This video [1] clearly shows a case where government was so frantic to find someone that it was willing to unilaterally suspend the law. Why? Recall a similar mindset during the recent manhunt for cop-killer Christopher Dorner.
Police even shot up a pickup truck carrying two women delivering newspapers. In that case, local and state government gave the police officers involved a
pass:
From the LA Times article [2] on the $4.2 million settlement paid to the victims:
“LAPD Chief Charlie Beck called the shooting “a tragic misinterpretation” by officers working under “incredible tension” hours after Dorner allegedly shot police officers.”
This is how it works folks. Dorner was on a vendetta against the Los Angeles police department. Government itself was the part who was threatened. When government is treatened, government will excuse far more egregious behavior than it would ever tolerate from those citizens within its jurisdiction.
The two Boston Bombers where a threat to local and state government. That is why government gave itself a pass. They also did not want to appear incompetent to the taxpayers. Only third was public safety an issue.
So citizens get terrorized multiple times: by the original act and then by the authorities whose rage is palpable, and even then by the media who use the incident to spin up new versions of old memes by which The Agenda is advanced.
[1] video: http://curmudgeonlyskeptical.blogspot.com/2013/04/warrantless-entry.html?
[2] LA Times: Women’s settlement with LAPD in Dorner case worth $4.2 million.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-women-shot-millions-20130423,0,1713238.story
Now is a wonderful time for some attorney to publish the legal basis for the police invading people’s homes with armed force.
I would say let the class action litigation begin!
They almost always do.
There was a lot of law enforcement present and only one terrorist, they all can’t make the collar. While pinning John Q. Public to the floor in his foyer is a distant second -they’ll take it.