To All,
I have read the entire thread and noticed two (2) majority themes.
Theme #1 - Law Enforcement violated rights by forcing themselves into homes and/or telling people what they could and could not do.
Theme #2 - Law Enforcement asked for cooperation and may have appeared to violate rights, but you cannot prove it.
The concern I have is not as much whether it was done, although if it was I hope appropriate legal remedies are sought, but rather in the growth of the mindset that such activity is OK and acceptable by the public.
There are millions of Americans on the coast who now see this as normal and reasonable. So, evil nasty badguy/girl at large, ergo lockdowns, curfews and home searches are necessary to capture said bad people. Most importantly both sides are now becoming desensitized to the concept that this is just what needs to happen in order to preserve the peace.
Sadly this is untrue. For thousands of homicide cases, shootings and acts of violence peace has been maintained and order kept without significant violations of civil liberties. Of course many violations have occurred but lawsuits and court cases have helped to keep some LE from flirting with disaster.
Of course it would be easier for LE to catch bad people without having to worry about rights, liberties and potential lawsuits. Yet we value these rights not because we fear bad LE but because we place liberty as a higher value than public safety. At least some of us do.
I am certain that every police officer whether local, state or federal had the very best intentions and wouldn't dream of even considering what they were doing as oppressive, and in most cases if not all it wasn't.
What concerns me is what happens the next time one of these fine folks goes to a door to ask for consent and is told, "Go away. You aren't coming in without a warrant." Will they accept this as a natural limit on their authority or will they become defensive and then DEMAND entrance? Will the public see the lone defender of his 5th amendment as unreasonable or as someone protecting more than his/her safety - his/her liberty?
Had I been in the area I may well have allowed the search in order to not hinder the speed of the search, being full aware of the choice I was making. But I would have been aware of the choice.
The sad reality is that most people when asked by LE to come in and look around do not even know they are making a choice between their rights and their safety. They will simply comply without thought or understanding the unintended consequences for the next time LE believe they need to search.
This is not the first time such activity has been discussed on these boards. See here:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...mass_detention_in_search_for_bank_robber.html
In this case LE handcuffed and detained more than 40 people to catch the badguy. This added to the mindset that the ends justify the means.
Today LE is being applauded for their excellent work in capturing a wanted fugitive - and they should be! I want bad guys caught. I want bad guys off the streets. I want bad guys in jail for the appropriate time for their transgressions. BUT I WANT IT DONE SECOND TO PROTECTING RIGHTS!
If they did all of those things in this case I have nothing to complain about. However, I think that even if they did remain on a leash, in the publics mind that leash has been stretched.
History has proven that investigators without moral, ethical, or legal limits are capable of producing tremendously effective results. We need only look at the Gestapo, KGB, Mukhabarat, NKVD, Securitate and others to know that maintaining order is easy without limits.
For me the priorities are simple:
Priority #1 - Liberty & preservation of rights
ALL OTHER PRIORITIES ARE RESCINDED.
Regards,
Doug
PS - Yes, I know I am in the minority...
I have read the entire thread and noticed two (2) majority themes.
Theme #1 - Law Enforcement violated rights by forcing themselves into homes and/or telling people what they could and could not do.
Theme #2 - Law Enforcement asked for cooperation and may have appeared to violate rights, but you cannot prove it.
The concern I have is not as much whether it was done, although if it was I hope appropriate legal remedies are sought, but rather in the growth of the mindset that such activity is OK and acceptable by the public.
There are millions of Americans on the coast who now see this as normal and reasonable. So, evil nasty badguy/girl at large, ergo lockdowns, curfews and home searches are necessary to capture said bad people. Most importantly both sides are now becoming desensitized to the concept that this is just what needs to happen in order to preserve the peace.
Sadly this is untrue. For thousands of homicide cases, shootings and acts of violence peace has been maintained and order kept without significant violations of civil liberties. Of course many violations have occurred but lawsuits and court cases have helped to keep some LE from flirting with disaster.
Of course it would be easier for LE to catch bad people without having to worry about rights, liberties and potential lawsuits. Yet we value these rights not because we fear bad LE but because we place liberty as a higher value than public safety. At least some of us do.
I am certain that every police officer whether local, state or federal had the very best intentions and wouldn't dream of even considering what they were doing as oppressive, and in most cases if not all it wasn't.
What concerns me is what happens the next time one of these fine folks goes to a door to ask for consent and is told, "Go away. You aren't coming in without a warrant." Will they accept this as a natural limit on their authority or will they become defensive and then DEMAND entrance? Will the public see the lone defender of his 5th amendment as unreasonable or as someone protecting more than his/her safety - his/her liberty?
Had I been in the area I may well have allowed the search in order to not hinder the speed of the search, being full aware of the choice I was making. But I would have been aware of the choice.
The sad reality is that most people when asked by LE to come in and look around do not even know they are making a choice between their rights and their safety. They will simply comply without thought or understanding the unintended consequences for the next time LE believe they need to search.
This is not the first time such activity has been discussed on these boards. See here:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...mass_detention_in_search_for_bank_robber.html
In this case LE handcuffed and detained more than 40 people to catch the badguy. This added to the mindset that the ends justify the means.
Today LE is being applauded for their excellent work in capturing a wanted fugitive - and they should be! I want bad guys caught. I want bad guys off the streets. I want bad guys in jail for the appropriate time for their transgressions. BUT I WANT IT DONE SECOND TO PROTECTING RIGHTS!
If they did all of those things in this case I have nothing to complain about. However, I think that even if they did remain on a leash, in the publics mind that leash has been stretched.
History has proven that investigators without moral, ethical, or legal limits are capable of producing tremendously effective results. We need only look at the Gestapo, KGB, Mukhabarat, NKVD, Securitate and others to know that maintaining order is easy without limits.
For me the priorities are simple:
Priority #1 - Liberty & preservation of rights
ALL OTHER PRIORITIES ARE RESCINDED.
Regards,
Doug
PS - Yes, I know I am in the minority...
) to refuse LE entry to search would bring them back in force with legal documentation to search not just for the Bad guy/girl but for whatever else they see fit. Guns in the house...you are a nut job....a bit of porn on the computer, well, take that where ever you want. If they want to it is their game and it can escalate to levels you are not ready to play at. I have seen this happen when it is not a total area lock down. LE has all the cards in the deck and if needed they will play them. 
Didn't read the whole thread, did it actually take all the way to post #261 to bring up the Nazis? I would've thought it would happen WAY before that. 
