Welcome to PatsFans.com

Do you agree with Supreme Court Ruling?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by mikey, Jun 16, 2006.

  1. mikey

    mikey In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/16/opinion/16fri1.html?ex=1150603200&en=f3f9957a121cdca2&ei=5087

    .
     
  2. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,329
    Likes Received:
    497
    Ratings:
    +1,142 / 13 / -27

    #87 Jersey

    Last edited: Jun 16, 2006
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,958
    Likes Received:
    196
    Ratings:
    +424 / 12 / -26

    Not seeing the complete decision, only parts of it, I have some concerns about my privacy rights.. there have been times when they have had the wrong address and on the other hand if they knock the people on the other side have time to arm themselves. This is the beginning of a swing towards the right, where it will lead no one knows.

    I think police need to look how this will be operationalized and the safety of their officers, just barging into a home may lead to some very unsatisfactory outcomes for both sides.
     
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    "Knock, knock"
    "Who is it"
    "It's the Police, may we come in"
    "Just a minute, shhhh, Clyde take the guns and go out the back window, Sapphire you go fulsh the Coke down the toilet" "JUST A MINUTE OFFICER"

    Then,
    "Oh hi Officer, come in, would you like a cup of Tea"
    :bricks:
     
  5. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,180
    Likes Received:
    199
    Ratings:
    +290 / 11 / -10

    I read somewhere that this could easily lead to police deaths in those states that adapted the Castle Rule (not sure if it's rule or something else), a rule championed by the NRA that allows homeowners to shoot first and ask questions later if they feel an intruder is putting them in danger. I could easily see in those states like Florida, police barging into a home, and being shot to death before they had a chance to identify themselves. It's interesting how the NRA with its gun advocacy actually puts police in greater danger, but a large portion of the right wing doesn't seem to care much about that.
     
  6. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    No one gets in my house and leaves on their own power uninvited or without a warrant. I'll go to prison first.
    The NRA's advocacy for the right to own a gun and use it for personal protection is not the cause of more deaths of police. The police (not individual cops), as the government muscle agency, will go as far as the people let them and then some. They always push the envelope and see what happens later. The people have a right and civic obligation to protect themselves from the police when they go too far.
     
  7. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I haven't read the opinion..but I think what they ruled on had more to do with the evidence collected than the fact that the police broke the so-called rule.
    If you read about this case, it had to do with a gun and drugs that were seized AFTER the police broke in unannounced. Usually, evidence seized in a
    raid like that that violated the law would be excluded. THAT was what the case was about...and the courts ruled that it WOULD be included. Before, when police did that, any evidence would be ruled out. THAT was what this was all about NOT no knock police raids.
     
  8. PatsFanInMaine

    PatsFanInMaine Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I agree with the courts ruling. The police announced their presence. Legal precedent has already affirmed(most recently by no less than the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last year) that announcing a police presence alone satisfies the so called "knock and announce" rule. This ruling by the Supreme Court simply reinforces lower courts rulings on such matters. The NY Times should do a little research before declaring that such rulings are setting new precedents.
     
  9. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    Pure hard core Liberalism, take the homeowners right to defend his property and life away from him then make the cops hide under the porch, in other words "give in to the bad guy".

    The Maggot has his gun when he comes through the homeowners window free to shoot the whole family dead while the poor good guy throws dishes at him (no gun to fight back).

    The Cop has to wait outside while the Bad Guy makes his plans to kill him (nuts)

    Patters, breaking and entering during the nightime in Maine is almost non existent, if there are 5 people living in a house and a bad guy tries to come through their window at 2 AM the bad guy will have 5 Guns shooting at him, and all the bad guys in Maine know it.

    Portland Maine is becoming VERY DIVERSE AND LIBERAL, I stayed at a Motel in Portland recently, there were signs in the lobby and in the rooms, warning the Guests not to enter the Motel Parking Lot after 11 PM without notifying security, you pay $200 a night and you can't go out to your car after 11 alone. Instead of hiring tough young security people with night sticks they turn the parking lot over to the scum (they don't want offend the bad guy with a show of force) after 11 PM the parking lot belongs to the human waste.

    Dukakis thought like this, when asked "what would you do if a person broke into your home and attempted to rape your wife" THE DUKE said "he would jump out the kitchen window and look for a cop" lol, imagine what his wife would look like when he finally sneaked back home.

    WHY DO LIBERALS STAND WITH THE CRIMINAL--TAKE THE GOOD GUYS GUN AWAY BUT LET THE CRIMINAL HAVE HIS. Mind boggling, why do liberals lack so in plain old common sense?
     
  10. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    The ruling wasn't on any no-knock violatons it was on the resulting evidence
    from a police force that has entered unannounced. A BIG difference!! Yes, this ruling does basically tell police forces it is OK, as they don't have the big deterrent to overstepping bounds..as they had before..namely evidence seized being thrown out. THAT is what this case is about...whether that evidence can be used or not. The courts said it could be now.
    As was stated in the NY Times article, "There is no dispute that the search violated the knock-and-announce rule. The question in the case was what to do about it."...The knock and annouce rule is NOT in question directly
    from this..it neither rules it OK or not. The ruling was on the evidence produced from that.
    The courts said one may use other means to sue the police or take civil action against them. As CNN online reported, "There was little unanimity over how to ensure law enforcement officers do not routinely violate the constitutional protection against "unreasonable searches-and-seizures.""...
    If anything this just shows that there are other cases and other rulings that will further change the law and the country.
     
  11. mikey

    mikey In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland,_Maine


    I have never been to Portland, Maine, but according to Wikipedia, Portland Maine is 92% white and just 2.6% black.

    I am not sure I would call 92% white "very diverse".

    If I cannot trust your simple assertion that Portland is diverse, how can I trust that your story about the Motel parking lot is true??


    .
     
  12. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    The ruling was on the evidence produced from a police violation of the "search and announce" rule...and the ruling said that the evidence could be used. In past cases it was tossed out. The ruling was NOT on the "search and announce rule" directly.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2006
  13. pats-blue

    pats-blue Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Yeah...wow where do I start with that one?

    For those complaining about the ruling, read it first. It WAS regarding evidence as another poster stated. The very basics of the case were that they ANNOUNCED thier presence as police officers with a warrant, fully identifiable with proper markings as police officers they just did not "knock". The court found they waited a proper amount of time after thier announcement before entering. This whole case was just a lawyer trick to try and get GUILTY people off.

    For those that "read somewhere" this could make it more dangerous for police, save your "concern". I won't go into tactics since it is obvious there are some here that see nothing wrong with shooting police if they enter thier home because "they will walk" or thier "civic obligation" to shoot them since they have gone too far.(but believe me nothing is farther from the truth) The ignorance astounds me. Get away from your stories that you read in the media that are told by defendants lawyers or families looking for a payday...that besides aren't even first hand accounts or flat out lies. Unless one of you has actually experienced a Warrant Service (that you actually were not gulity of any crime) or performed them you are talking out your A**.

    I have conducted several hundred of them. (actually I checked..well over a thousand) Both with and without warrants, everything from normal barricades, high risk and hostage rescues. You have no idea the risks police take with thier lives to keep you safe.

    Oh and as far as thinking anyone "walks" or is willing to "go to prison" I can gaurantee if you "tag them with my double-Barrel 12-gauge" you won't be "walking" anywhere because if the cop you shot doesn't take care of you #2 in the stack will take care of the threat with any SWAT team that is properly trained. Nice how cavelier you are about killing cops if you think the "law" is on your side.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2006
  14. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    Mikey,
    Read again, slowly, I said "Portland is BECOMING very diverse and liberal. I know what's in the back of your little head Mikey, this isn't a Racist statement in fact most of the crime in Portalnd IS committed by "Whitey".
    It is becoming very Liberal in the sense that the Police are not being able handle things on the street as they used to, they have to be very careful as the little Liberal watch dogs are just waiting to nal them with Brutality charges, the bad guys know this and the cops know this.

    In short, the bad guys are winning, the cops hands are being tied tighter and tighter each year.

    The sign is there, I saw them in Florida also, the parking lot belongs to the bad after dark. We can't have the Police offending them, that would be cruel and unfair :bricks:
     
  15. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    PBlue...Just wondered out of the over a thousand warrants how many resulted in a dangerous situation..some kind of attack, possible attack or otherwise serious situation? How many was there a big problem with evidence being destroyed? How many were drug related or weapons related??
    I understand all situations could possibly be serious..but just wondered what the percentage was (roughly) in your case.
     
  16. pats-blue

    pats-blue Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0


    In our area if there is information that guns are present on warrants that is when we (SWAT) will always do the warrant...so if I understand your question correctly very close to 100% on warrants. Barricades because our hope is to actually AVOID confrontation and the equipment and training we have available we will respond to some barricades that we don't have positive information that there is a deadly weapon involved or accessible.

    We have hit houses that have cages built inside all of the entrances...concrete baricades, ect. We have done one with fully automatic machine guns fully loaded at every entrance to the home (AK-47's...with children in the home no less)

    Again not going to go into tactics, but we never respond to a call or warrant to "get evidence". Our tactics are not sacrificed ever to retrieve evidence. We will alter our tactics under certain circumstances to our DISADVANTAGE (again not going to say when) but I will let you know it is to take additional risk on ourselves to maximize the positive outcome of none of the occupants getting hurt.

    We have been shot at during these callouts numerous times (LAPD gets shot at weekly during callouts) attempted to be run over by vehicles and even one explosive device....oh yeah many, many dogs (pit bulls, rotty's) purposely "sic'd" on us.

    We do use some tactics to minimize the possibility that evidence is destroyed...but honestly the SWAT team could care less, nothing changes once inside....I will say there is a big drop in water pressure with any neighborhood we drive into..:D

    An edit in case I didn't answer your question. The SWAT moto is "Speed, Suprise and violence of action" That does not mean guns blazing it means to overwelm the sensory perception of the suspects to prevent THEM from taking violent action through our tactics. We have rules that we follow the bad guys DON'T...and yes many of the court rulings make police work MORE dangerous. To a cop it has nothing to do with "getting the evidence" it has to do with actually being able to go home at the end of the day. Doesn't anyone wonder why nobody wants to be a cop anymore? The pay has always sucked for the job. It is something else and I will give you a clue, it has to do with the media and opinions like some in this thread.

    I'm medically retiring in a month due to being hit head on twice on the same day one year apart. Never thought I would say this but I am glad I am getting out.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2006
  17. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    If a Cop was lying unconscious on the street and six Carjackers were kicking him in the head and if there should happen to be any Liberals watching this they would be screaming at the Cop to leave the poor bad guys alone.

    "thats right Harry" :rocker:
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2006
  18. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    PBlue...Thanks!! I didn't understand exactly what you were saying until your long post..being part of SWAT and going after the low life dangerous criminals is obviously far from simple seach warrants. Thank you for your thoughts on that and for that post. Contrary to what many think, liberals and progressives very much appreciate what SWAT teams do and how they take care of these low lives. There may be many debates on
    big picture issues, but once we are talking about criminals with weapons hold up in a building, I don't think many can be at all critical of those who round up the bad guys. Thank you for your words and good luck with your future
    endeavers. Maybe at some point you could shed light on yuor thoughts about the media wtc.
     
  19. pats-blue

    pats-blue Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0


    Many here have the same view of the media, but some for some reason forget that same opinion when they read something about the police. I don't have a lot of time right now but let's just say that With FIRST HAND knowledge of things that have happened on the street and what EXACTLY was said in court much of what you read in the media is LIES. They purposely omit responses to get the reaction they want. What sells papers and gets clicks on the link? BAD COPS. Cops being heros don't sell papers.
    Bad cops? Yep there are bad cops, but I have seen the media flat out use OPINIONSs of people that weren't even there as FACTS. Read the paper some time on a use of force by the police or where someone gets hurt. Multiple paragraphs will be used to talk to thier friends, family who get to make unsubstantiated and outragous claims. We had a family here that made calims I can't go into (on going case) but sufice to say the claims were VERY serious...every media outlet gave them hours of time over a period of months. When the department was allowed by the county attorney to release some information that PROVED that the claims the family made were not only not true they were so ridiculous they should have been charged with a crime (I mean very bad...officers lives were threatened as a result of thier LIES) When the FACTS came out ONE, thats right ONE media outlet tried to do a story on the lies. It saw 4 minutes on the late news...why, It doesn't sell. The claims were so ridiculous any even remotely rational person would realize it is a lie but they don't want to so the media obliges them and rarely corrects themselves even if PROVEN wrong. Yeah Borges hasn't corrected himself and continues to slander BB, does it effect BB? No, I can tell you that the media has made a police officers job harder and more dangerous in many ways.

    We do approx. 200 + callouts a year. One of those callouts last year made the papers in any form. We shut down enitre neighborhoods for hours due to the danger to citizens posed by some of these people. Numerous officers put themselves at personal risk to evacuate residents or rescue injured persons...not one peep from the media. When we have they cerimonies for the higher department awards given to officers for heroism and life saving we have dozens of officers that receive the life saving awards, some of the them are simple CPR but some are just crazy. You will rarely hear about these cases in the media because they are POSITIVE stories. Most officers are actually embarassed by getting the medals. I for one rarely wore mine. I received multiple life saving medals, a couple of the situations were not your standard CPR...NONE reported in the papers. My point being that cops do things everyday that would leave many here pissing thier pants that you will never read about...and IMO they don't want to.

    Now I'm late, I obviously have a lot more...lawyers also are a bane that I failed to mention. We had a motor officer killed by a drunk driver here very recently. He worked for another agency but I knew him because he was my neighbor for 6 years and he attended a SWAT school I was teaching at...well the DAY BEFORE they laid him to rest several lawyers came forward and filed a motion to dismiss DUI's against thier clients since the "officer and lead witness is dead"! I know the papers were aware of it, did they report this outrage? NO.

    Also look at the headlines and how people responded here on this court case. It was obvious that they knew NOTHING about the case but it didn't stop them from forming FULL OPINIONS on it and went in all kinds of directions that had nothing to do with the case but they imagined it did.

    Besides tactics we study all these court cases that come up including pertient lawsuits. We go over the entire case mistakes the police made (with 20/20 hindsight) and learn from it and adjust or tweak anything we have to CONSTANTLY. Again some of the "terrible tragidies" where police were so wrong is not the case but what you get to hear and sells papers is a sound bite or one side from the plaintifs attorney and do you think that is going to be fact? Believe me some of the cases you read on the internet and read like a horror story or "cops on a rampage" are far from the FACTS. Even if a city pays out many times it is only to save money. A large civil suit case involving a fatality can cost millions to defend and then you are at the same whim of the people that set OJ free...I don't like those odds.

    Whatever, it was suppossed to be short but believe me even this is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Oh by the way one of the most cheesy lines in the movie SWAT was "SWAT isn't a life taking organization it is a life saving one" is 100% true. Fatal shootings as percentage are much less likely to occur during a SWAT callout than with just patrol officers (I would add we have much more information most of the time then they do and it is much more likely to be correct, better equipment and a lot more of it at our disposal)

    My last thought was where everyone went on this thread after they spouted off with thier opinions?
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2006

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>