Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WOW! ISN'T THIS DRUG WAR GREAT!
Boortz.com ^ | 11-22-2006 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 11/22/2006 7:35:17 AM PST by Dick Bachert

Atlanta police went to a home on Neal Street in Atlanta last evening to execute a search warrant. When they kicked the door in the only occupant of the home, a 92-year-old woman, started shooting. She hit all three police officers. One in the thigh, one in the arm and another in the shoulder. All police officers will be OK. The woman will not. She was shot and killed by the police.

I'm not blaming the cops here. Not at all. They had a valid search warrant, and they say they were at the right address. Shots were fired, three cops hit, and they returned fire. A 92-year-old woman who was so afraid of crime in her neighborhood that she had burglar bars on every door and window, is now dead.

The blame lies on this idiotic drug war we're waging. We have all the studies we need, all of the comprehensive data is in. We can do a much more effective job of reducing drug use in this country if we'll just take a portion of this money we spend for law enforcement and spend it on treatment programs. A Rand study showed that we can reduce illicit drug usage in this country a specified amount through treatment programs at about 10% of the cost of reducing drug usage by that same amount through criminalization and law enforcement.

There's just something in the American psyche that demands that drug users be punished instead of treated and rehabilitated. We think they're stupid and ignorant for getting mixed up with those drugs in the first place. And you know what? We're right? But look at the messages we send to our children every single day with cigarettes, alcohol, and an endless stream of drug ads on television and in magazines. Drug culture? You bet we have.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: cutandrun; donutwatch; druggy; drugwar; hempatarian; leo; stoner; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-573 next last
The report I heard of the story was that these cops were in plain clothes. If you've heard otherwise, please so note. If they DID try to serve a warrant in plain clothes, they should have known better -- especially in that neighborhood.

Sorry for the screw-up, maam. And, oh yeah, Happy Thanksgiving and R.I.P.

Trust me, there will be a renewed call for GUN CONTROL by Atlanta poobahs. That MIGHT make SOME sense IF there were more than one cop for every 1,500 of us and YOUR cop could get to you BEFORE you reached room temperature. But he can't. And even if he could, the courts have continually ruled that he has NO obligation to save your butt. Don't believe me? Google "Warren v. District of Columbia" for some fascinating and frightening bedtime reading.

1 posted on 11/22/2006 7:35:20 AM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Cool beans!


2 posted on 11/22/2006 7:37:17 AM PST by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
All Right...what are we not being told here?

How do the LLE officers wind up suspecting this particular domicile?

How about some facts?

3 posted on 11/22/2006 7:39:28 AM PST by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Paging all drug warriors, paging all drug warriors....

But look at the messages we send to our children every single day with cigarettes, alcohol, and an endless stream of drug ads on television and in magazines. Drug culture? You bet we have.

Can I freshen your cup of coffee? This should be a good thread.

4 posted on 11/22/2006 7:39:59 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: evad

"We're from the gov'ment and we's here to help!"


5 posted on 11/22/2006 7:40:26 AM PST by Ueriah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
"A Rand study showed that we can reduce illicit drug usage in this country a specified amount through treatment programs at about 10% of the cost of reducing drug usage by that same amount through criminalization and law enforcement. "

Odd that the amount is omitted.

6 posted on 11/22/2006 7:41:40 AM PST by patton (Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Oh jeez, here we go again! Popcorn time...


7 posted on 11/22/2006 7:41:52 AM PST by DanTheAdmin (Oh Really?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

something is missing from this story.

Was anyone else in that house?

The story indicates this is the correct house. Were the drugs found there?

A 92 year old drug dealer is still a drug dealer.


8 posted on 11/22/2006 7:43:29 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Just more Collateral Damage in the WOD. Are you next?


9 posted on 11/22/2006 7:44:04 AM PST by Lexington Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Not sure Boortz is making much sense here. On the one hand, the drug war is stupid. But what if druggies dont seek treatment? Force them to get treatment? And how do you do that? Prolly need to use force, right? Like go to their house and arrest them? Same crap, different day. Then at the end, he acknowledges we use drugs in our culture every day. So should we treat alcohol and tobacco like the other drugs? Or treat the other drugs like alcohol and tobacco?


10 posted on 11/22/2006 7:44:23 AM PST by Huck (Soylent Green is People.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Sad, but not bad shooting for a 92 year old -- three out of three! One was saved by his protective vest. Banging down someone's door, while in plain clothing - regardless of announcement, really invites problems. Don't count on her death being a lesson to overzealous narcotic agents.


11 posted on 11/22/2006 7:46:37 AM PST by RAY (God Bless the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
A 92 year old drug dealer is still a drug dealer.

AND an entrepreneur!

12 posted on 11/22/2006 7:47:28 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: patton
>"A Rand study showed that we can reduce illicit drug usage in this country a specified amount through treatment programs at about 10% of the cost of reducing drug usage by that same amount through criminalization and law enforcement."

Yeah! And you know what,
maybe if we gave Muslims
all of the funding

we're spending to fight
terrorism, then maybe
Muslims would like us!

13 posted on 11/22/2006 7:47:47 AM PST by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

14 posted on 11/22/2006 7:48:05 AM PST by xrp (Republicans Message: Vote for us, we suck less than Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

"But what if druggies dont seek treatment? Force them to get treatment? "

If you spent the money you now waste on drug enforcement on enforcement of burglary and assault laws, you'd still get rid of the worst druggies and the recreational ones wouldn't matter.


15 posted on 11/22/2006 7:49:44 AM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
A 92 year old drug dealer is still a drug dealer.

You don't know that she was a drug dealer. Oh, that's right, in the WOD all suspects are guilty until proven innocent. My mistake.
16 posted on 11/22/2006 7:51:41 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RAY

> not bad shooting for a 92 year old <

Absolutely.

Moreover, one wonders if the perps who busted down her door were wearing body armor? And what kind of weapon and ammo was she using?

[Inquiring minds want to know!]


17 posted on 11/22/2006 7:51:58 AM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
A 92 year old drug dealer is still a drug dealer.

It's possible, I guess. But she's still a 92 year old lady.

If you're a cop, and you're in the hospital today with two of your buddies, all sporting bullet holes, there's no way to spin it - you effed up. Dead grandma and all.

Next time, instead of kicking the door in like you're the A-Team on speed, try ringing the doorbell with a bouquet of flowers and then cuff grandma while you search the house.

18 posted on 11/22/2006 7:52:35 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
If you spent the money you now waste on drug enforcement on enforcement of burglary and assault laws, you'd still get rid of the worst druggies and the recreational ones wouldn't matter.

Ha, that might actually be true, and isn't it the corresponding crimes that most concern people? I mean, other than the fear of their kids getting access to drugs, the threat is the bad behavior associated w/ drug use, not necessarily the drug use itself. But whatever. I'm just saying I don't see how you can force ppl to get treatment w/out using the same tactics Boortz apparantly deplores. It seems kooky to be against the drug war but advocate gubmint funded "treatment."

19 posted on 11/22/2006 7:53:12 AM PST by Huck (Soylent Green is People.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
Can I freshen your cup of coffee? This should be a good thread.

Coffee? Caffeine is a mind altering chemical. Good thing you picked a government approved drug or you would have to expect a midnight knock on the door with a battering ram.

20 posted on 11/22/2006 7:53:35 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Hey Kerry, What part of showing heels and ass is a winning strategy in Iraq?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
I hate the Drug War as much as any other pothead here on FR does, but something about this story doesn't ring true. If all the information on the warrant was correct, and they had articulable, accurate evidence that this 92-year-old woman was selling drugs out of her house, why in the world would the police find it necessary to execute a no-knock warrant (in plain clothes!) to apprehend such an old woman? Why couldn't this warrant have been executed in another way?

Have the cops been watching too much Dallas SWAT on A&E or something? Do they need to act like adrenaline cowboys each and every time they act?

21 posted on 11/22/2006 7:59:06 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert; All
For those of you who think the cops are being maligned here and not enough facts given, get real. This sort of stuff happens all the time in the US now thanks to our WOD and the use of no knock warrents.

The way to end this and the drug gangs is to legalize drugs. No, I am not a libertarian, but I am a person who uses history as a lesson. Drugs and gangs were not a problem in this country before they were outlawed. Prior to the turn of the century most drugs were legal in this country and the drug addition rate was no worse then than it is now, AND we had the added benefit of not having gangs that are financed by illegal drugs.

There are a whole lot of people who use a moralistic approach to drug use instead of the lesson that prohibition taught us, in fact there are some who still believe we should bring back prohibition along with bootleggers and the crime that was rampant during the prohibition era.

Want to end drug crime? Legalize it, take the money out of it and you will stop drug dealers and most of the crime in their tracks, not to mention defunding street gangs. Yes, we would probably still have gangs but we would take the sting out of most of them, without money they would fall apart.

I would be willing to bet that the reason drugs are NOT legalgalized in this country is, in large part, due to the bribing of officials to make sure the golden goose isn't slain. Flame away if you want, but this time maybe, just maybe, you could try using your heads to think with instead of your emotions.

22 posted on 11/22/2006 7:59:45 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
Caffeine is a mind altering chemical. Good thing you picked a government approved drug or you would have to expect a midnight knock on the door with a battering ram.

Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts...arrest them all. Throw away the key. Did you know that if you give rats Mocha Lattes all day they will pee a lot and become schizophrenic. That study was funded by Salada Tea. What other evidence do we need? Damn those crazy libertarians. ;-)

23 posted on 11/22/2006 7:59:56 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RAY

Okay, say the lady had a nephew, grandson, etc., who deals drugs.

Can the cops NOT set up a stakeout to see who is there before busting into someone's house with guns pulled? What if her two and four year old great grandkids were there?

If I am home alone at night, and somebody (don't know it's cops) kicks my door in I am going to shoot.


24 posted on 11/22/2006 8:00:38 AM PST by girlangler (Fish Fear Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: patton
Odd that the amount is omitted.

He omitted nothing. You are not paying attention. He said the cost was ten percent.

For what ever amount paid for law enforcement to achieve a certain reduction in drug usage, the same level of reduction can be achieved through noncriminal treatment programs at ninety percent less cost.

Treatment costs only 10% of what enforcement costs for any dollar amount you wish to throw out there.

Better still, no Great Grandmothers need to die.

25 posted on 11/22/2006 8:00:49 AM PST by higgmeister (In the Shadow of The Big Chicken!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
For the longest time, I was against drug decriminilization. I've catigated Libertarians about being obsessed with drug legalization more than once.

Now, I'm no longer sure that legalization is a bad idea. Obviously, laws against driving under the influence and similar laws would remain, but I'm no longer convinced society is well served by imprisoning someone who uses drugs in their own home where they aren't messing with someone else while doing it.

I think that programs like those put on by churches, DARE, and the like have done far more to reduce drug use than any amount of enforcement ever did. And our enforcement procedures are making the cops look and act more like military forces or JBTs everyday. I fear where this road leads far more than some guy next door smoking himself to death with crack. If that sounds heartless, then I'm sorry, but that's how it is.
26 posted on 11/22/2006 8:01:00 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
There's just something in the American psyche that demands that drug users be punished instead of treated and rehabilitated.

Puritan heritage.

27 posted on 11/22/2006 8:01:20 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1742500/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1742448/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1742449/posts


28 posted on 11/22/2006 8:01:58 AM PST by absolootezer0 ("My God, why have you forsaken us.. no wait, its the liberals that have forsaken you... my bad")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton

Just ask yourself a hypothetical question:

If the enormous profits to be made from selling drugs were removed, who is going to go to the trouble of bringing the stuff into this country, and for what reason?

Take the profit out of the equation and the problem will be reduced substantially.

Am I a druggie? No.

I do not use any illicit drugs OR alcohol.

But I am a rational and intelligent person that is able to see that when something hasn't, doesn't, and WON'T work, it is time to try something else.

The per capita addiction rates for this country have remained essentially unchanged since the eary 1800's.

Education and treatment are the areas where money should be spent.


29 posted on 11/22/2006 8:03:10 AM PST by EEDUDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
No. It is not the "Drug War".
It was the stupid and careless execution of a Search Warrant by an alleged law enforcement entity, that did not have its shit together.
I would really like to read the Warrant and the Application and Affidavit for the Search Warrant as well as the ***REQUIRED***specific and particular description of the premises and curtilage to be searched and where they expected to find the contraband.

If anyone has personal problems with the "drug war" and it's connection to the procedures of the search and the warrant procedure, extensively and precisely governed by the Forth Amendment just replace the term "drugs" with contraband, i.e. explosives, child porn, widgets, macaroni, whatever.

It's HOW the search is executed and conducted. Not rocket science but not exactly art either. There is a correct and prescribed manner in which these things are done, with oversight (hopefully) by the supervisory echelon of the law enforcement entity. Mistakes do happen. But they should be rare to the extreme, if the individual executing Officers/Detectives/Agents do their job correctly and accurately.
Generally when incidents of this type occur, it is because of the piss poor selection of personnel by police agencies for their Detective/Investigator units.
30 posted on 11/22/2006 8:04:32 AM PST by Gideon Reader ("The quiet gentleman sitting in the corner sipping Kenya AA and enjoying his Stan Getz CD's".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EEDUDE

"The per capita addiction rates for this country have remained essentially unchanged since the eary 1800's."

Availability hasn't seemed to have suffered much either, in this war.


31 posted on 11/22/2006 8:04:58 AM PST by mutley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Great shooting by granny in what was probably a pretty intense situation. Unfortunately, she was out numerered by the thugs.


32 posted on 11/22/2006 8:04:59 AM PST by zeugma (I reject your reality and substitute my own in its place. (http://www.zprc.org/))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Remember the Sudafed clause. Thanks to a rise in meth use the fed and most states independent of the fed have now decided that if you buy too much stuff with psuedoephedrine in it then you are a "probable" drug dealer. This is why all the medicines with psuedoephedrine in them are behind the prescription counter and have to be signed for and they have limits to how much they can sell you at once. Anybody that decides to stock up on cold and allergy medicine, and does so in multiple purchases to get around the single sale limit, is putting themselves at risk for being noticed by the DEA and experiencing some of this no-knock action first hand.


33 posted on 11/22/2006 8:05:31 AM PST by discostu (we're two of a kind, silence and I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

And had they gone to the wrong address to investigate a burglary or an armed robbery then this wouldn't have happened?

I fail to see the connection to the WOD.


34 posted on 11/22/2006 8:07:22 AM PST by SampleMan (Do not dispute the peacefulness of Islam, so as not to send Muslims into violent outrage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81
I think that programs like those put on by churches, DARE, and the like have done far more to reduce drug use than any amount of enforcement ever did.

I certainly agree that enforcement has been a joke on level with some of the weirder global warming proposals. However, I'm not a big fan of project DARE. When my son was in first grade he called me a drug user for having a beer. Of course he was right but the point was the program was aimed at children too young and still in the black and white concrete operational stage to understand what they were being told. By middle school my son and his friends were making up all sorts of outrageous drug experiences just to entertain the DARE instructors in their "group therapy" sessions. I wish he's spent all that time learning how to read and write better instead of wasting school time with project DARE.

35 posted on 11/22/2006 8:07:38 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Gideon Reader

But the drug war is the specific excuse that's been used by the government to make no-knock searches part of their regular repetoir, and to expand the list of products that make you a potential bad guy to include things in almost every American home like alergy medicine.


36 posted on 11/22/2006 8:08:10 AM PST by discostu (we're two of a kind, silence and I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: calex59

Your post contains much that is reasonable.

Unfortunately, since you fail to pander to the self-righteous prohibitionists in our midst, you will be dismissed as either a pot-head or a cloud-cuckoo libertarian.

The faith that these folks have in the state is truly frightening. American-style socialism certainly has created its own special version of secret police.


37 posted on 11/22/2006 8:09:30 AM PST by headsonpikes (Genocide is the highest sacrament of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rhombus

Points well taken. Then again, DARE is a government run program, so I guess we shouldn't be surprised. I think that on moral issues like this, it is the Christians in the community as a Church that should deal with these issues. The Church is supposed to be the moral conscience of the community. The government, OTOH, exists only to secure the rights of individuals against infringement. This system has worked since the founding of our republic, and I see no reason why it should've been abandoned.


38 posted on 11/22/2006 8:10:33 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: calex59

Just for the record, I agree with you 100%.


39 posted on 11/22/2006 8:10:33 AM PST by Taylor42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81
The Church is supposed to be the moral conscience of the community. The government, OTOH, exists only to secure the rights of individuals against infringement.

I take it then you're not a paleo-conservative. ;-) You'd better put on your flame-proof underwear.

40 posted on 11/22/2006 8:14:45 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dead

That's the most sensible post anyone is likely to see on this, or any other, thread on no-knock raids.


41 posted on 11/22/2006 8:15:34 AM PST by 91B (God made man, Sam Colt made men equal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Not sure Boortz is making much sense here. On the one hand, the drug war is stupid. But what if druggies dont seek treatment? Force them to get treatment? And how do you do that? Prolly need to use force, right? Like go to their house and arrest them? Same crap, different day. Then at the end, he acknowledges we use drugs in our culture every day. So should we treat alcohol and tobacco like the other drugs? Or treat the other drugs like alcohol and tobacco?

Are you on drugs? How can you consider that we would no longer use the force-of-law to apprehend druggies and then immediately conclude that because of that you would still have to go to their home and apprehend them?

The reason a druggie hides his habits is fear of the police. Without that fear any number of avenues become available to him for intervention and treatment. His employer may detect a problem and make treatment a condition of continued employment. His family, friends or other efforts in the local community will provide help.

If his irresponsible acts while being influenced by drug usage result in crimes, he will still be arrested for the individual crimes and be held responsible, Then one of the conditions of his punishment would certainly be treatment for the drug abuse.

42 posted on 11/22/2006 8:17:13 AM PST by higgmeister (In the Shadow of The Big Chicken!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

The story I read last night was that the police were "approaching the house" when the woman shot at them. Somebody is lying.


43 posted on 11/22/2006 8:17:28 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
I take it then you're not a paleo-conservative.

I don't really know what constitutes a paleo-conservative. I read the writings of the Founders, and I think they were right. I guess I would call myself an adherent of strict constitutionalism with a dash of libertarianism.
44 posted on 11/22/2006 8:18:58 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Good morning.
"The story indicates this is the correct house."

The story indicates that the cops burst into a house in a bad neigborhood, in the dead of night, that they believed there was some connection to drugs in the house and that a 92 year old woman reacted to them breaking in by opening fire. Oh, yeah, and the woman is dead and the cops are wounded.

I'll bet that cleaned that neigborhood up.

Michael Frazier


45 posted on 11/22/2006 8:19:18 AM PST by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: higgmeister
His employer may detect a problem and make treatment a condition of continued employment. His family, friends or other efforts in the local community will provide help.

LOL. Cuz junkies first and foremost concern is their job security. Most jobs NOW don't tolerate junkies. That's why junkies do crimes, duh.

If his irresponsible acts while being influenced by drug usage result in crimes, he will still be arrested for the individual crimes and be held responsible, Then one of the conditions of his punishment would certainly be treatment for the drug abuse.

That's my point. Same crap, different day. Forced treatment, forced incarceration. Same difference.

46 posted on 11/22/2006 8:20:30 AM PST by Huck (Soylent Green is People.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
Yeah! And you know what, maybe if we gave Muslims all of the funding we're spending to fight terrorism, then maybe Muslims would like us!

Behind door #1, there's a table with an ounce of weed in a baggie laying on it.

Behind door #2, there's a Muslim terrorist with an AK-47 and a bomb belt.

Which door would you feel safer to open?

47 posted on 11/22/2006 8:23:29 AM PST by bassmaner (Hey commies: I am a white male, and I am guilty of NOTHING! Sell your 'white guilt' elsewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

I hate drugs. My stepbrother died of a heroin overdose. My big problem with the WOD is the erosion of due process. Seizure laws and no-knock warrants seem to violate the 4th Amendment. The gubmint has used the WOD to expand its tyrannical powers. I don't like that.

A 92 year-old lady is dead, 3 cops wounded. Sounds like a screw-up to me.

Also: did they find drugs in the house? Seems like that would be a big part of the story if they had.


48 posted on 11/22/2006 8:23:45 AM PST by karnage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Your link leads to the wrong URL (www.nealznuze.com is NOT the same as www.boortz.com
49 posted on 11/22/2006 8:26:06 AM PST by TChris (We scoff at honor and are shocked to find traitors among us. - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Lots of pertinent info missing here.Although i would find it highly unusual for a 92 yr old woman to be selling drugs,i find it incredible that a woman that age could get off(at least)3 shots and hit what she was aiming at(esp under the circumstances).I'm gonna try to find more info,but could you ping me if you hear more about this?Thanx


50 posted on 11/22/2006 8:26:20 AM PST by Thombo2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-573 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson