Gut Rumbles
 

June 21, 2006

this bothers me

I don't agree with this supreme court ruling. I have NEVER believed that cops dressed up like paramilitary ninjas should be kicking down doors (or using one of those battering rams they have now) to invade a citizen's private property.

That's just un-American to me.

I also believe that this shit is a result (inevitable, once government starts "protecting" us from ourselves) of the War on (some) Drugs. Launch a surprise attack and the alleged perp doesn't have time to flush his illegal drugs down the commode while the cops stand outside. I call bullshit.

Are you familiar with the name corey maye? If not, you should be.

He shot and killed a cop who was part of a no-knock raid (yes--- a DRUG raid) on the WRONG HOUSE, and now he sits on Death Row for doing exactly what I would have done in the same situation.

People, I don't own any guns. I don't keep my non-existent guns loaded, either. I don't have them placed in easy-to-reach locations all around my home, either. But if I DID... it wouldn't be a good idea to knock down MY front door and come barging into MY Crackerbox unannounced.

That's why I don't own any guns. I might get all nervous and disturbed by such an invasion and start shooting at whoever rammed his way into MY home and interrupted my peaceful viewing of Home Box Office at night. I might not miss my target, either.

And I might end up on Death Row for shooting a cop, too.

I call BULLSHIT!!! A man's home is his castle, (even if it has a filthy kitchen), and he has the right to defend it against ANY invader, with whatever force he can muster. What would YOU do if somebody knocked down YOUR front door and came charging into YOUR home at night?

I can think of only ONE reason for cops to come barging into a home the way they do so often now, and that's if a hostage is being held inside. Drugs ain't no excuse for that kinda shit. And the Supreme Court is WRONG by ruling that it's okay for cops to do it.

I'll just give you a good piece of advice, despite what the Supreme Court says. Don't try that shit where I live.

Somebody's gonna get shot.

Comments

Amen.

Supreme Court rulings aren't going to mean shit when you're lying in a pool of your own blood. The second amendment was intended to make government respectful of the rights enumerated in the other nine. Unless and until they manage to nullify the second, police are damnfools for volunteering for these raids, taking the risk of the wrong house and the wrong homeowner at the wrong time.

Posted by: Desert Cat on June 21, 2006 11:17 AM

This is just an extension of allowing the gov't to do as it wishes. Those stupid fucks that say, "If you haven't done anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide" when confronted with the gov't "wiretapping" and other such gov't incursions into our lives - such as getting your door kicked in - are now seeing the chickens come home to roost. Give the gov't an inch, and they'll take a mile.

The attitude should be, "I haven't done anything wrong, so you have no need OR AUTHORITY to watch me". But we're a bunch of safety-first pussies that would rather feel secure than be free, so we gladly give up our hard-fought rights for the illusion of safety.

If anyone kicks in my door, someone is going to be dead when the shooting stops. It may be me, it may be the cops, but someone will be dead.

Posted by: The Other Mike S on June 21, 2006 11:52 AM

I have mixed feelings on this one, if a legal warrant has been issued then knocking on the door and announcing should depend on the evaluted risk. What the ruling does allow is the use of evidence even if all the local policys are not followed to the letter. Its does nothing to remove any legal requirments for a warrant.

Posted by: james old guy on June 21, 2006 12:07 PM

What's not to like about the standing army being able to kick in doors with nothing more than a flimsy excuse? They're the thin blue line that binds our civilization together! Why, if it wasn't for them society would completely....shit, I forget how the Blue Martyrs take it from there. I think it has something to do with the assumption that if some baddy threatens me I won't shoot him.

The court and the cops have turned this whole 'enforcement' morass into an "Us versus Them" bit. Given how many guns are in this country, that ain't good for judges nor cops. The really sad thing is many lawmen aren't fond of this ruling at all. I guess it's even more sad that they won't quit and find new work, but suck it up and kick doors in with the rest of 'em.

Posted by: red on June 21, 2006 12:22 PM

but remember, it's okay if US troops do it to Iraqi civillians.

Posted by: anon on June 21, 2006 12:35 PM

Quite a different scenario, anonymous coward.

There are other ways to do this if "flushing the drugs" is the issue. Enlist the wastewater department to position a screen at the next downstream manhole, station someone at the water meter to watch the flow, then knock. If the meter suddenly starts spinning like mad, and bags of pills start showing up at the manhole, then I'd say you've got your evidence.

Bottom line is, the SC is no longer protecting the bill of rights. Apparently the needs of the state trump the rights of the people.

Posted by: Desert Cat on June 21, 2006 03:58 PM

Desert Cat has a point, I know Savannah PD will cut line under trailers and put buckets there to catch anything. (Can you tell I lived in a shitty, drug ridden, whore loving trailer park?)

But no-knocks are nothing new...But they did have to announce themselves within seconds of the door busting. (According to one of the law books I am looking at now)

Steph

Posted by: Steph on June 22, 2006 04:09 AM
Post a comment














*Note: If you are commenting on an older entry, your
comment will not appear until it has been approved.
Do not resubmit it.