The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that police do not have to knock before entering your home if they have a warrant. What else did they rule police don’t have to do?
Say “Excuse me” after shooting a perp.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that police do not have to knock before entering your home if they have a warrant. What else did they rule police don’t have to do?
Say “Excuse me” after shooting a perp.
Then can I say “Screw You Hippy!” after shooting a tree-hugger?
They also said that the Police do not have to ever sing that lame song again, De Do Do Do De Da Da Da,
That’s all I want to say to you.
Shoot a perp, then say “excuse me.” That’s LOL funny.
If a drug-crazed psycho rushes with a broken bottle and they have to shoot him so many times so that he loses enough blood to not be able to function even on ‘roids, will “excuse me” still suffice? Or do they have to verbally acknowledge his efforts? “Hey, you did a really good job of holding on there. I didn’t think I had you.” Turns to crowd, “Don’t you guys think this perp did a really good job? I mean, we really had to shoot him a lot.”
Would that apply to all warrants, or just felony warrants? I can’t say I agree with the ruling, but I don’t know all the mechanics behind it yet. Now if they’re dealing with a violent offender or someone who, due to the severity of their offence, may be particularly resistant, or when it’s a known recidivist (as many drug pushers & sex offenders are), I might totally understand, but if it were for a traffic/misdemeanor warrant, I don’t see the need for it. It just seems a bit too “KGB” for me.
Maybe when I understand it better…
I think this is an assault on those Carmen Miranda right thingies. These right-wing fascists are taken away all our rights, or lefts?
Love that Scalia. He wrote of the attenuated connection between the knock and the seizure. In plain-speak, this means, “Screw you, we have a majority now” to the evil left Supremes. Scalia is so COOL!
it’s not that the police no longer have to “knock and announce” if they have a warrant, but that if they fail to do so, the evidence obtained is not suppressed simply b/c of the failure to knock and announce.
basically the court said the police still have to knock & announce, but there are no consequences if they fail to do so. logical? it depends on if “knocking and announcing” are part of what makes a search lawful.
http://www.posieren.com/
Stars posieren
AlanABQ,
“traffic/misdemeanor warrant”
If the police have to put out a warrant for your 300 traffic tickets, I hope their waiting in your kitchen cattle prods at the ready.
I wonder what you set bail at for such a person. Like there is any chance they are actually show up for their day in court.
That for the porn link gammy. Now would you mind if we castrate you?
“If the police have to put out a warrant for your 300 traffic tickets, I hope their waiting in your kitchen cattle prods at the ready.”
Yeah, because that’s a major crime problem in America; unpaid traffic tickets. Good thing I have just under 300, especially since cattleprods are painful, from what I gather. Thankfully, I’ve yet to encouter or even hear of a police officer having one as standard gear.
I don’t know where you live, Neo, but it sounds pretty rough if the police need cattleprods.
Exaggerations about 300 traffic violations and cattle prods aside, many municipalities do have major problems enforcing minor offences. It has long been an observation that when police departments won’t bother with enforcing minor crimes they also have trouble with enforcement of more serious offences. While it may be practical to temporarily emphasize more serious crimes in cases where resources are limited it is never good to let lax enforcement become a chronic problem. This usually leads to a systematic breakdown with an escalating crime problem. Before long you also get a law enforcement system that is way behind on enforcement and has become used to letting things slide.
PS: No, That didn’t address any of the issues of announcing a warrant when making an arrest.