21 July, 2013
If you ask the average person about the events that took place in Watertown, Mass. on April 19th, what do you think their response is. "Watertown?", or "Sure, 'cuz it was a public safety issue." These are the responses that I have received from various individuals I've spoken to. Guess which one is the response given by police officers that I've asked. "Public Safety", what does that mean? I know more than likely they probably have a technical definition for it, which leaves you as confused upon hearing it, as you were before you asked.( EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES There are also "exigent circumstances" exceptions to the warrant requirement. Exigent circumstances arise when the law enforcement officers have reasonable grounds to believe that there is an immediate need to protect their lives, the lives of others, their property, or that of others, the search is not motivated by an intent to arrest and seize evidence, and there is some reasonable basis, to associate an emergency with the area or place to be searched ) My belief is, "Public Safety" is a catch all, covering the gamut of scenarios, not covered by the standard protocol answers concerning why the police did what they did. Let's see, if what happened at Watertown is a "Public Safety" response to a threat to the public (Man or men wound or kill multiple individuals, and are on the loose), I guess they'll have to start responding the same way to home invasion robberies, riots, and high speed car chases. What town is next, yours perhaps.
This article discusses a lot of the problems developing from a military mindset within our police forces. I'm one of the first people out there, trying to find legitimate reasons for the police doing what they're doing. For what it's worth, most of my friends are cops, or military, so yes, I want to believe they're doing the right thing. But I'm no fool, and the proof of the on going brutalization of the American people, being perpetrated by the police in numerous locales across this nation, cannot be ignored.
I read something recently in a blog response, which made me realize how far gone even the supposed "Constitutionally enlightened" are. Here's the quote " From my point of you, I find it hilarious that Libertardian Anarchists feel that they know more about the application of the 4th Amendment then people who go to school for it, and constantly get legal updates on it." Let's review, the people he's talking about are the police, and yes, they do receive formal instruction, as to the Constitution, and applying it to they're position as law enforcement officers. So, with that being said, explain Watertown to me from a fourth amendment standpoint....please do. Even a sixth grader can understand how much of a fourth amendment violation, the events in Watertown were. It's not a difficult concept to understand. " The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
As far as the police getting updates, sure they do, new precedents of law are filed every day, and if applicable, most departments will advise their officers of these updates. So this moron is right about the police being educated, and updated on the Constitution, as it applies to the law, but their actual APPLICATION is what has a lot to be desired.
If we were to apply the "Educated in", and "knowledgeable" title, let's look at BooHOo (barrack hussien obama). Isn't he a Constitutional law lecturer/professor or some such animal? OBVIOUSLY Barry Soetoro/Barrack Hussien Obama/Nero whatever his name is, does not have the first clue what the Constitution means (even with education) or he wouldn't do what he does, right? Because if he really knew what it meant, that means.................he's actively trying to dismantle that Constituion, and he's using the police to do it. I know there are friends of mine who don't like to think they're being used by the Imbecile-In-Chief, towards his draconian ends, but that is exactly what's happening, and they better wake up, before the music ends, or they'll be lumped in with the rest of the thugs that will need put on their ass.
"Ignorance of the law, is no excuse" goes both ways. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and using "The Exception clause" BS, out of convenience, will still get you a one way ticket to the gallows, when all is said and done.
Respect is won and lost by the action or inaction of the individual. Do you want the fleeting "attaboy" of an administrator, who's only goal is pleasing the tyrannical master he serves, no matter what the task? Or do you want the respect and admiration of a nation of free men, because you were the lone voice a wilderness of blue, sayin' "NOT ON MY WATCH!" concerning the constant Constitutional violations being committed on a daily basis. Like everything else in life, the hard choice is usually the right choice. Make the right choice, now, or reap the consequences later. Oh and by the way, it's later than you think.
American by BIRTH, Infidel by CHOICE