Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Washington, DC] PD to start warrantless home searches for firearms this month according to WTOP 630
WTOP 630 AM news talk radio ^ | 03/13/2008 | Heard on radio news WTOP 630 AM

Posted on 03/14/2008 7:20:21 AM PDT by stockpirate

Sorry if this has already been posted. They were talking about it on the air. The plan is for DC police officers to go house to house in certain areas and search for weapons and if any are found they will NOT prosecute.

Last time I checked this was against the law.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; jackboots
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: Personal Responsibility

“If we get ONE gun off the streets, it will have been worth it.”

Therein lies the flaw in their argument. They will be getting guns out of the houses of law-abiding citizens. These guns aren’t on the streets (in the hands of criminals).

Typical liberal thought: if the gun exists, it will - sooner or later - get stolen and used to kill someone.


61 posted on 03/14/2008 9:36:53 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Didn’t the police do this successfully in Massachusetts a few months ago?


62 posted on 03/14/2008 9:48:30 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoftballMominVA

They ask, you consent, they have permission.

You _can_ say “no” to a team of heavily armed cops knocking on your door at oh-dark-thirty asking “may we search your house for illegal stuff? we promise not to prosecute, only confiscate.” You answer “no”, they leave. They might never come back...ever...


63 posted on 03/14/2008 10:13:14 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Yup. A whole lotta gusn will likely suddenly be legal in DC come June...


64 posted on 03/14/2008 10:14:27 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Moose4

I think they are hoping this is their ace in the hole:

“if any are found they will NOT prosecute.”

They may hope (falsely) that if they cannot prosecute you for what they find, then they can do it.

They can’t, of course. I mean, they can, but they will be violating the constitution if they do.


65 posted on 03/14/2008 10:15:56 AM PDT by RobRoy (I'm confused. I mean, I THINK I am, but I'm not sure. But I could be wrong about that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

They do this in DC but don’t want an electronic intercept of a known terrorist communicating to someone in this country?


66 posted on 03/14/2008 10:20:27 AM PDT by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GalaxieFiveHundred
"Western Union"
67 posted on 03/14/2008 10:23:58 AM PDT by synbad600
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
I think they are hoping this is their ace in the hole:

“if any are found they will NOT prosecute.”

They may hope (falsely) that if they cannot prosecute you for what they find, then they can do it.

Courts have ruled time and time again that police can deceive suspects under many circumstances. If anyone believes that the cops "will not prosecute" no matter what, they're either really stupid or really gullible.

Deception by Police

Let us examine more closely the rationale for lying at the investigative stage. Here, police are permitted by the courts to engage in trickery and deception and are trained to do so by the police organization. One might properly conclude, from examining police practices that have been subjected to the highest appellate review, that the police are authoritatively encouraged to lie.(15)

68 posted on 03/14/2008 10:29:25 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/15490870/detail.html

Boston is about to do the same thing.

I bet quartering troops in the “at-risk” households would stop illegal guns, they should try that next.


69 posted on 03/14/2008 10:35:32 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

fair enough: so the cop says “while asking for voluntary compliance i saw in plain view the following suspicious behavior in a neighborhood known as a high drug trafficing and violence area...”


70 posted on 03/14/2008 10:39:02 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: A Strict Constructionist

Chief Cathy rode a sexual harassment lawsuit to a pile of cash and promotions right up to the Chief’s office. I believe she was Commander of the Special Operations Division (those guys that run around in black tactical gear hollering “hut! hut! hut!”) before Mayor Adrian promoted her.


71 posted on 03/14/2008 10:47:25 AM PDT by RoadKingSE (How do you know that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a muzzle flash?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

I just read the Boston article. Believe it or not, I actually like the idea. I think of it as a neighborhood “ignorance/stupidity crackdown”.

That is, if you are stupid enough to actually let them in, you deserver what you get. I’m actually quite serious here.

On a related note:

“Wilkerson said you don’t call the police because you’re having a tough time parenting.”

My wife made that mistake with my stepson before I met her. He was 16, they were in a small town, and she thought she would use the old (old as in 1930’s through 1960’s) trick of sicking the police on your kid for something just to “put the fear of God into him”. Unfortunately, the cops got a little too into it and it became a small nightmare with almost permanent consequences. And no, it was not gun or drug related. It really was “minor” but the cops are getting weird.

I don’t trust ‘em any more. Even the nice ones.


72 posted on 03/14/2008 10:47:30 AM PDT by RobRoy (I'm confused. I mean, I THINK I am, but I'm not sure. But I could be wrong about that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

no way


73 posted on 03/14/2008 10:54:09 AM PDT by tutstar (Baptist Ping list - freepmail me to get on or off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
“D.C. police are so eager to get guns out of the city that they’re offering amnesty to people who allow officers to come into their homes and get the weapons.”

Or put another way: "Let us in and we'll just take the guns. Make us get a warrant, and you go to jail"

74 posted on 03/14/2008 10:57:30 AM PDT by PapaBear3625
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
"Officer, I do not consent to any searches."
75 posted on 03/14/2008 10:57:37 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (Where are they hiding Obama’s white half?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rom

Notice how they’re timing this for the week before the Supreme’s hear oral arguments on the Constitutionality of DC’s gun laws?


76 posted on 03/14/2008 10:59:05 AM PDT by PapaBear3625
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
How can they do this without violating the Fourth Amendment?

Ask the IRS. They do the same thing.


And the NSA and DHS
77 posted on 03/14/2008 12:07:22 PM PDT by wartman (http://www.jeffwartman.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility

“I am no fan of guns”

How do you protect your home, personal items and family?


78 posted on 03/14/2008 12:43:32 PM PDT by wolfcreek (Hank Hill's Dad, Cruella and Curious George=Loony Toons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Califreak
As a former Law Enforcement Officer and Corrections Officer I have taught all my extended family members that they are to never, THAT’s NEVER, allow a Government Officer into their home unless they have been given a warrant. Not even inside the door, Not for a drink of water, not to use the bathroom etc.
Police.
“But Mam we are doing this for you and your family. Just insuring that your home is safe and your neighborhood is safe.”
My wife's response.
“Not without a warrant.”
Police. Well we certainly could get one. Do you really want that to happen? Do you want us to have a car sit outside your home to we get the warrant over here.
My Wife.
You bet your ass I do..... Have fun sitting in your car waiting..........
79 posted on 03/14/2008 1:34:47 PM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Patriot Guard Riders - Standing for those that stood for us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SilvieWaldorfMD
Yeah! That's right!

WMAL is button #2 and WTOP is button #1!

80 posted on 03/14/2008 1:43:25 PM PDT by kinsman redeemer (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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