Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
General Category => Off Topic Stuff => Topic started by: jgillmanjr on April 23, 2013, 08:26:12 AM
-
What say you - legit or not?
We can clearly say there were no warrants issued.
I would argue that some of these searches were not consensual either.
Combine these two, and you get illegit.
Go.
-
Likely an excessive application of exigent circumstances.
-
What I found hilarious in some... discussions on facebook is that people were arguing that any warrantless and non-consensual searches were legit under the hot pursuit exemption.
Hot pursuit... right... that's why they didn't chase the guy into a particular dwelling. In fact, if I recall correctly, he was actually found outside of the search area. Yup, hot pursuit alright..
-
I think it's clear that the non-consensual searchers were illegal. The frisking of homeowners was illegal. The pointing of weapons at homeowners was assault. For the most part the entire operation was over-kill. And it sickens me.
-
The frisking of homeowners was illegal.
Frisking for what? If I were in the lockdown area I would have armed myself with whatever I had. My gun would be in open view. Does this mean they went around confiscating guns or checking serial numbers? If a bomber is loose in my town and I was told to stay inside and not answer the door then I would have armed myself for personal protection.
I never did hear the frisking part but then again there is so much news around the entire ordeal I just missed it.
-
Like I have asked, how much do we take? How much do "WE" allow? No one has drawn a line in the sand...
-
The Harvard Report is out on the police response to the Boston bombing. It was chock full of police f'ups.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/04/robert-farago/harvard-report-police-response-to-boston-bombing-was-a-bureaucratic-bunfight/ (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/04/robert-farago/harvard-report-police-response-to-boston-bombing-was-a-bureaucratic-bunfight/)