In Boston of all places - gun searches in homes

[JohnCrabtree]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/17/police_to_search_for_guns_in_homes/
"Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search for guns in their children's bedrooms.

The program, which is already raising questions about civil liberties, is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.

In the next two weeks, Boston police officers who are assigned to schools will begin going to homes where they believe teenagers might have guns. The officers will travel in groups of three, dress in plainclothes to avoid attracting negative attention, and ask the teenager's parent or legal guardian for permission to search. If the parents say no, police said, the officers will leave.

If officers find a gun, police said, they will not charge the teenager with unlawful gun possession, unless the firearm is linked to a shooting or homicide."


This is scary. Anytime I hear of "Plainclothes officers" it is a bad sign. Yes, cosent to search must be given by the parent, but this is still putting Pressure on the parent to allow a search. I can see 3 plain clothes officers get intimidating. Then what happens if they instead of finding a gun, find drugs, or if they find a copy 101 Things to do til the revolution, or find a few liberty dollars? What if they keep their word and don't charge for the weapons they find, but do charge for the bullets?
How will the parents know that the guys who showed up in plain clothes are actually cops?


Hopefully parents will have enough sense to tell these plain clothes thugs NO. and the cops will listen.

[Mark]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/17/police_to_search_for_guns_in_homes/
"Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search for guns in their children's bedrooms.

The program, which is already raising questions about civil liberties, is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.

In the next two weeks, Boston police officers who are assigned to schools will begin going to homes where they believe teenagers might have guns. The officers will travel in groups of three, dress in plainclothes to avoid attracting negative attention, and ask the teenager's parent or legal guardian for permission to search. If the parents say no, police said, the officers will leave.

If officers find a gun, police said, they will not charge the teenager with unlawful gun possession, unless the firearm is linked to a shooting or homicide."


This is scary. Anytime I hear of "Plainclothes officers" it is a bad sign. Yes, cosent to search must be given by the parent, but this is still putting Pressure on the parent to allow a search. I can see 3 plain clothes officers get intimidating. Then what happens if they instead of finding a gun, find drugs, or if they find a copy 101 Things to do til the revolution, or find a few liberty dollars? What if they keep their word and don't charge for the weapons they find, but do charge for the bullets?
How will the parents know that the guys who showed up in plain clothes are actually cops?


Hopefully parents will have enough sense to tell these plain clothes thugs NO. and the cops will listen.

It seems to be just another way to ease the public into accepting a police state
and throwing away what's left of our Liberty and privacy.

The next "program" they launch might not even ask for permission.

I hope people up there have the guts and sense to nip this in the bud while they can.

[T206]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/17/police_to_search_for_guns_in_homes/

[pcosmar]

We live in a nation of sheep.

[foofighter20x]

Nice job reading the article there...
Notice the bolded portions...


Police to search for guns in homes
City program depends on parental consent

...

The officers will travel in groups of three, dress in plainclothes to avoid attracting negative attention, and ask the teenager's parent or legal guardian for permission to search. If the parents say no, police said, the officers will leave.

...

[T206]

Nice job reading the article there...
Notice the bolded portions...

Not sure if you are referring to me or not, but of course I saw that...however it is still a step in the wrong direction. Whats next, as long as your landlord gives concent, the police can look in your apartment for a gun?

[pcosmar]

Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search for guns in their children's bedrooms.

The program, which is already raising questions about civil liberties, is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.

And the sheep say, Baaa

Oh save us from Gunsssssss!!!

[T206]

And the sheep say, Baaa

Oh save us from Gunsssssss!!!


Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search for guns in their children's bedrooms.

The program, which is already raising questions about civil liberties, is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.

And if you are a parent who thinks your kid has a gun, be a grown up and talk to them, then search their room if you think they have one. Having a kid is a BIG responsibility that it seems more and more parents arent willing to take the time to deal with. The police are not to be used as babysitters.

[Mark]

thread already.. a few down..

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=38310

my comment there:

"It seems to be just another way to ease the public into accepting a police state
and throwing away what's left of our Liberty and privacy.

The next "program" they launch might not even ask for permission.

I hope people up there have the guts and sense to nip this in the bud while they can."

[T206]

thread already.. a few down..

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=38310

my comment there:

"It seems to be just another way to ease the public into accepting a police state
and throwing away what's left of our Liberty and privacy.

The next "program" they launch might not even ask for permission.

I hope people up there have the guts and sense to nip this in the bud while they can."

Sorry, I actually searched for a thread (I guess too quickly) and didnt see anything.

[coastie]

This is rediculous....:eek:

Maybe the state should launch a program where they produce kids of their own, since they assume parents cant parent anymore (which, unfortunatley, id true nowadays).

How about launching a "program" that teaches concerned parents how to make a found gun safe, and then turn it in to the police?

On another note, the guns found are more than likely illegal in the first place, which means its highly likely the kids will just go get another one. Allowing the police into your home to remove them is rediculous to say the least, as they will not stop there, and I believe once you invite them in, you've effectively given up your 4th Amendment rights.

These parents need to get a clue, and be parents.

[pcosmar]

These parents need to get a clue, and be parents

There you go.

It doesn't fit in to the Nanny State mentality.
The state is mother and father.
The state will tell you what is good for you.
The state will provide for you. The state will raise your children.

[coastie]

Ah yes, the root cause of these high crime neighborhoods. Why is shit like this so blatantly obvious to some of us?:mad: I truly dont get it.:mad:

[foofighter20x]

Not sure if you are referring to me or not, but of course I saw that...however it is still a step in the wrong direction. Whats next, as long as your landlord gives concent, the police can look in your apartment for a gun?

That question has already been tried and answered firmly in the Supreme Court.

Landlords cannot give consent for searches where a tenant has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Get with the times, man.

[Mark]

Sorry, I actually searched for a thread (I guess too quickly) and didnt see anything.

oh.. please don't apologize..

Loving Ron Paul means.. "never having to say you're sorry".. ;) :D

[ConstitutionGal]

I notice that this story references "high crime neighborhoods". What is doesn't mention, however, is whether these high crime neighborhoods are public housing. Here is TN a few years ago, they were trying to start a program where, if you lived in pubic housing, you more or less gave up your rights requiring the police to get search warrants to come into your apartment or home. It was being advocated under the guise of the war on drugs. Sadly, I don't know if the law passed, I just remember when they were talking about on the local news. Point is, if you're being housed on the public's dime, I would think that it might be logical to expect some loss of privacy in certain situations.

[T206]

That question has already been tried and answered firmly in the Supreme Court.

Landlords cannot give consent for searches where a tenant has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Get with the times, man.

And we cant go to war without congress too, right?

[foofighter20x]

And we cant go to war without congress too, right?

That's never gone before the USSC. :p

[coastie]

I notice that this story references "high crime neighborhoods". What is doesn't mention, however, is whether these high crime neighborhoods are public housing. Here is TN a few years ago, they were trying to start a program where, if you lived in pubic housing, you more or less gave up your rights requiring the police to get search warrants to come into your apartment or home. It was being advocated under the guise of the war on drugs. Sadly, I don't know if the law passed, I just remember when they were talking about on the local news. Point is, if you're being housed on the public's dime, I would think that it might be logical to expect some loss of privacy in certain situations.

:mad:WHOA. I dont think it would be "logical" to loose your right to privacy, in any circumstance in this country. There should never be a compromise to the right to privacy.

I am completely against welfare entitlements, believe me. But I would never expect someone to give up their individual liberties because they take said entitlements. They are still AMERICAN CITIZENS, and should have the full rights as such. Revamping this whole system is the solution - not taking away someone's rights as a pre-requesite for accepting them.

[pcosmar]

That's never gone before the USSC. :p

Neither has the 2nd amendment.

[conner_condor]

And if you are a parent who thinks your kid has a gun, be a grown up and talk to them, then search their room if you think they have one. Having a kid is a BIG responsibility that it seems more and more parents arent willing to take the time to deal with. The police are not to be used as babysitters.

My growing children of 14 and 15 have owned guns since they was 10. I bought them their guns.Each one owns a shotgun and 2 rifles of now,1 being of high caliber for dropping deer and a 22 for plinking tree rats and lots of target shooting. They know how to use them quite well. I feel very comfortable with them owning guns and trust them more than I do most adults when it comes to them. I think if parents took more time to enjoy our heritage and to teach their children what the purpose of the gun is for,(self defense and for gathering food) and not killing people because they are pissed off at them.We would be in a better society.

[T206]

My growing children of 14 and 15 have owned guns since they was 10. I bought them their guns.Each one owns a shotgun and 2 rifles of now,1 being of high caliber for dropping deer and a 22 for plinking tree rats and lots of target shooting. They know how to use them quite well. I feel very comfortable with them owning guns and trust them more than I do most adults when it comes to them. I think if parents took more time to enjoy our heritage and to teach their children what the purpose of the gun is for,(self defense and for gathering food) and not killing people because they are pissed off at them.We would be in a better society.

Just to clarify, Im not against people owning guns. What Im against is parents who unlike the fine example that you set...are not capable of dealing with their kids if they think they are doing something that they do not approve of. Good job being a real parent on your part, unlike so many people who just happen to have a kid living with them.

[mordechai]

This is Boston.

While there are those that still have the spirit of '76, they are few and far between.

And yes, this is about preparing us for a police state. Don't ever let the police into your house. I personally won't let cops I know in private life in my house unless I know them well enough to know they don't like their jobs.

It might sound extreme, but the government is attempting to make the cops not "our" cops anymore. Things that are totally legal you do now may not be in the future. Likewise, the cops you've known may not have a problem putting you away. Think about it......

[Corydoras]

If I recall correctly, the entire congressional delegation of Massachusetts receives F marks from the NRA every year. It's a very, very anti-gun state, which is odd, because the western two-thirds is kind of rural.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

:mad:WHOA. I dont think it would be "logical" to loose your right to privacy, in any circumstance in this country. There should never be a compromise to the right to privacy.

I am completely against welfare entitlements, believe me. But I would never expect someone to give up their individual liberties because they take said entitlements. They are still AMERICAN CITIZENS, and should have the full rights as such. Revamping this whole system is the solution - not taking away someone's rights as a pre-requesite for accepting them.

Agreed!

[Captain Shays]

No, but thanks for the opportunity officer.I already searched my son's room. Have a great day.

[Richard in Austin]

Three plainclothes detectives? I can imagine a number of scenarios where a homeowner or tenant who doesn't know their rights could be tricked or bullied into 'consenting'. And then again, no matter what really happens, it's your word against theirs.

Those people could benefit from having their own camera & mike surveillance on their front doors.

[Kapt Nemo]

There you go.

It doesn't fit in to the Nanny State mentality.
The state is mother and father.
The state will tell you what is good for you.
The state will provide for you. The state will raise your children.


In Mother Russia Gun buys you...


;)






Three plainclothes detectives? I can imagine a number of scenarios where a homeowner or tenant who doesn't know their rights could be tricked or bullied into 'consenting'. And then again, no matter what really happens, it's your word against theirs.

Those people could benefit from having their own camera & mike surveillance on their front doors.


You know I just finished remodeling my house with my dad and that was one of the first things I thought about installing... not that I'm into anything illegal, but one never knows who might try to get into your house... aside from the criminals... though that line is getting really thin now too....

[RSDavis]

You Don’t Need Those Pesky Civil Rights, Do You?
by RS Davis (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=333203731&Mytoken=6A179F7E-E37E-40B2-82D4792C1F5ED17037834056)

Hello Freedomphiles! Did you know that the Boston PD is asking local residents in high-crime areas to sign away their 4th Amendment rights? Did you know that the most astonishing thing about it is that the people are doing it?

Under the experimental program, dubbed "Safe Homes," teams of police officers assigned to Boston's public schools will hunt for leads on youths believed to have guns. Tips might come from neighbors, or even parents or guardians, who are often fearful of their own children. Three plainclothes officers and a clergyperson or community activist will show up at the youth's home. The officers will ask parents to sign a form allowing the search of the home, including the child's room. Weapons found in the child's possession will be seized, and no charges will be filed unless the weapon is linked to a violent crime. "This is an interaction between human beings, where common sense will prevail," Edward Davis, Boston's police commissioner, told TIME.

This just mystifies me. Who knows what they will find during these searches? They've only promised not to prosecute gun crimes. What if they find drugs or stolen property? You've already incriminated yourself.

I would think that since these neighborhoods are made up of people who didn't even have civil rights until about 40 years ago, they'd be extra careful to safeguard them.

Not so:

The ACLU's opposition, however, has failed to move many community residents in neighborhoods directly impacted. "I understand political correctness and the potential civil liberties risks. But until you have bullets flying over your head, I suggest you take your leaflets and keep them in the suburbs," says the Rev. Jeffrey Brown, interim executive director of Boston TenPoint Coalition, a group heavily involved in reducing gang violence, particularly among the city's black and Latino youth. Brown says he plans to walk with police officers during searches.

Believe me, Rev. Brown, the secret to safety and security is not found in giving up your fundamental rights to your government. It is in protecting them at all costs.

If the police have evidence that there are illegal weapons in a home, they shouldn't have any problem getting a warrant.

I can totally see this turning into a "consent or we'll use your non-consent as evidence of a crime" situation. I can see them profiling and bullying parents into allowing searches that being no guns, but arrests for other things.

This is an end-run around habeus corpus, as well as the 4th and 5th Amendments, and I don't like it one bit.

Whole story here (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1687895,00.html).

[GunnyFreedom]

Three plainclothes detectives? I can imagine a number of scenarios where a homeowner or tenant who doesn't know their rights could be tricked or bullied into 'consenting'. And then again, no matter what really happens, it's your word against theirs.

Those people could benefit from having their own camera & mike surveillance on their front doors.

Of course, when the state keeps you so poor that you have to beg welfare to buy milk for your kids, you will be able to afford and maintain such a surveillance system.... ... ...how, exactly?




PS - Not trying to be a smartypants; just trying to give you a different perspective. Please pardon the satirical approach. For some reason I felt I should drive the point home rather than make it subtly. not for you, specifically, but it felt important.