcing every resident out of their house, at gunpoint, strikes me as rather excessive. Finally, the idea of charging the guy with using weapons of mass destruction (which I've always associated with Nuclear weaponry or of similar scale) is also a bit odd in my books.

But then again, I don't understand the evil behind the intent to blow up a downtown full of people so I'm not gonna pretend to know the best way to deal with situations like these. Right now, all I can say that I'm simply glad I don't live there. I wouldn't have appreciated this kind of treatment from people who are supposed to be protecting me, not treating my like a suspect in my own home.

xDarc:

kiri2tsubasa:
You do know that the police ASKED for peoples permission to search their houses in Watertown right? IF the person said no they just left.

Define ask. See what this resident has to say about being asked for permission at 1:28 in the video below. He doesn't seem to be aware that "no" was an option, as I'm sure many of the people who were raided weren't. Fear and intimidation.

Damn right fear and intimidation, the cop's work in this case is done better and faster if you DON'T know you can say "no" and let them in. That's not only intentional, it might also be a simple "cop/militaristic" response to being tense in a situation no one really expected.
Personally, I'd feel better with the cops entering my place, if only for they to be sure I'm not hiding anything; it's a public threat, all privacy goes to ground, that's what I believe in, even when the law says otherwise... Unless the law is Judge Dredd...
Question: can't a judge issue some sort of special warrant to search a whole area?

If an officer of the law doesn't have a warrant to search my property, then he doesn't have a reason to search my property.

If this happened to me, I'd say "you're welcome to come inside and visit, maybe watch some TV or whatever. There's a Regular Show marathon on right now, that show's awesome. But by no means are you allowed to search my house without a warrant."

The way they seemed to be acting, I'm sure they didn't treat these people's homes with care. I'm not gonna let the cops make a mess of my house looking for someone who isn't there.

After watching the video I just realized something. What about the people who had indoor cats? I would be terrified one of those assholes would leave a door open or something and let them out :/

Gilhelmi:
I honestly believe that someone (civilian or police or both) will get shot someday because a false tip was called in, police charge gun-hoe bustin' down doors, and get shot/shoot an innocent resident who does not know these people but just had his front door knocked down.

Oh boy... do I have some news for you.

Ismael Mena, Jose Guerena, Kathryn Johnston and countless pet animals are just a few of the avoidable casualties of no-knock raids.

Countless more have survived but suffered various legal and economic repercussions due to the police mistakenly raiding their residence rather than the correct one.

EDIT: I forgot to shit-talk these officers and how fucked up they all looked. I'm no Tier-One body slayer myself, but they pretty much just handed BDUs and a rifle to every swinging dick cop in the area and told them to go play army. No sense of urgency or coordination, no aggression or speed during searches, no sense of tactical movement or awareness.

Also, that one FBI loser who was filmed on national TV trying to be a big-dick operator trying to jump a tiny gate, only to practically fall off the thing and then have it casually swing open a second later.

Nielas:

Dirty Hipsters:

xDarc:
and later it would be admitted he was unarmed

I really don't see what that has to do with anything. Police wouldn't have known that he was unarmed at the time, and it was a pretty fair assumption on their part that he would be armed considering he'd just detonated 2 bombs.

More importantly, the manhunt started when they shot and killed a police officer. Assuming that the man was unarmed would be suicidally stupid.

And to top it all off, they had just been in a firefight with him and his brother the night before. It's really easy to pass judgment after the fact, but we can really only judge them based on the information they had at the time, and at the time, they had every reason to be worried that he was armed and dangerous.

As for how I'd respond, I wouldn't make a fuss. Given the situation, I wouldn't even bother to ask what they were there for. If they forced me to go somewhere, I'd likely ask if I would be let back in later that day so I know if I should start looking for a hotel to stay in that night. If it weren't a time of crises I might ask why they were there and what they were doing, but in this case it might give me more peace of mind.

I'm not saying this because I like having my Constitutional rights trampled on. I'm just saying that, based on my personality, I wouldn't resist or argue. Not to mention, I generally look at the situation rather than holding to some universally applicable ideal that we should never go against even in the most extreme of situations, and given the situation--a loose terrorist who is likely armed and had already killed a cop, the high likelihood that they have a very limited time window, and the sheer scale in which they had to operate--I'd likely view it as extreme enough to warrant some extra flexibility. Maybe you disagree, but I don't see myself thinking or acting any different at the time this was going on.

You should shoot them with your guns.

I hear that's a really good way to make freedom happen.

Don't have a problem with it, but the cops really need to be better organized and not treat the civilians like they did something wrong.

Like give them some damn time to put on shoes and put the people outside in a safe place

small things like that

Riddle me this:

How many "genuine American patriots" that live far enough away from Boston, would start accusing the authorities of not trying hard enough to catch the terrorists otherwise?

My guess is "A whole damn lot".

Product Placement:
Finally, the idea of charging the guy with using weapons of mass destruction (which I've always associated with Nuclear weaponry or of similar scale) is also a bit odd in my books.

Actually, no. The phrase is used by politicians and the media to mean something really nasty (usually CBRN), but apparently it's also a phrase used in US law that includes fairly small bombs. That definition just doesn't hit the headlines so much.

OTOH, they really should not be using the same terminology to refer to two completely different things like that.

The right to say no to the cops searching your house is in the constitution. (If they don't have a warrant,) If you aren't aware of that I have trouble feeling that you were wronged in anyway.

In this case, yeah I would.

If you know the full story, those brothers were on a rampage. After the bombing, the full list of events as I understand it included the two brothers robbing a convenience store at gun point, pulling over and shooting a campus security officer for no reason, getting in gun fights with the police involving lower-grade explosives, the older brother getting shot at which point the younger one drives over his corpse to get away, and then finally being found by in a grounded boat by the owner. The guy had no idea he was there. This is straight out of a movie plot it's so surreal.

Boston was on complete lockdown trying to find these desperate madmen. If the police were at your door, you knew why they were there. If the cops had reasonable suspicion that one of the bombers was on your property somewhere, then why in the hell would you want them waiting and coming back the next day with a legal warrant, all the while the bomber might be hiding in your goddamn home with you?! A warrant would be useless, and you might be fucking dead for spending the night with a crazed man hiding in the basement.

If you're thinking that some cops were using the opportunity to raid houses in relation to other cases, that's highly doubtful. The hundreds of cops that were in Boston during lockdown were a part of an entire search grid. These weren't cops just bopping around on their own patrolling whatever street they felt like. The search they performed was completely procedural and didn't allow opportunities to go off and raid some home that had relation to some other case being worked on. This wasn't a police state. It was a search grid that was eventually disbanded when the search was complete.

Unfortunately, "No", in the eyes of the law, usually means "I'm guilty."

I can only see it bringing further complications in a situation like this, but no I would not let them enter.

This is why I'd never go to the US. It looked like the raid was a little sloppy too. Case in point as someone pointed out, "Mr. Urban Commando" outside there needlessly pointing his gun up at the house. You have proper discipline, or you don't have a firearm. End of Story.

No warrant, no entry. I'm all for cooperating, but there's such a thing as violating my rights.

Product Placement:
The fact that an entire capital of Massachusetts was shut down, for a short while, while searching for this guy, always struck me as bit excessive. This door-to-door tactic of forcing every resident out of their house, at gunpoint, strikes me as rather excessive. Finally, the idea of charging the guy with using weapons of mass destruction (which I've always associated with Nuclear weaponry or of similar scale) is also a bit odd in my books.

But then again, I don't understand the evil behind the intent to blow up a downtown full of people so I'm not gonna pretend to know the best way to deal with situations like these. Right now, all I can say that I'm simply glad I don't live there. I wouldn't have appreciated this kind of treatment from people who are supposed to be protecting me, not treating my like a suspect in my own home.

Your correct, a WMD (weapon of mass destruction) are basically Nukes, Biological and Chemical weapons. Killing 3 people (while tragic) with a few simple bombs, isn't using WMD's. It's really not a good sign of the US's morale status when that's called so easily.

Geo Da Sponge:
You should shoot them with your guns.

I hear that's a really good way to make freedom happen.

Preach it, brother! Dey can terk mah gernz wern derka derr!

Listen, gents. The guy they were chasing was suspected to have been involved in the cold-blooded murder of a police officer. For blowing up innocent people with a bomb. They'd just gotten done shooting at cops, throwing bombs at them, and was now on the loose.

As far as they knew, the guy could be carrying anything. More bombs. Poisons. Automatic weapons.

You know what the police would rather have? Wankers like you armchair lawyers sitting around on internet forums going on about 'police states', instead of having to answer for why the guy they couldn't find managed to get away and plant another bomb. Maybe this one at a pre-school. Or Time's Square like they admitted they intended.

If the dude had busted into your house and had you all huddled in the bathroom at gunpoint, I can imagine you'd welcome the sound of the police kicking down your door without asking. It's be music to your ears. I don't think you'd be scolding them for not having a warrant as they ushered you guys to first aid.

Geez, people. Perspective.

Adam Jensen:
No I would not. And the fact that this thing is totally OK now in America makes me so glad that I left that shithole. Land of opportunity my ass. More like an Orwellian nightmare. Closing down the entire city to search for one unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager. Scaremongering is also a form of terrorism if you ask me. And that's what the American government with it's mass media did to it's own people after the Boston incident. It's despicable.

"An Orwellian nightmare"
Huh, I wasn't aware we were discussing North Korea. Besides if you think scaremongering is exclusive to the U.S government, you must really not be that well traveled. I mean look at the islamaphobia that's gripping most of Europe, especially France.

As someone who actually LIVES in the Greater Boston area... we are almost universally appreciative of the way the Boston Police Department and other various first responders handled this event.

Allow me to remind you all that this was taking place not FOUR DAYS after the bomb blasts at the marathon, which left three dead and over 170 wounded, many of whom lost limbs, and was being watched LIVE ON TELEVISION across the state. They found additional explosive devices that didn't go off, one of which was directly underneath the grandstands where hundreds of spectators were sitting near the finish line. As tragic as the casualty list is, it could easily have been much, much worse.

Add to this the murder of an officer at MIT, a carjacking, throwing MORE explosives out of the car window while being chased, an extended shootout and the very real concern of a suicide vest, there was every reason to try and lock down the immediate area to make sure he didn't sneak away, grab another hostage or hurt more people. And then when you have hundreds of cops and agents roaming the streets after being on edge for four days straight, immediately following a prolonged gunfight, you think it's unreasonable for them to want to start checking private property?

They asked for permission to search houses. Not everyone said yes, and in those cases they just left; I haven't seen a single report of them barging into homes uninvited. Instead, I see there's a photo of a cop bringing GALLONS OF MILK back to one house with a toddler, because they were out and couldn't leave to get it themselves. That guy is AWESOME.

Yeah, I'm sure there are cases where cops were too aggressive or pushed harder than they should have. Perfection ain't something we got here; if you know somewhere that's selling it, please let us know. But they broke no laws, and made goddamn sure that they did everything they could to prevent more casualties. I'm proud of them, the city is proud of them, and every single person in the press and in person I've seen, read or talked to has appreciated how it was handled.

i have nothing to hide of course but when a cop raids your house, shit gets broken and thrown everywhere, and if its a false alarm, they dont pay for the damages of clean up afterwards. stupid assholes.

the bad thing about saying No means that you're suspicious now and that just makes it worse for you so there seriously isnt a Win Win situation.

if only the cops wouldnt trash your house, then i'd happily invite them to snoop into my home to look if it meant it would catch the bad guy. but then again, my house is completely innocent, i dont do anything illegal besides download music on my computer, but i live in Canada and no one gives a shit about that. im so lucky

Lucky Godzilla:

Adam Jensen:
No I would not. And the fact that this thing is totally OK now in America makes me so glad that I left that shithole. Land of opportunity my ass. More like an Orwellian nightmare. Closing down the entire city to search for one unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager. Scaremongering is also a form of terrorism if you ask me. And that's what the American government with it's mass media did to it's own people after the Boston incident. It's despicable.

"An Orwellian nightmare"

Huh, I wasn't aware we were discussing North Korea. Besides if you think scaremongering is exclusive to the U.S government, you must really not be that well traveled. I mean look at the islamaphobia that's gripping most of Europe, especially France.

Indeed, Orwellian is a little hyperbolic. "Unarmed, sleep deprived and exhausted teenager" also makes the chap sound like a victim and not a murderer. I am pretty sure they didn't know he was unarmed either, at the time. It's checks and balances, could you imagine the uproar if they didn't respond robustly and the bloke had let off another couple of bombs. Perhaps in Time Square? It was heavy handed but I think there was genuine fear on the behalf of the State.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked