Goodbye, Fourth Amendment...

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Slippery slope, (http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/17/police_to_search_for_guns_in_homes/) right off a cliff.

Hopefully, the People will not submit to these illegal searches.

[BCH]

Ummmm, they're asking to be let in. Personally, I wouldn't let them in, I'd search the little bastard's room myself and If I found an illegal firearm, I'd shoot him in the foot with it when he got home. This program doesn't change or violate any existing laws. Any resident of a dwelling can allow the police into the dwelling if the police ask to be let in. If they are not allowed in, they go get a warrant. I'm pretty sure if you have an "adult" child, they could let the cops in to search your room too.

[THE FEZ MAN]

yea i hate to say it, but refusal for consent to search is considered probable cause in some circles

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Considering the neighborhood is most likely a "lower income" one, the residents aren't the most educated, IMO. A lot of people consent without a true understanding of the consequences, which can lead to an arrest.

Just say NO! And parent your children, if your kid is involved with some shady shit, kick his/her ass.

[weakside]

This is an ok program. The parent is giving their consent and they are the ones who own the residence. It follows good search and seizure practices.

However, it makes me sad that there are some people that need the government to do the job that they should be doing themselves.

[THE FEZ MAN]

i would toss my kids room in about 20secs if i thought he was up to something, then he would have a cot, and an open rack of clothes and thats it.

[weakside]

[QUOTE=THE FEZ MAN;2233119]i would toss my kids room in about 20secs if i thought he was up to something...[QUOTE]

We need more parents like you. Too many just don't care. I see it everyday.

[BCH]

i would toss my kids room in about 20secs if i thought he was up to something, then he would have a cot, and an open rack of clothes and thats it.

You mean your kid? The one who's got half his chromosomes from you?? Oh He'll be up to something allright. :)

[d0uche_n0zzle]

I remember Clinton tried to force people living in Housing Projects to basically the same thing, allowing "sweeps" for drugs/guns or else you'll be kicked out into the street.

The courts ruled it unconstitutional. I see the same thing happening with this shitty idea. If they suspect someone of criminal activity, build a case and get a signed warrant to search.

There is never a good reason to toss peoples civil rights out under the guise of "public" safety, IMO. No matter how poor they are, or how much crime occurs in their neighborhood.

[weakside]

I remember Clinton tried to force people living in Housing Projects to basically the same thing, allowing "sweeps" for drugs/guns or else you'll be kicked out into the street.

The courts ruled it unconstitutional. I see the same thing happening with this shitty idea. If they suspect someone of criminal activity, build a case and get a signed warrant to search.

There is never a good reason to toss peoples civil rights out under the guise of "public" safety, IMO. No matter how poor they are, or how much crime occurs in their neighborhood.

I agree with you for the most part. But remember that no one is forcing these people to concede to the search. The cops are asking for their permission to enter the dwellings.

Now, you can make a pretty good argument that poor, uneducated people don't realize that they can tell the cops to go screw but that really isn't the cop’s fault.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Most people are usually emotionally overwhelmed when three police officers show up at their front door asking them to consent to a search their homes.

Also, due to the dumbing down of the educational system they fail to realize that any "illegal" items seized will be used against them or their children.

It stinks and needs to be flushed before it's even started. If the savages want to keep killing each other, let them.

[NortonsHeiny]

[QUOTE=d0uche_n0zzle;2233172]I remember Clinton tried to force people living in Housing Projects to basically the same thing, allowing "sweeps" for drugs/guns or else you'll be kicked out into the street.

The courts ruled it unconstitutional. I see the same thing happening with this shitty idea. If they suspect someone of criminal activity, build a case and get a signed warrant to search.

This sounds as if they are not randomly going to houses looking for a gun they are going to homes of those they suspect haves guns which would lead me to believe there has been some sort of invest already and have probable cause to ask. To ask you need only reasonable suspicion. The program might be compared to the turn in your gun program where you can bring your unregistered firearms to a turn in station and not be charged criminally. Many parents would prefer just turning a gun over free of charge so to speak. It might be a better idea then the kid getting caught on the street which could end up getting the kid killed.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 13--CIVIL RIGHTS

Sec. 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or
custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or
laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or
penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his
color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or
both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation
of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or
threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this
section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be
sentenced to death.

Just a refresher for some of you less informed people.

[stevethrower]

A team of about 12 officers will visit homes in four Dorchester and Roxbury neighborhoods:

Well there is a shocker....

[abudabit]

Maybe they can hand out metal detector wands to parents instead.

[Stormrider666]

See what parents need to do(and I got this idea from Bill Cosby), is treat their kids like inmates. Remember they are not paying rent for that room. So once in a while you make them stand in the hallway, while you toss their room, just like they do in prison.

[Smokezilla]

Is there anything anymore shameful, not only as a parent, but as a citizen that the cops have to come into your house and do something about YOUR kid because you've failed SO badly in raising them? I'd kill the kid and then off-myself.

[THE FEZ MAN]

You mean your kid? The one who's got half his chromosomes from you?? Oh He'll be up to something allright. :)

trust me, im always on the look out.

[Smokezilla]

trust me, im always on the look out.

I looking for the real Dad of both my kids, too. . . there's NO fucking way they came from my genes. . . Little heathens!:icon_lol:

[THE FEZ MAN]

mine is just the opposite, either my parents ignored all the shit i did or i really fooled them, my kids a fucking idiot and gets caught all the time because he's lazy

[BIV]

As a gun lover and big support or our right to bear arms, I see nothing wrong here. The police are asking for permission and getting it before they come in. It's a legal search, the weapons are illegal and they are not even busting the kids for having the guns unless it's connected to another crime. They are doing LESS then they can under the law, not even approaching the line of breaking the constitution. If these idiots are so uneducated that they don't know their basic rights, then screw 'em.

Sounds like a solid program, it should be more widespread.

[Hog's Big Ben]

As a gun lover and big support or our right to bear arms, I see nothing wrong here. The police are asking for permission and getting it before they come in. It's a legal search, the weapons are illegal and they are not even busting the kids for having the guns unless it's connected to another crime. They are doing LESS then they can under the law, not even approaching the line of breaking the constitution. If these idiots are so uneducated that they don't know their basic rights, then screw 'em.

Sounds like a solid program, it should be more widespread.

What he said.

How does this hurt? The good cops are going to follow the letter of the law when they do these searches. The bad ones will find a way to fuck with you anyway.

[Kris_LTRMa]

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 13--CIVIL RIGHTS

Sec. 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or
custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or
laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or
penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his
color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or
both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation
of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or
threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this
section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be
sentenced to death.

Just a refresher for some of you less informed people.

I think we're all pretty much informed and I for one don't see where Title 18 has anything to do with the situation at hand..the cops in this case aren't depriving anyone of their rights. They're knocking on a door and asking if they could search the house because they have reason to believe that there might be illegal guns in the house. People in the ghettos are far from ignorant when it comes to the cops. Whether there are 10 cops or 1 on their front door, they're not going to let them in unless they really want to do so. The ones who are trying to raise their children to be more than savages (there are a handful out there) will allow the cops access to the kid's room and wherever else the cops want to check.

If more parents were responsible for their kids, the cops wouldn't need to do this.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Even low-life criminals have rights. Granted, the parents should be beating some respect for others into their children, but we know it's a cultural thing to pack heat and shoot at anyone who "disrespects" you.

It's an awful abuse of Civil Rights, IMO. How soon till they say you'll need permission to have a blog or some other silly infringement on your G-d given libertys?

[Xyn]

It's an awful abuse of Civil Rights, IMO. How soon till they say you'll need permission to have a blog or some other silly infringement on your G-d given libertys?

Yes, becuase "G-d" cleary commanded us never to allow our police officers to request voluntary searches of your home.

How is this a violation of civil liberties? :huh:

This country is fucking doomed. On all fronts. Everyone's gone ape shit.

The cops are completely in the right here. If you care at all about your rights, go to a library. Read a book. Go online. It's not hard to find this shit out. If your so ignorant that you think you have to do everything a police officer tells you to, there's no helping you. You've violated your own liberties.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

How does giving up ones' rights make you safe?

You have a right to say no to the request, but will that stop them from targeting you anyway?

It's a slippery slope, that no good can come from it. Sure, they're going after yutes with "illegal" weapons, but when does it stop? It doesn't, IMO. It can and will only get worse unless we put a stop to it now.

[Xyn]

Please tell me you are joking.

When does it stop? When it endangers our rights. It does nothing of the kind right now. There is no abuse that could be made of this policy that couldn't be equally abused during a traffic stop.

It is retarded to give up any of your rights no matter how safe you think it will make you feel, however this thing does nothing of the kind. What is the problem?

It isn't a slipper slope and even if it were, that wouldn't be reason in and of itself not to do it. What specifically about this issue is in violation of our rights? That, or what will it specifically and inevitably lead to that will infringe on our rights?

It's VOLUNTARY!

[d0uche_n0zzle]

It's VOLUNTARY!

Sure it is. :rolleyes:

If the police have probable cause, let them get a signed search WARRANT. This way no one can claim they were forced into the search.

Please read the Declaration of Independence, then the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, sporto. :action-sm

[Kris_LTRMa]

From the article itself ... they're basically targeting at risk youth...it's a voluntary program ... there is no violation of civil rights ... end of story.

..is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun [violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.
...The officers will travel in groups of three, dress in plainclothes to avoid attracting negative attention, and ask the teenager's parent or legal guardian for permission to search. If the parents say no, police said, the officers will leave.
I understand people's concerns about this, but the mothers of the young men who have been arrested with firearms that I've talked to are in a quandary," he said. "They don't know what to do when faced with the problem of dealing with a teenage boy in possession of a firearm. We're giving them an option in that case."
Police said they will not search the homes of teenagers they suspect have been involved in shootings or homicides and who investigators are trying to prosecute.
If drugs are found, it will be up to the officers' discretion whether to make an arrest, but police said modest amounts of drugs like marijuana will simply be confiscated and will not lead to charges.
The program will target young people whose parents are either afraid to confront them or unaware that they might be stashing weapons, said Davis, who has been trying to gain support from community leaders for the past several weeks.

...."What I like about this program is it really is a tool to empower the parent," he said. "It's a way in which they can get a hold of the household and say, 'I don't want that in my house.' "

[d0uche_n0zzle]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. ;)

[TreeFortRichard]

ok, let's go with your premise that the police are going to use denied consent as probable cause...do you then believe that the police will cordon of all access to the premisis while they try and rush a warrant to search for a possible gun? seems like a waste of time. What does work is the parents don't have to be responsible for their kids...they can keep on watching soaps and cashing govt. checks while the police search their kids rooms

[Xyn]

Please read the Declaration of Independence, then the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, sporto. :action-sm

Already have, several times. But since you're such an expert, maybe you could point out the part that this violates? Becuase I'm dead certain you won't find it.

But let's just agree to disagree :icon_roll

Probable cuase could probably do with some tightening up in general. The search request itself however is not a violation.

"You're in violation!"

[LiddyRules]

They could always say it's for terrorism, get us all cheering for it, and then use it to prevent regular crime like The Patriot Act.

[BCH]

They could always say it's for terrorism, get us all cheering for it, and then use it to prevent regular crime like The Patriot Act.

You against preventing regular crime? :action-sm

[THE FEZ MAN]

You against preventing regular crime? :action-sm

depends on who is breaking the law, its easyer to break the laws if you make them up as you go along

[Myhairygrundle]

ok, let's go with your premise that the police are going to use denied consent as probable cause

Denial of consent is not probable cause. You can't invoke your right to refuse a search and have it be used against you in a warrant. What do the cops put on the affidavit?

"The suspect refused to let us search, we have no evidence or reasonable suspicion other than their refusal, so please issue a warrant?" No judge will do that.

It's the same as invoking your 5th amendment right of self-incrimination and having it used against you.

These folks in the ghetto know their rights better than the average person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

[BCH]

Denial of consent is not probable cause. You can't invoke your right to refuse a search and have it be used against you in a warrant. What do the cops put on the affidavit?

"The suspect refused to let us search, we have no evidence or reasonable suspicion other than their refusal, so please issue a warrant?" No judge will do that.

It's the same as invoking your 5th amendment right of self-incrimination and having it used against you.

These folks in the ghetto know their rights better than the average person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

I've never understood why neither the fourth or fifth amendment apply to giving breath or blood if you're suspected of driving drunk.

[Myhairygrundle]

I've never understood why neither the fourth or fifth amendment apply to giving breath or blood if you're suspected of driving drunk.

Here, they can't force you to give a sample unless you kill or seriously injure someone.

To the best of my knowledge, you don't have to give a breath sample, but you can get your DL suspended for refusing. But I know every state has different DWI laws. That's a whole different game though....

http://www.texasdwilaw.com/dwi_cg2.html#16

[d0uche_n0zzle]

I've never understood why neither the fourth or fifth amendment apply to giving breath or blood if you're suspected of driving drunk.

Most times when reading about a DWI involving a Judge, Cop, Lawyer, etc... they'll refuse to take any tests. Because ratting yourself out is just plain silly.

[UCFGavin]

I've never understood why neither the fourth or fifth amendment apply to giving breath or blood if you're suspected of driving drunk.

one of the best ways is to consent to their demands. for example, if they want you to take a sobriety test, then tell them you'll take it in a level, well lit room so there is no confusion. if they want you to take a breathalyser, tell them you will submit to the breathalyser if they allow you to take a blood test because you believe breathalysers are not 100% accurate. you don't always have to just say "no"