As. Freakin'. If. - DC and Boston

[tellner]

Two stories from the papers.

Everyone who would invite the police into his house to rummage around looking for contraband, please raise your hand.

Everyone who believes the police would disregard everything else in the house and not bother you or come back later, please send me your name, date of birth, address, social security number and mother's maiden name.

The first is from Our Nation's Capital.

WASHINGTON -- A crackdown on guns is meeting some resistance in the District.

Police are asking residents to submit to voluntary searches in exchange for amnesty under the District's gun ban. They passed out fliers requesting cooperation on Monday.

The program will begin in a couple of weeks in the Washington Highlands neighborhood of southeast Washington and will later expand to other neighborhoods. Officers will go door to door asking residents for permission to search their homes.Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said the "safe homes initiative" is aimed at residents who want to cooperate with police. She gave the example of parents or grandparents who know or suspect their children have guns in the home.Community leaders went door to door in Ward 8 Monday to advise residents not to invite police into their homes to search for weapons.

"Bad idea," said D.C. School Board member William Lockridge. "I think the people should not open your doors under any circumstances, don't even crack your door, unless someone has a warrant for your arrest."

The second is from Boston:

Police limit searches for guns

Opposition from residents is strong; Invited into homes without warrants

By Maria Cramer, Globe Staff | March 25, 2008
Boston police officials, surprised by intense opposition from residents, have significantly scaled back and delayed the start of a program that would allow officers to go into people's homes and search for guns without a warrant.

The program, dubbed Safe Homes, was supposed to start in December, but has been delayed at least three times because of misgivings in the community. March 1 was the latest missed start date.

One community group has been circulating a petition against the plan. Police officials trying to assuage residents' fears have been drowned out by criticism at some meetings with residents and elected officials.

Officers may begin knocking on doors this week, officials said yesterday, but instead of heading into four troubled neighborhoods, as they had planned, officers will target only one, Egleston Square in Jamaica Plain, where police said they have received the most support.

Police would ask parents or legal guardians for permission to search homes where juveniles ages 17 and under are believed to be holding illegal guns. Police would only enter homes into which they have been invited and, once inside, would only search the rooms of the juveniles.

 

[KenpoTex]

Two stories from the papers.

Everyone who would invite the police into his house to rummage around looking for contraband, please raise your hand.

Everyone who believes the police would disregard everything else in the house and not bother you or come back later...

yup, I totally believe that, this is a great idea..."think of the children."

 

[Ceicei]

A bad idea, a totally bad idea. If they can't get the support of the people to "voluntarily" do this, what is to stop them from going to unvoluntary means? I surely hope they won't think of looking at firearm purchase records. Weren't the purchase records supposed to be destroyed?

Although I have "nothing to hide", I would not 'invite" them into my home. These hogwash proposals mentioned in the articles better not be introduced into my state.

- Ceicei

 

[tellner]

Better: They'll certainly keep lists of the ones who don't "voluntarily" let them in.

Even better: If you live in public housing and refuse to let the police go through your dwelling and possessions you could find yourself out on the street.

 

[Ping898]

Although I have "nothing to hide", I would not 'invite" them into my home.

Ditto...I don't understand who would let them in...if you have something to hide, you aren't letting them in and if you don't have something to hide, on principle you aren't letting them in.....

Police would ask parents or legal guardians for permission to search homes where juveniles ages 17 and under are believed to be holding illegal guns.

If I thought my kind had a gun, I would search his/her room myself, not let some cop I don't know in to do the searching....

 

[Empty Hands]

Ditto...I don't understand who would let them in...

Most people don't really understand their rights. They have been conditioned all their lives to trust and fear authority and to submit to the commands of the officers. The cops in question for their part rarely make clear when they ask to "come in" what you are consenting to, the fact that you don't have to consent and that there shouldn't be a penalty for doing so.

Some cops also rely heavily on intimidation to get their way in these "voluntary" situations.

 

[tellner]

There's where the camel sticks its nose under the tent.

The police will say "If you don't let us in you must have something to hide. If you don't do what we want you're making our job tougher. You must hate the police. That means you're the enemy."

Sorry, to all the decent cops. But that's how it works. Truth, Justice and the American Way depend on which end of the Glock you're looking at.

From the citizen's perspective we say "This is my home, my castle. Nobody comes in without my permission or a reason that's so pressing that you can get an order signed by a judge giving you the right to temporarily violate my family's safety and put us at risk."

In other words, unless you've got a damned good reason don't break into my house and point guns at me. Your own convenience and the possibility that a fishing expedition might turn up something does not constitute a damned good reason. My life and freedom are at risk. That's far outweighs the crushing burden of you filling out a form and handing it in to the Court clerk for a judge to look at.