Supreme Court gives police a new entryway into homes

reply to post by Wolf321


Good idea. The door gets kicked down? It blows up with shrapnel in the face of those who kicked it down. After a few ATF goons get blown away by this, they may calm their raids.

Or you know, they'll just do like at Waco and burn the houses down.

Originally posted by basilray
ok please define what destroying drug evidence sounds like so we can understand exactly what cops will be listening for.......

Like the sound of paper being burned or shredded. You know, like the constitution being destroyed.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Wolf321

 

Good idea. The door gets kicked down? It blows up with shrapnel in the face of those who kicked it down. After a few ATF goons get blown away by this, they may calm their raids.

Or you know, they'll just do like at Waco and burn the houses down.

The ATF got their asses handed to them at Waco.
It was the National Guard and (allegedly) Delta Force that did the burning...

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by basilray
ok please define what destroying drug evidence sounds like so we can understand exactly what cops will be listening for.......

If you flush the toilet.

edit on 16-5-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)

Oh great. If they come knocking at the door and catch me on the pot I am not allowed to flush now?!? Or if I do I'm taking a chance and may be arrested for destroying evidence. And if I've been eating that cheese I could end up doing some hard time. www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is past insane. Glad I moved to Mexico, the US has gone completely nutz!

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


Thats the beauty of this law. Virtually ANY noise can be construed as you "destroying evidence." So essentially, the 4th Amendment is gone.

And Wolf? That was awesome.

The ruling was not a final loss for King. The justices said the Kentucky state court should consider again whether the police faced an emergency situation in this case.

There's the out for the citizen. If it's not an emergency situation, evidence gained under such circumstance(s) can be disallowed.

So much "to-do" about nothing. Evidence is often dismissed as inadmissable based on such grounds.

reply to post by EssenceOfSilence


This truely is a joke, I am really worried we wont get back all these rights. I feel very helpless, I mean what can we do? All someone can do is stand up and say no or fight the cops? Then what a bullet in the head meanwhile your wife and kids loose thier daddy and husband so that the media can spin it as your a nutcase dangerous physco path because you visit sites such as ATS and listen to Alex Jones.

I am sorry but I feel as if it is too late, too much of America believes this type of stuff is a non-issue. To busy watching T.V. never studied history and will be shocked when the a police state new age national socialist agenda is so clear it tazes you in the face.

I am sick of doing nothing. I am telling everyone I know to vote out ALL justices, stay away from the establishment republicans and democrats its all a hoax anyway. I cant see or hear all that well so I hope big brother is reading this post because I always assume someone unlawfully breaking into my house wants a Mother-@#$% Smith and Wesson MP-15 Slide Fire Full auto ramming brass down thier Ass. I am preparing for the storm that is already on the horizon.

Im mad as hell and Im not gonna take it anymore

The "At least America isn't as bad as" crowd should be here soon to restore our faith in our country.

I feel like I'm in a nightmare that I can't wake up from and it keeps getting worse.

reply to post by Wolf321


Yea founding fathers would be appualed and ashamed at the mockery this once great nation has turned into. The assualt on liberty, personal freedoms and justice for all has been long gone for a while. The question now is what to do about it?

reply to post by basilray


Toilets flushing and water suddenly being turned on are some sounds. The sound of furniture being over turned or doors being slammed are other sounds.

I am kind of torn about this decision. On one hand I don't want some gang banger that is slinging to kids getting away with it. On the other hand anyone with enough weight to be a major dealer isn't going to be able to flush it in a hurry.

This is a tough one and I can't really call where I fall. I think we should start really looking at legalization and regulation to end this whole mess. Prohibition is a crime multiplier. It leads not only to petty criminals but corruption, murder, white collar crime, and whole economic systems enforced by violence.

If i build a house i am going to build it with armored doors with multiple bolts like a back vault.

I might even face the door with a good bouncy rubber so they when the officer hit it with the door buster it will bounce.
www.kickproofdoor.com...
www.armorconcepts.com...

Just setup speakers in every room with sounds of bongs being used, plastic bags being ripped and rustled, toilets flushing, panicked movements... and sit out the back and let them waste their time.

Hopefully the negative reward of having no satisfactory bust/raid/shooting would cause them to be less eager, as opposed to the positive reward of having an arrest should you become violent, shoot your pet and blame you in the confusion, damage your property. They love that.




I wonder what would happen if, in light of all of the blatant garbage being allowed now in the name of justice, enough people decided to just migrate elsewhere - if enough did, I wonder if there would be any official action to prevent it.

It just seems far to damn scary with the boxes people in society live in, getting smaller and more confined...

Originally posted by MikeNice81

I am kind of torn about this decision. On one hand I don't want some gang banger that is slinging to kids getting away with it. On the other hand anyone with enough weight to be a major dealer isn't going to be able to flush it in a hurry.

I dont think the "war on drugs" should be going on at all. And therefore I dont support the right to enter without a warrant because you hear noises that indicate someone is "destroying evidence" to catch some druggie. The only way to prevent someone for "slinging to kids" is for parents to really work on their kids. And I know people will say "oh but we do! Its all the druggies!" No. It isnt.

A lot of the kids who end up using have parents who use. Sure, their parents may not use crack, but they may drink, pop prescription meds, etc. A lot of parents are teaching their kids how to be substance abusers with their own bad behavior and then acting helpless and innocent when the kid starts using something off the street because they cant use what Mommy and Daddy do.

And granted, even really good parents might end up having a child who uses, through absolutely NO fault of their own. But thats life. The war on drugs isnt working, its not designed to work, its an industry, and I dont like the idea of having the Constitution undermined to allow people to perpetrate what is in essence a racket. I understand breaking down a door without a warrant if you hear someone screaming, or if you are chasing a fleeing suspect. But because you think you hear evidence being destroyed is not okay by me.

The people who will be most impacted by this law are the poor. The people least likely to be able to get the kind of lawyers who will be able to go after the cops who abuse it.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I starred your post. I agree with everything you said about the war on drugs. It isn't effective and never can be effective. Prohibition of alcohol taught us that. Also a lot of what is happening is due to bad parenting. Not in all case, but in many cases, the start of the behavior can be traced to nurture over nature.

However, in this case they were chasing a fleeing subject. They entered the wrong apartment because they thought a known criminal was damaging evidence. I need to see the actual decision to really call an opinion. I have a hard time believing that the court did not rule a little more tightly than is presented.

If the opinion says, hey knock on any door and see what happens, I agree with you. If it says, if while in the act of persuing a fleeing criminal the cops happen to end up in the wrong place and find evidence of another crime it is admissable. I am more inclined to agree with the SCOTUS.

Pursuit of a fleeing criminal would be easy to varify. Cops are not going to persue a criminal without calling it in. They are going to be looking for back up. There will be an audio record of what happened on file at the emergency communications center. If it is verifiable that they were chasing another subject and made an honest mistake that is a whole different ball game.

There is just too much nuance for me to make a decision untill I read what was actually written.

reply to post by MikeNice81


They already HAD the right to enter without warrant if someone was fleeing, or if someones life was at stake, (medical emergency). This goes beyond that. Someone else already posted a link to the case, and there is no one part of the argument that I could clip and give you an "ah ha" moment. Its a pretty BS distinction they are drawing, because it is, they take a lot of time trying to make that distinction sound like it really matter. As I read it, it doesnt. I agree with the dissenting opinion, which IS possible to present in a short snippet.

The whole thing is worth a read, for those who want to know whats up. There is an "out" in it, in a sense.

www.supremecourt.gov...

JUSTICE GINSBURG, dissenting.
The Court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement indrug cases. In lieu of presenting their evidence to a neu-tral magistrate, police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, nevermind that they had ample timeto obtain a warrant. I dissent from the Court’s reduction of the Fourth Amendment’s force.

The "out" they are leaving people against warrant-less search because the cops hear noises is, (same case linked to above)

And even if an occupant chooses to open the door and speak with the officers, the occupant need not allow the officers to enter the premises and may refuse to answer any questions at any time.
Occupants who choose not to stand on their constitutional rights but instead elect to attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame for the warrantless exigent-circumstances search that may ensue.

Although the sound of you getting up and walking across the room to answer the door and exercise your constitutional rights may be construed as a noise suggesting that you are destroying evidence, so even this out, as I see it, is BS.

The scariest part of this supreme court ruling is that it was on the very last back section of my cities newspaper in a small article almost as an afterthought. What is also just as scary is that there are only two pages of responses to this on ATS. I cannot discuss this at work, I cannot discuss this with my family. I checked every section on CNN and found nothing, absolutely nothing about this ruling in any article on the CNN website this morning. I even checked FOX news to see if they had anything, and sadly they did not.

It might be time.....

Kentucky, you have broken the heart of this southern redneck.
What a shame.

I've seen many potential "slippery slopes" created before, but this one is damn near vertical!

2nd

I officially hate America now.

America hates freedom, so I hate America.

I am pro-freedom.

I guess that makes me Un-American.

This 'new America' can burn in hell.

This crap has got me so angry......
If I don't cool off soon I'll be in jail for terrorism.

Basically.

What I don't understand is why all of you have guns for?
To look cool? Is that why you all pack guns?

To protect yourself from Osama Bin Laden?

I know as a fact none of you ever planned on using those weapons to protect your freedoms and fight off the super-fast growing totalitarian regime.