Unbelievable police story

[Tech]

I've read this story twice and still can't believe it's real...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/20/rude.awakening.ap/index.html




I hope he sues the bajeezus out of the police department.

 

[Hypocrisy86]

that is retarded.
oh yea, come in, want some beer?

 

[Duality]

The officers told Molde his garage door was open, the TV was on, the keys to his truck were left in the ignition and the door to his house was ajar.

i'd want them to wake me up to fix this stuff if i was enough of a jack ass to do all these things

 

[Tech]

i'd want them to wake me up to fix this stuff if i was enough of a jack ass to do all these things

I don't really see how any of that stuff makes him a jackass. I've forgotten to close the garage door several times or left my car unlocked. Leaving the tv on? are you fucking kidding me?

not to mention, the police are very lucky they didn't get shot. I'm sure the homeowner would have been well within his rights to shoot an intruder in his home at 3:00am, especially since he has children.

I suppose if the police wanted to be nice, they could have left the homeowner a note on his frontdoor letting him know it'd be advisable to secure his home better. Other than that, it's none of the polices business.

 

[Duality]

^ you're right in the fact that the police had no right to enter. however personally i would want to be notified right away if i left my key in the ignition, garage door open, and door ajar at night with children present. better the cops than a criminal.

the article said that typically they do just leave a note, however i'm sure it was these three factors combined that led them to enter and inform the homeowner. you're looking at it from a personal rights standpoint that they had no right to enter, i'm looking at it like the cops actually cared enough to inform the man right away rather than much more easily leave a note and be on their way.

 

[Ironslave]

^ you're right in the fact that the police had no right to enter. however personally i would want to be notified right away if i left my key in the ignition, garage door open, and door ajar at night with children present. better the cops than a criminal.

I see your point where you're coming from in most of your posts, but this is a gross abuse of police power. They had no right to intrude into his house in the middle of the night, regardless of any situation. It's stuff like this which shows more and more a large number of police officers are abusing their power and violating our basic/property rights.

 

[Tech]

^ you're right in the fact that the police had no right to enter. however personally i would want to be notified right away if i left my key in the ignition, garage door open, and door ajar at night with children present. better the cops than a criminal.

the article said that typically they do just leave a note, however i'm sure it was these three factors combined that led them to enter and inform the homeowner. you're looking at it from a personal rights standpoint that they had no right to enter, i'm looking at it like the cops actually cared enough to inform the man right away rather than much more easily leave a note and be on their way.

ok, let me ask you this...

If those police walked in and accidentally stumbled upon a bag of cocaine or a marijuana plant, what then? do you think it would be ok for the police to arrest him?

 

[Duality]

Originally posted by Ironslave
I see your point where you're coming from in most of your posts, but this is a gross abuse of police power. They had no right to intrude into his house in the middle of the night, regardless of any situation. It's stuff like this which shows more and more a large number of police officers are abusing their power and violating our basic/property rights.

i'm not questioning that from a legal standpoint they were in the wrong, but "gross abuse of police power"?? are they not here (in theory) to protect and serve? i think this falls under said protection category. this is one of the things Ron Paul wishes would return to our general society, care and compassion for our fellow man. these cops i feel demonstrated this by taking the effort to inform the man right away, rather than just write a note and be on their way.

don't look at it like the cops just marched in as they pleased, look at it like they had enough human decency to tell this man about the potential danger he might have caused himself had these errors gone unchanged.

 

[Tech]

this is one of the things Ron Paul wishes would return to our general society, care and compassion for our fellow man.

Ron Paul is a pretty big fan of the Constitution, so I'm certain he'd have a problem with police officers ignoring the Fourth Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures citizens' right to "be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures …"

 

[Duality]

ok, let me ask you this...

If those police walked in and accidentally stumbled upon a bag of cocaine or a marijuana plant, what then? do you think it would be ok for the police to arrest him?

ahh now that is a different story completely. legally a lawyer would argue that the cops had no grounds to enter or "inspect" his home and find these narcotics. this is the arguements many DUI lawyers use to get their clients off the hook. more or less this is the story: "your honor, my client was pulled over having done nothing wrong, yes he was drunk, but the cops had no right to pull him over to know that" legally this arguement works, morally it is reprehensible because the man was drunk and the police did make the correct call in the subsequent pulling over and arrest. they did do what was best for society as a whole, however it was a vioaltion of the man's rights very tricky situation.

it all depends on how you look at it. however legally no he should not be arrested for it (if they found narcotics) or at least not convicted of anything. but i think it's wrong that you believe these cops had any bad intentions with what they did here.

 

[Duality]

Ron Paul is a pretty big fan of the Constitution, so I'm certain he'd have a problem with police officers ignoring the Fourth Amendment.

oh yes i am aware of that. still you're harping on something that was a display of human compassion and shoud not be viewed as a negative. try looking at it in a humane way rather than from the lawyer's perspective.

spin it this way. we all have a right to our personal property correct? were the police not aiding in this man's consitutional right to protect his property...? they violated one right, but helped another.

 

[Tech]

but i think it's wrong that you believe these cops had any bad intentions with what they did here.

I don't question their intentions, I question their judgement.

If this was a small town where everybody knows everybody, I'm sure the police were just being neighborly. But it doesn't matter what their intentions were because they broke the law. I question their judgement as police officers because they went into this mans home to tell him about some unlock doors and that he left his television on. HE LEFT HIS TV ON??

 

[Duality]

I don't question their intentions, I question their judgement.

If this was a small town where everybody knows everybody, I'm sure the police were just being neighborly. But it doesn't matter what their intentions were because they broke the law. I question their judgement as police officers because they went into this mans home to tell him about some unlock doors and that he left his television on. HE LEFT HIS TV ON??

you're picking and choosing here as to why the cops imo really entered, he left his keys in the ignition, that alone proves enough danger to his personal property for the cops to make a decision to inform the man of his mistake.

Originally posted by Duality
spin it this way. we all have a right to our personal property correct? were the police not aiding in this man's consitutional right to protect his property...? they violated one right, but helped another.

i'm trying to look at it from your viewpoint here, is this not a somewhat legal justification?

 

[Tech]

were the police not aiding in this man's consitutional right to protect his property...?

thats like saying it's ok for firefighters to come soak your house with water to protect it from catching on fire.

or the animal control officers come to your house and tie your dog to a tree, just to make sure it won't jump your fence and run away.

or a mailman opening your mail for you, so you don't get papercuts on your fingers.

:methman:

edit: I just realized that firefighters actually do that to homes when they're in the way of forrest fires, but I think you get my point.

 

[Duality]

thats like saying it's ok for firefighters to come soak your house with water to protect it from catching on fire.

or the animal control officers come to your house and tie your dog to a tree, just to make sure it won't jump your fence and run away.

or a mailman opening your mail for you, so you don't get papercuts on your fingers.

:methman:

edit: I just realized that firefighters actually do that to homes when they're in the way of forrest fires, but I think you get my point.

that was pretty funny.


however you go to extremes too easily here. from a totally legal standpoint with absoluetly no regard for human decency these are fine examples. you are refusing to read between the lines here. it's either black or white in your eyes and that is an unfortunate way to look at all matters such as these.


tell me, would you rather have had your car stolen, or the cops inform you, albeit "illegally"?


edit: please answer completely honestly

 

[Tech]

tell me, would you rather have had your car stolen, or the cops inform you, albeit "illegally"?

if the question is...would I rather run the risk of having my car stolen or have the police illegally enter my house at 3am and wake me up?

honest to god, I'd rather take the risk of having my car stolen. in all fairness, I could probably leave my windows down and doors unlocked all year round and my car would probably not get broken into.

but you know what? carelessness isn't a crime and if I'm so irresponsible that I leave my doors unlocked, I probably deserve to have my stuff stolen. but then again, thats why Americans are suppose to have personal responsibility.

I often get the impression from your posts that you wouldn't mind living in a nanny state.

 

[Duality]

if the question is...would I rather run the risk of having my car stolen or have the police illegally enter my house at 3am and wake me up?

honest to god, I'd rather take the risk of having my car stolen. in all fairness, I could probably leave my windows down and doors unlocked all year round and my car would probably not get broken into.

but you know what? carelessness isn't a crime and if I'm so irresponsible that I leave my doors unlocked, I probably deserve to have my stuff stolen. but then again, thats why Americans are suppose to have personal responsibility.

I often get the impression from your posts that you wouldn't mind living in a nanny state.

fair enough. i personally would like to be informed of it. neither is wrong for this.

you call it a nanny state, i call it man looking out for his fellow man. i'm not implying in the least bit that police or other agencies can do as they please even if they have the slightest inclining that something wrong may be going on, but everything is not black and white and this occurence is a perfect example. these cops deserve a thank you, not a lawsuit.

 

[Tech]

these cops deserve a thank you, not a lawsuit.

if the home was in immediate danger (a gas leak, fire, tornado, a flood like Katrina), then yes the police could have the right go into your home and help evacuate. I might be wrong, but I believe that is one of the few exceptions within the Fourth Amendment when the police have that right.

in this particular case, was the homeowner in immediate danger? absolutely not. if you were looking at his house from the outside, there could be many scenarios as to why his tv is on or his doors are unlocked. it's the homeowners responsibility to secure his home and property....if he wants to. if not, then thats his own problem.

the police don't deserve a thank you, they deserve to be fired.

 

[Duality]

i think we both have said as much as we can in defense of our respective view points. i fully understand your arguement. however morally i must disagree with it in this given situation. i think you are just a little too unforgiving on your policies on most things in regards to circumstance. yes this man's 4 amendment rights were technically violated. but it can be argued that it was in defense of his right to protect his property.

 

[Ironslave]

Duality... for arguments sake, say for example an average good samaritan walking the street had done this, and not a police officer, what would be your response?