I fucking agree with you. If you are inside your house safe why have a team of goons at gunpoint search your house and treat you like a criminal yelling at you to keep your hands up then violate you by patting you down for the apparent reason of a 19 year old missing kid who they know the identity of. It is insane and completely absurd..

The STATE will decide when you are safe in your own premises......that's not even for you to question.......

See the picture of the guy in the Hummer to the right? THAT guy gets to determine things for you now. That person and his opinion which is influenced entirely by people in higher places gets to determine life or death over the population he is to "protect". He, who probably is jacked up on 'roids and who watched Rambo the night before gets armored up and given an AR15 with a scope and the "responsibility" of "protecting" the other troops as they patrol your streets. Don't get in their way though! Don't question! They might slip up.......shoot a hundred bullets into your boat or house thinking the "bad guys" are holed up inside. The thin blue lines protects them from those mistakes and you and I get fucked right up the goat ass.

Those guys lose their rights and freedoms as soon as they're done playing army but pfft, who fucking cares right! They're out saving the world from the huge amount of terrorists that are roaming our cities. No time for straight honest thinking!

I'm just rambling and adding to your post. Not telling you "how it really is" or anything.

Right in the goat ass

My only friend is an AM radio

Its the art of Deception, we are here to protect you by pointing are guns at you and treating you as if you are a criminal. The people cheering after the suspect was caught was priceless. When they did not realize by deception they were all actually the criminals.

[deleted]

You cant just quote somebody (using quotation marks) make the text bold and then claim paraphrased.

here you go

That is the best way I have heard it put. Simple, yet effective.

Are you surprised? The next day after the bombings there was military police on the street checking people's ID's, and they didn't know who the bomber was yet.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/04/16/day-after-marathon-blasts-investigation-continues/4oQaszf1BWu0XIGFlNAOHN/story.html?pic=26

MILITARY POLICE! Policing a city... The last time when the army had something to do with police in my country was when we were under communist dictatorship. That is a hallmark of a communist totalitarian dictatorship state.

This was 100% martial law in all but name and without a proper reason. Using only 100% civilian police and detectives the same result and work could have been done without trampling over peoples rights. Beat cops and detectives are used to dealing fairly with citizens. SWAT, FBI tactical teams, ATF, the army, and all those agencies tactical teams aren't. They will not take your rights into consideration because they are not trained to do so. Usually by the time they are deployed, someone else has done the proper initial front line work(talk to people, gather information, get warrants) to assure that tactical's deployment will be constitutional and legal.

THIS TIME THEY WERE THE FRONT LINE! The only place where the front line in policing are combat troops(SWAT and tactical fit the bill) is a war zone. For a few days Boston was a war zone.

Still not sure if it was incompetence at leadership level due to paralyzing fear or just a test for future things to come.

So those military IRAQ style searches of buildings where every civilian was considered hostile where just a natural next step. I wonder what the next step after this will be... hope we never get to see it...

I hope people stop everything and start to think what really happened and realize they got screwed over the govt. I hope some of these homeowners file a suit against the govt. for infringing on there rights as a citizen.

I would like to point out that in the US civilian police are not trained to take the peoples rights into consideration either. They are in fact trained to trick people into voluntarily giving up their rights.

They didn't. This This entire scenario played out within 100 miles of the border, which means that it happened in the "Constitution Free Zone" of america. Here's a link from 2008, and here is the map that shows which areas are affected. This isn't "new", in fact it was pushed through several years ago. It's important to remember that while the public is stressing about gas prices and how dumb honey boo boo is....these people are designing and selling you your own enslavement. This is chess, not checkers. They have been setting up for this crap for decades......WAKE THE FUCK UP! Learn your recent history, and then complain about all the rights being stripped away. Chances are, they've been gone for years and only when youfind out they're gone will it be far far too late...

First of all, the population isn't a "tireless minority", they're an apathetic mass. The majority of regular folks have bought into the illusion of choice (red or blue) and will bury their head in the sand of that side vehemently. Second, not trying to sound like a dick, but I posted this information to help. It's a waste of energy to fight something that no longer is valid in this case. They made the Constitution Free Zone several years ago, and then this happened in that zone. The people knew about it, but shrugged it off as if it wasn't going to affect them (like they always do). Well guess what...it's affecting them now and everybody's pissed at the government when they SHOULD be pissed at themselves for allowing this to happen years ago. As previously stated, this is chess not checkers. Learn recent history, and pay attention- just because a bill passes today doesn't mean they won't wait a few years for everyone to forget about it before they start showing it in action. Heaven forbid they start using the patriot act to it's full potential.....Boston was a drop in a barrel compared to the shit in THAT piece of work.

This portends exactly what I expect will happen with executive order 13603 (signed march 16th, 2012), which grants the executive branch the right to seize any and all resources deemed necessary for national security (including people), during peacetime or times of national emergency, without congressional approval, and not subjectable to judicial review.

Almost no one will notice that document until something blatantly dictatorial occurs. And when people suddenly cry foul, they'll just be referred to 13603, only to realize that we became a militant state in 2012.

Exactly. And this where, I think, the problem stems from....

People are too busy. There's no time to pay attention, I've got to go to work at a job I loathe to make money to pay bills I shouldn't need, then I gotta take my daily or weekly dose of TV to escape my reality. The people don't take time to critically think about ANYTHING, or they've been pigeon holed into a situation where most people can't.

"Dancing with the stars is on!! I better go take my 30 minute dose of 'Beautiful people'. Then I take my 30 minute dose of 'I can sing better than that!' when American Idol comes on."

There's been 2 entire generations grow up in this country being indoctrinated to think like drones, and act like drones, and soon they'll also be "protected" by drones. They want people smart enough to RUN the machines, but not smart enough to ask WHY they have to run them. You can't force people to think. You can't force people to understand that. The only you can do is watch their moves, and plan accordingly. THIS IS CHESS. The more you people try to point up at the hill and bitch about things, the less time you have to be positioning your pieces for either defense or a counter strike. There is enough evidence on the board now to expose their strategy, be smart enough to look out for your self by studying it and seeing what the next move is going to be so YOU can either circumvent it before it happens or protect yourself WHEN it happens.

I know, you're only on reddit talking about this stuff because you WANT to HELP people!! I get it! I want to Help people too!! You gotta realize though, that some people don't want to be helped. They're perfectly happy soaking up all the good times and prosperity as long as they can, only to be blindsided when TSHTF. And some people might want help, but want to wait until it's too late to ask for it. These people see it, but they want to soak up all the good times too, they don't understand that their "greed" will be their downfall.

It's okay to be compassionate, but be smart about it.

Couldn't have said any of that better myself. This is, almost verbatim, what I tell people constantly. That we're intentionally kept too busy to care. That we should be cultivating lives we don't feel the need to escape from with weekends, vacations, and TV time. That our education system is designed to create soldiers, not thinkers. That the only way to combat the rising tyranny is to remove our dependence on the machine. Grow gardens, foster community interdependence, stop paying taxes. Non-violent, non-cooperation. Stay calm and starve the beast.

And chess is my favorite game.

I'm glad to know there's at least one other person out there delivering the same message. Actually, I've encountered an encouragingly robust number of similar mindsets, but as you mentioned, a lot of them are reactive about it. The toughest part, in my experience, is inclining people to think proactively about this situation, before it's too late. It may be already.

Everybody makes fun of those crazy preppers... squirreling away "supplies" and researching "free energy" or "micro-hydro power"...looking at off grid homesteading.....and clinging to guns. They ridicule, and call them crazy, and say "Y2K didn't happen, The Mayan Calnder didn't happen...You're just too paranoid!"....all the while they submerse themselves in materialistic bullshit, consuming for the sake of consumption and not one time paying any attention to the policy that ACTUALLY matters. They worry about gay marriage, and taxes on internet sales....completely oblivious to the monster feeding their addictions.

When the times comes, and it will come, when the house of cards fall- it will devastate this massive group of the population. They will not have survival skills. They will look to preppers, just as they looked to commerce and government, for their "help". Sadly, they will not find it.

While it may be "a law" it is an illegal law therefore I do not need to comply..the concept of a Constitution free zone is absurd my rights extend to anywhere I stand in the US. I and for that matter any citizen should stand up for thier inalienable rights as citizens. In reality this law should be considered treason on the rights of the people and any elected official who supported this should be brought up on charges. ... but we all know this will never happen, as the people in Boston demonstrated...

I agree completely, unfortunately T-rex stands a better chance of cracking out 100 push-ups before charges of treason would be brought up...

It is only an 'illegal' law if the Court determines that, yes? I am imagining that your constitutional law is similar to mine (Australian), in that the courts are to apply the constitution and may strike down law which is in violation.

Also, treason is a bit of a stretch. I understand your passion on the issue, but to throw around words like that undermines the message you are trying to convey.

Interesting articles - when it comes to external boundaries on the coast line, would it not be where the US waters end and international waters start as opposed to the coast itself? When I step into the water I am still in the US. Just wondering.

Well, that's the ACLU website, I would imagine they're pretty spot on with their info....but I guess anything is possible with these jokers..

[deleted]

Just think, though.....A constitution free zone......that's a two way street, isn't it.

As someone who lives in a country that up until about 23 years ago was a communist state I can tell you this is worse than it was during that time as far as illegal searches and having weapons pointed at you.

I pity you America, srsly. I do, and if less 'fortunate' people like us have gotten to this conclusion you should truly be worried about what your country is becoming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Republic_of_Romania

How do you think communism started in my country? Simple: "Look, WW2 is over, Soviet Russia has won this side of Europe, they will make us their slaves, just accept us, the Romanian Communist Party(People's Party) and give us absolute power because the soviets trust us and we'll keep you safe from the worst of what they have planned for this country. We just want the best that can be achieved under the current circumstances to keep you and this country as safe as it can be."

Same principle, 70 years ago with other actors.

And even so, in '79 my father had a neighbor that was tech savvy and built his own radio transmitter and was tuning in and transmitting on the police(called the "militia") channel by accident. EVEN SO, a nice militia man came to his house, rang the door bell, patiently waited until someone came to the door and asked them politely if they can come in, discuss the situation and dismantle the equipment. AT NO POINT WAS THERE ANY GUN DRAWN. IN A FULLY TOTALITARIAN COMMUNIST STATE.

Good luck America! You are going to need it!

Edit: recounting of the old story.

POLICE STATE HAS ARRIVED

"Normalizing" in process. This will be the norm...it is only a matter of time. The reasons to justify it will get less and less severe.

What the fuck happened to this country? Why do so many people think this is ok??

Because it's not happening to them so they don't care.

Nail. Head.

It didn't happen to me granted...but when I see all the "Ohhh, if they tried to pull that shit on me, I'd have a rifle in their faces" types, I know those people weren't there either.

Hot pursuit has long formed a part of English common law as one of the exceptions to the castle doctrine which affords owners of private property protection against the intrusion of government agents as well as civilian trespassers. As such, it has been exported to many former colonies of the British Empire, including the United States and Canada.

I don't think it's too difficult to understand how exceptional the Boston case is unless you are of the type who is convinced that (nearly) any government action is a coordinated effort to destroy liberty. When was the last time a serial murderer using improvised explosives was at large and being pursued in an urban area?

If the authorities knew where the suspect was the searches would be unwarranted. If the authorities weren't dealing with what potentially could have been a serious terrorist threat, the searches would be unwarranted. But the combination of the two outweighs your right to be king of the castle. If you don't like the possibility of living in a specific neighborhood of a specific city in the country and having your apartment swept once in a lifetime, you had better not choose your castle in those neighborhoods.

That said, if there was a bomb-making murderer in my small town and the cops weren't going door to door to find them and make sure they weren't holding hostages anywhere, I would put together a posse and do it myself.

-and I'll find out who you are, form my own posse and do the same to you, your wife and your children at 3 am. Just to show you what it's like to be yanked out of your home and have your family frightened.

Where I live we have what's called castle laws. Legally you would be an intruder and I would be within my rights to kill you.

Castle laws have exceptions like hot pursuit.

If you come to my home just to prove a point, you're a criminal. If you did it under the official reason given by the authorities, and they were doing nothing, I'd gladly let you have a look then join you at my neighbor's door.

Now you can argue whether the official reason was true or not, but what I have been saying is assuming the official account is true, I don't think anyone's rights were unjustly infringed. If the official account is untrue, we have some big fish to fry, because then, yeah, this was a huge intrusion under a false flag. I'm just not one to treat every emergency as a false flag and instantly assume everyone is out to get me.

I'll agree that it sets a bad precedent. That said as far as occupations go, it wasn't exactly the worst case scenario.

Because you don't start with the worse case. You work your way up slowly justifying it to the people you're attempting to oppress. I don't treat every attack like a false flag either but Boston was expected.

-and for the record, I don't care about your motive or reason, you're not a cop so that also makes you a criminal as well.

Boston was expected.

Link me to some sourced evidence of that and I'll recant everything I've said. Not to be a dick or anything, but I was awake on that Thursday night following via twitter and the videos I saw made the place out to be a warzone. I'm going to tend to believe first hand video accounts over baseless speculation.

It was expected by people who have been keeping up with events over the past 10 years. There's no official news source to my knowledge, I just knew something like this would be coming to justify what comes next, which is to reenforce the idea that we need to be disarmed. -and of course turn us against one another, cops don't have to do a damn thing if we're busting each others doors down. (hint hint)

It was predicted that they would go after black powder after this incident and sure enough they are. These attacks aren't going to stop either. Not until the American people are so demoralized that they will gladly give up their rights just to make it stop.

A quick Google search "bill to ban reloading powder" shows lots of places are attempting to pursue bills. There's also symbolism in selecting Boston. Lots of battles have been fought in Boston however it's where rebels put up a sight to secure a cache of weapons in 1770 as stated i another post yesterday.

Im fairly certain between the us marshalls..bounty hunters..the fbi..the atf..state and local police forces and heck old people with nothing better to do..we have found a large number of criminals working within the boundaries of the legal system..heck we have found people that have killed way more people then boston..the point is we didnt need to send in humvees armored like its downtown baghdad on day 2 and have people forceably removed from their homes to catch serial killers..serial bombers..and mass murders .. I have the human right to protect my family..and what kills me is they still didnt get him..a fully informed ..aware citizen did

Why have the residents accepted this??? A class action lawsuit is imperative.

Because they are scared shitless? If an angry man is yelling at me with a semi automatic weapon, LE officer or not, I'm going to do what he says. My rights or not. I don't want to die.

Worse thing is, if you do stand your ground they'll probably arrest you while abusing you. Let you go only when they realise you're no threat with no apology. Can people even be bothered - it just seems easier to comply?

Maybe we'll become the next China.... ( Tiananmen Square, anyone?) [Whole different situation, I know]

Because they are scared shitless? If an angry man is yelling at me with a semi automatic weapon, LE officer or not, I'm going to do what he says. My rights or not. I don't want to die.

Patrick Henry would be so disappointed in you right now.

Give me liberty only when I don't have to die for it. ;) I'm a disappointment to this country... and I apologize.

at least you apologized

Its sad that most people just comply with everything they are told for the fact if they stand up against it they will be prosecuted like the see ever day on T.V. That's why people comply and that's why they don't stop.

And after ALL they did was for nothing. It was a citizen that found him. All the "troops", all the rape and pillaging and all the cost totally for naught.

Not only that, but it was after the lockdown had ended and the citizen found the guy specifically because he was told he could go outside.

If the man had gone outside 8 hours earlier, we probably would have found the guy 8 hours sooner. The lockdown delayed the suspect being found.

Totally agree man. Citizens are clearly not capable of detecting an intruder in their own homes. Nope the Boston military has to raid peoples homes all jacked up on testosterone and their alpha male complex juice.

Who's to say they don't have home owners hostage in their own home? If I was on the run from a massive police force, I'd consider ducking in a home and taking the kids hostage. Then instead of a day of lockdown looking for a potential terrorist, Boston might still be trying to find this guy, and you all would be bitching about all the extra security in the mean time.

How many people were injured in the invasions? How long did they last? How many arrests resulted? Etc.

Sure it might be that the authorities encouraged the suspects and arranged for the bombing so they could have an excuse to practice their martial law game plan and justify their FEMA and SWAT budgets or the authorites took exceptional action to deal with a clear and present threat to security.

They would have had to deal with that when the situation came.

They dealt with the situation as it came...they had a serial terrorist on the loose and flushed him out and captured him. If they had not Boston would still be under increased security today until the suspect was uncovered. If there was a third attack, Boston would be under martial law. They came, they saw, they did their job, and got the fuck out...isn't that the textbook case for needing SWAT teams and national guards?

but the BPD did not flush him out, he was discovered by a private citizen outside of the search area after the BPD had lifted request to stay in your homes.

so......

You make a very good point.

I'm not a "shill" and i can definitely understand the concern, but I'm also concerned about crying wolf, as it distracts from truly traitorous acts and desensitizes people against criticism of government action.

I just didn't see this as an overreaction, but as a justifiable reaction to an extraordinary set of circumstances. Edit: It should also serve as a lesson for similar situations in the future. I see this as a (slightly) exaggerated reaction (even more exaggerated in hindsight), not as an abuse of military power ala Kent State.

Technically he wasn't a serial terrorist... they committed one instance of attacks and as far as we actually know. They didn't do it. Or even perhaps coerced to do it.

The cover story was serial murderer and possible terrorist. You can argue that the cover is false, but that doesn't negate the response of organizations unaware of the conspiracy, but would require corrective action on those who betrayed us.

What do you mean by serial terrorist, that makes no sense, At the time They had a suspect of the bombing on the loose. He was not a serial Terrorist. " If they had not Boston would still be under increased security today until the suspect was uncovered". What are you talking about they called off the search and said the lockdown was over at 5pm, If they never found him shit would have gone back to basically how it was before they Identified him.

The possibilities are endless and we can all argue why one situation works and another doesn't and vice versa. What bothers me. Is that the Federal government has gotten so big, so consuming, that the citizen no longer has a right to anything. Sure they SAY you do. But when injustice happens, everyone seems to look the other way and just go "well it wasn't me." I'm scared for a nation that employs more people by giving them a rifle and conditioning them to just take orders and that any resistance to those orders is viewed as treason and reason to be killed on the spot.

That's why constant vigilance is essential.

Too much military power and our government risks tyranny. Too little military power and our society risks security.

Too little scrutiny and we allow corruption. Spurious scrutiny and we cause harm to legitimate authority and provide cover through obscurity for corruption.

It's a balancing act and one that is and has always been the price for living in a free society.

I see your point and I respect that it is the price we pay, However I think too little benefit too greatly for us to believe we have the best system we can have. Too many backwards things going on and it's just getting worse. The justifications for losing rights only increase and I'm afraid that we will be another rome or another germany. Humanity will look back on the legacy of the freedom nation known as America and will hardly learn from the fall of it's empire. I get the balance and check society we live in, but it's starting to implode on itself. Too much complications, Too much corruption, too much fear compelling citizens to be fed by a nanny state.

Thank you for your civil tone. I don't suppose I should have to say it, but I feel like I'm in enemy territory. I listen to mainstream media and alternative media on both sides of the political spectrum (Democracy Now, 2600, No Agenda, Alex Jones). I like to be critical of all media, because all of it, even the independents, sometimes especially the independents, have an agenda.

It struck me as I was reading your response that it reminded me of "All Along the Watchtower." Yeah, the federal government is scary because it's a huge bureaucracy that no one person can oversee, let alone the worries that the people who do oversee it have our best interests at heart.

The problem I have is jumping to the conclusions. Alex Jones, for instance, called this all a false flag all the way back on April 15. How could he know that at that point? Even if it turns out to be, these kind of wild speculations drown out real whistleblowers with actual evidence.

We can't really collapse the size of the government by a significant amount. We may be able to cut it by say a quarter if we were willing to live with fewer services, but even then the remaining bureaucracy would still be massive, and paradoxically, even more blindly loyal. In other words, 8,000 FEMA employees in the place of 10,000 might actually be more susceptible to conspiracy, corruption and greed.

The only way to protect our selves is through the media. Journalistic ethics do not allow for alarmist messages because they reduce credibility. Ultimately, news broadcasters value their credibility more than most people in this sub would realize. The people who want to cry false flag at every emergency are entitled, but they aren't journalist, they are commentators.

Gossip is a dangerous thing. Not because muzzling it protects wrongdoers from scorn, but because it might actually shield the actual wrongdoers by deflecting the blame toward innocent or lesser players. The frustation I have with this sub is that (1) a lot of times that gossip is assumed to be news and people spread it as though it is and (2) it really is desensitizing to real problems. It leaves a society that just assumes everybody is up to no good and gives a pass to serious bad guys. I just find it ironic that people who distrust everything that comes out of a journalist mouth will buy everything that comes out one of these commentator's mouths. It's not that I don't believe some of what they say is true, it's just that I frankly don't give them the credibility that I give to traditionally sourced news. Ultimately the only defense to the fall of empire that you are concerned about is not playing David and Goliath with the bureaucracy, but using our institution the media to keep it in check. I'm just concerned that the instant jump to the message "it's all corrupt" is just as damaging if not more so than "trust it all."

Yeah I appreciate the insight, It's harder for me to see my fellow peers say everything is as it they say it is, rather then them say "It's all lies and corruption." Being critical of information is important and since we do not know everything, it's important for us to refine and revel in the information being brought to us by all parties. Sometimes my bias leads me to question everything I hear on major news sites, however it's the tone and words they use that infuriate me. When a certain picture is to be painted, and a mass majority gulps it up without question, I find a dangerous combination capable of creating a disastrous future. I hate to see people talk about events without going to other sources rather just listening to main stream one sided bullshit. It's just a sad nation where our education teaches us to follow rules rather then create our evolution through intellect refinement.

Well I think all sides of any issue have too many people who look for one source as an authority on a subject. In science, either a proposition is true or false. In politics, an act might be just given a premise that turns out to be false. That sort of uncertainty is intimidating to a lot of people.

Let's say that a cadre of people actually orchestrated these attacks and have managed to obscure it from the masses. The other actors (police and national guard) become unknowing participants in a conspiracy. Sometimes when it comes to things like diplomacy, one party will lie to the other party and both parties will know it's a lie, but they will still negotiate using the lie as a premise, because maybe that lie covers up a truth that neither party wants to discuss.

I'm just kind of conspiracied out. I don't doubt that there are hundreds of conspiracies all operating at the same time, sometimes colluding, sometimes competing, and I'm not sure whether or not that is actually the heart of a representative democracy. The only concern I have is "It's all lies." You know, most people in government can probably earn more in the private sector. Most of them are there for public service. Some are there to benefit private sector companies they will later rejoin.

Let's say you want to hire regulators and inspectors for the natural gas industry. Guess who you are going to hire? People from the natural gas industry. Why? Because they will know the most about the natural gas industry...how it works and where the bodies are buried. But when the administration changes, these people need jobs again. That's how you get former Halliburton and Monsanto and Goldman-Sachs employees in government regulating Halliburton, Monsanto and Goldman-Sachs.

So you can look at that and either say "we got the best and most knowledgable regulators we could get" or "we hired regulators from the very firms they are supposed to regulate" and sadly they are both right. The only way to fix that is to create stable good-paying non-spoils independent bureaucracy jobs for regulators, but then those people become beholden to bureaucratic loyalty.

I like what you said here..

Let's say that a cadre of people actually orchestrated these attacks and have managed to obscure it from the masses. The other actors (police and national guard) become unknowing participants in a conspiracy. Sometimes when it comes to things like diplomacy, one party will lie to the other party and both parties will know it's a lie, but they will still negotiate using the lie as a premise, because maybe that lie covers up a truth that neither party wants to discuss.

It's the fact that there are certain truths we can all agree exist but we don't want to discuss because of how uncomfortable they make us feel. I always like to look at hollywood (because of their deep connections with politics and the elite) and look at the themes they play on in their movies. The Matrix was an amazing novel before movie, that showcased a society plugged into a false reality where the people believe in the consistencies and daily mishaps to be normal. Essentially being pulled out (or taking the red pill) would allow us to open our eyes and minds to the reality of the world we inhabit. Being fully aware that you cannot go back to a false reality without knowing that it is false. I love this premise because it reminds me of the mass of people who would rather remain ignorant and subconsciously use all sorts of argument to defend the system that does not promote their own evolution but keeps them dormant and submissive to the status quo.

Edit: Reworded a few sentences.

If I had to argue with you on that, I'd say we are all victims of our own Matrixs (matrices?). In some people's realities the government has no impact on thier life at all. For others, they feel like the course of their entire life hangs in the balance of some innocuous decision.

You can live in a mindset where the government is always right and you can live in the mindset that government is always wrong. Neither of them are very healthy. My construct is that our government does pretty well for a giant human-run institution. Free of corruption? No chance. Potentially dangerous? Absolutely. Actively planning tyranny? Possibly in some corners. Worthy of overturning? Absolutely not.

You kinda have to give the government some benefit of the doubt. Not a blank check, but benefit of the doubt. Why? If not, you are assuming that this somewhat-corrupt government will be replaced by a better government. We could overthrow the government and end up with a full on totalitarian government. Sure, if we edge to close to totalitarianism, I'd rather run them out than consent despite the uncertainty. But until there is proof of widespread treacherous conspiracy, I'm going to assume that the evil acts of men are usually those of themselves alone and not a part of some elaborate scheme. That doesn't mean we shouldn't constantly watch out for that treachery. What it does mean is we should be careful about who we put that label on.

I agree it's too much force, but who's to say the people in the homes aren't friends with the person and are hiding him from the police?

Who is to say you aren't running a drug cartel in your basement. We could make a blind assumption about everyone with that logic.

The citizen walked out with his hands up, then he dropped them to his side. The police officer then grabbed his arm and held it back up for him so he would know, even though we know you aren't the kid, we still want you walking around with your hands in the air like a criminal (in your own front yard)

And they yelled at them and berated them like they were dogs.

Yelling at people to make them feel like dogs is part of the training.

American Imperialism at its finest.

Not sure this is an example of imperialism. Not saying there isn't an empire run by the US federal government, but I'd hate to see this become another watered down term that loses meaning.

I suppose if we're saying that the rule of authority by the federal government being executed instead of the authority of a dependent state like Massachusetts, then maybe... but that doesn't quite describe the situation here very clearly.

The problem with this is everyone is too scared to do anything.. Welcome to post 9–11 America

I commend you on having the balls to say this sir, upvote for you! Putting myself in their shoes (under the circumstances) I'm honestly not sure what I would had done but this does seem to me to be way "above the law".

they clearly demonstrated that they don't give a fuck about warrants anymore. obviously this is illegal and wrong. but what will anyone do about it? they got away with this in boston. that was their testing ground. they have acquired the power they wanted. I don't doubt that this was the entire reason for this mess.

and to address your point OP, I think most people agree that this is not okay, but the problem is most of us are so encumbered by american or any other capitalist life (full time job, full time schooling, which in a lot of cases it's both combined (mine for example)). this gives people a reason to keep slaving away, instead of dropping everything and fighting back. just a theory of why we have so many awakened, apathetic people out there.

Either these retards are WILLING to give up their rights and because of that they think that means everyone else should be willing to give their rights up as well.

Or they're being totally insincere shills, with the goal of making it appear that this kind of behavior is or should be more publicly accepted than it actually is.

i dont understand their compliance. what happened to questioning authority

Exactly. The media. People who openly question authority are labeled and demonized by media, and then by the audience of the media. You either eat what they feed you, or you are a "violent anarchist", "terrorist sympathizer", "crazy conspiracy theorist using social media to create an army", etc.

The events in Boston do have a silver lining, at least to those of us that were listening to police scanners and seeing videos sent to "evil social media". That silver lining is that it validated our suspicions of how inept/misleading/ full of shit the media is. I can't even count how many times I inadvertently did a "WTF?" face to the tv while listening in on the scanner, and it was due to outright fabrication, not "media delay for officer safety".

All those decades of police shows.

You know when both brothers were in a car being chased but the younger one got away? My theory is they let him get away to see where he would go and if he had allies or support. So they knew where he was during these searches.

Do we know what led cops to this particular house? Did they do this to every house on the block?

the guy who lived there called it in when he saw that the cover of his boat had been disturbed, and looked inside and saw a foot.

The guy who lived at that house? Shouldn't BPD have been more focused on the boat versus the house?

Thanks for the reply, I was camping at a music festival for the entire time this event was going down. No phone, no tv, no radio. Ignorance was certainly bliss...

I guess it all comes down to what one considers "unreasonable" : /

Wish there was ONE REAL AMERICAN who stood up to his constitutional rights and REFUSED without a warrant and by threat of a gun. JUST ONE!

There are those people. They get their doors busted down and if they're armed, they get gunned down.

one of these days there will be an IED under the front porch, or maybe the "suspects" friends hiding in the woods across the road with a couple rifles waiting...

once that starts, these abuses will begin to stop, because they'll be afraid to go busting down doors if there's a good chance the doors will explode on them.

I'm here. They've had no reason to come after me yet, but they'll have to pry my rights from my decaying bones if they ever do. There are plenty of others like me out there, but you'll never hear about us because the media will twist the story to make us sound like monsters. I suspect Dorner was one such American. His rights were trampled. He refused to allow it to happen. Went after the people who perpetrated the offense. Was quickly labeled a murderous, rampaging psycho. The monster was slain. Fairytale ending. Shhh, go back to sleep 'murica.

Here you go

Agree whole heatedly, just wish some of us poor folk had money for guns. So that when this shit happens we could fight back.

Good luck buyin ammo for them guns

just get something that people aren't panicking over. the old .30-30 lever action will do the job fine, and i don't see a shortage of that ammo anywhere. same with a lot of bolt action ammo, 7.62x54r, .303 brit, 8mm mauser, even .30-06 is still found around here.

^

steal it

hi point pistols are cheaper than $200 new. you can get a used one for a bit over a hundred at a pawn shop. legally. they have a lifetime guarantee. they look like shit, and are heavy as a brick, but they go bang.

and there's also explosives. that seems to work quite well for poor people all over the world. it's a bit indiscriminate, though.

I would have told them to fuck themselves if they banged on my door ordering my hands in the air. I would have made them tackle me.

Same. I'd have happily gotten the shit stomped out of me on camera, just to show the sheeple they don't have to bend over and take it up the ass.

They probably would have just shot you and anyone else in your house a couple dozen times to make sure you're not terrorists.

welcome to the future of America. Police state, 2013.

[deleted]

Clear enough. And the 2 billion rounds of ammo would fit the bill.

My opinion..thats exzactly what it was..

So you're saying the Boston Marathon Bombings were setup so that they could eventually test the public's response to a neighborhood lock-down, and subsequent search of the surrounding homes?

No at no point did I say they were set up. I do believe someone had a plan like this waiting and used this as an oppurtunity. It was scarily well coordinated for all of those agencies.

Sorry, I actually ment to reply to whydoyouhefftobemad. I appreciate you answering though! Well my guess is that the FBI, CIA, and ATF were all in close proximity to everything considering the Marathon had just happened on Monday. They were still investigating the bombings which was like a 20 minute drive from where the shootout took place. At least that's my explanation for why they were on scene so quickly.

I don't know what coordination you're talking about though.. Like the searching of the area? I mean they let a 19 year old elude them for like 18 hours, I wouldn't consider them "scarily welly coordinated," then lol. Now had they swooped right in a found him within like 15 minutes of searching, that would be scary..

The groundwork for the legality of such actions were laid. They were just waiting for an opportunity to present itself to use them and gauge people's reaction.

That seems to be the circlejerk these days.

EDIT: And as for the people saying this was "reasonable" (by whatever definition they want to apply), you would still need to get a warrant so your argument is completely invalid. If the situation was as dire as the media portrayed, I'm sure it would have been easy as pie to get a warrant from any judge who would want the publicity for himself.

Not necessarily. There are several circumstances in which a search or seizure is reasonable and requires no warrant whatsoever. Hot pursuit, exigent circumstances, plain view, etc. all authorize search or seizure without a warrant (or a valid warrant, for stuff like the good-faith exception).

So given that rationale if say its reasonable to assume that all individuals in a country will at some point violate at least one law does that give me probable cause to consider every citizen a criminal? In what way does assuming either a. Everyone is a household is a hostage or b. they are aiding and abedding a known terrorist add up to probable cause? Was sitting down to have dinner somehow impeededing their search. Knock on the door ask some questions look for fishy behavior..then get some..

if say its reasonable to assume that all individuals in a country will at some point violate at least one law does that give me probable cause to consider every citizen a criminal?

No.

In what way does assuming either a. Everyone is a household is a hostage or b. they are aiding and abedding a known terrorist add up to probable cause?

I wasn't saying you're wrong in this specific case, but that your assertion -- just the part I quoted -- was wrong in general. It may well be that this behavior falls outside the recognized exceptions to the warrant rule; we'll have to wait for the media hype to die down, and the s. 1983 suits to be filed and litigated. But it's not the case that a reasonable search necessarily needs a warrant, even if it is otherwise reasonable.

Agreed there are rulings that guve the guard rails..but casey jones high on cocaine drove this one right off the rails

Thank you for giving clarification as to the actual law.

[deleted]

Home of the Brave

[deleted]

It's 'land of the free, home of the brave.' That's what FartyNapkins was saying.

Who wants to make a bet when the younger brother is well enough to communicate , he will be either drugged, under the influence of a psychoactive drug or somehow unable to fully communicate comprehensibly.

If he is, we'd never find out.

Unfortunately...this...

Executive Order 13603: National Defense Resource Preparedness

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness

I'm omiting parts of the document, for brevity, but I have not skewed any of the intent. Feel free to double check.

By the authority vested in me as President..

Executive departments and agencies responsible for plans and programs relating to national defense, or for resources and services needed to support such plans and programs, shall...

...in peacetime and times of national emergency...

be prepared... to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources [including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel]...

...for national defense requirements.

Take special note of the parts where it specifies the executive branch's right to ensure the availability of (i.e. to seize) any resources necessary for the sake of national defense...during peacetime or times of national emergency.

The Bill of Rights is pretty much void. This overrules most of it in one fell swoop. They can take what they want, when they want, without congressional approval (and later they use some tricky phrasing to immunize the affects of this order against judicial review, effectively separating them from both the judicial and legislative branches' checks and balances). They also specify three councils in charge of determining when all of this can happen. All three councils are in the executive branch. So they only need their own permission to invade your homes, take your things, even take you. And it's all legal now.

Welcome to 'murica.

Holy fuck. This is so insane. Honestly, guys, for those of us who Dont want to submit to tyranny, what can you do when all these armed men with weapons loaded and ready are at your door? Even if you know its unlawful and unconstitutional for them to search your place without a warrant, do you just stand your ground and film the encounter with an automatic upload feature?

I honestly don't think I would have answered the door. Would they have just busted in the door? So many questions.

nothing will be done by anyone.

You think police-state apologists care about facts or evidence? They care about those less than they care about humans or rights.

Apologies if this comes across as offensive or anything. I'm British so I obviously don't share the same rights and stuff but hear me out. I'm not trying to argue hear I'm just discussing :) but no doubt I'll get downvotes, oh well.

Don't you think it's required for them to do this? For example, the terrorist could have hidden inside and keeping the family hostage, or the resident could've even been working with him and be armed, it's just not a situation where you can't take time. He could've been placing a bomb or disposing of evidence or something like that. I mean it wasn't like they were arresting everyone when they entered the homes, they were simply ordering them out for their and the BPD teams safety. They can't exactly sit down, discuss it and ask them to leave, it's an emergency. If a genuine terrorist entered my home I'd understand why I'd be escorted out at gunpoint by the police, I could be armed and working with the guy for all they know.

At the end of the day the police are there to protect us, now I know the police here in the UK and over there are very different and you guys get a lot of police brutality issues but that's down to the police themselves, not what they can do in an emergency involving a terrorist.

Our police are here to protect the rich and powerful.

Yes but the point I was making is that I don't understand why them entering the residents home, in a severe emergency and them knowing nothing about the residents, is so frowned upon? Like I said they could've been working with him for all they know so they must always use the safest course of action for themselves and the civilians in the nearby area

Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.

We'd all be incredibly safe if we'd just submit to being locked in our own separate cages, told what to eat, forced to exercise, etc.

But that just ain't the way we do things here. Or at least...it's not supposed to be.

I understand, like I said you have different rights that us, as far as things go you people on the other side of the pond have much more freedom.

But surely you can see that what the BPD did was required? They don't have the time to go around getting a warrant for every house to search, that could give the suspect more time to kill people or escape so in order to save more lives, surely some sacrifices must be made? Like I said it's not like the residents were arrested, afterwards they resumed life just as normal.

I understand the rationale, but the reason stuff like that is not constitutional here is that it's too slippery a slope. If a state of emergency or a war has been declared, that's different because the threat is nationwide; lot's of people's lives at risk. In this case, no state of emergency had been declared and the threat was very isolated and limited. Even if the kid had a second bomb, or a firearm, and held a family hostage with it, that does not qualify as a state of emergency. Otherwise, they could call any ol' thing an emergency, and maintain a constantly martialized society (which we actually do, since the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, but that's another discussion).

I'd be hard pressed to say where the line should be drawn, but a single household is certainly too small a danger to flippantly cast everyone's rights out the window.

Ahh I follow now, thanks for clearing that up. I should've looked into the differences over there before I commented. Thanks again, you're totally right about it then, such a shame America has fallen to what it is nowadays

I agree. For all our lofty constitutionalities, we have already slid down that slope I mentioned. We are technically a plutocratic military corporatocracy at this point. Doesn't get much worse than that. IMO, the only thing worse is a fascist dictatorship, and we're headed there fast. Actually, we're headed toward a totalitarian dictatorship, I suppose, since our government seems to think it can impose its will on the entire world.

Well said.

Where does it say that they don't have a warrant?

Then where is the warrant? And why aren't they presenting it to the owner of the house?

And what is it based on? Those people didn't have a connection to the terrorist, and they knew who he was at that point so they knew 100% those people were innocent.

It's not their fault either, doing that kind of first contact front line approach is not what they were trained for. They were trained for one thing only, breach a location already confirmed to need that kind of action. It's the leaderships fault for deploying them in that kind of situation. Totally wrong use of assets.

A warrant does not have to be shown unless specifically asked for. If they have the warrant, legally, they are allowed to enter and search the property. Not a single place in that video is it specifically proven that they don't have a warrant.

But if there would have been beat cops used, instead of SWAT and federal tactical teams, be sure they would have been flaunting that warrant in the face of everyone coming out of that house. Because they are trained to do things like that, these guys aren't. They also aren't trained to get warrants, I doubt any of them know how to.

So I'm quite sure there is no warrant. And how do you know they didn't ask? You can't hear that, all you can hear is the shouting of commands and the radios.

repost is a repost. the searches served a purpose, they weren't just barging in peoples houses for NO REASON.

The point is they are doing it as wrong as it can be done without actually going as far as shooting or arresting anyone.

There was no need for the search to be done this way at all. Waste of money, waste of time, breaking the law, scaring people, putting innocents into harm's way.

So many fugitives have been apprehended without actually needing to call the national guard and APCR's on the streets and wasting everyone's time, money and paralyzing an urban center for so many years before this. There was no need now either. But if they can get away with it, who knows what they will dare do next.

You have to wonder, if 2, maybe now 5 guys with a few pipe bombs can: 1. kill people 2. paralyze the lives of millions of people 3. make them lose their constitutional rights 4. evaporate hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in money lost during this whole operation 5. tie up thousands of law enforcement and army personnel and hundreds of vehicles for a week at least 6. They and their cause became famous around the world.

You have to wonder if 2-5 guys just did this. Have these few guys won? What else could have been their objectives? I think they achieved what they set out to achieve, except maybe escape, which probably they regarded as a small chance anyway.

Are we all losing the war on terror because we are fighting it the wrong way? Are the terrorist actually winning? If this keeps up I do think we are fucked.

Guess what; life is back to normal in Boston. There is no police state. I just had a picnic on the Charles and enjoyed the beautiful sunny weather without fear of police or bomber. I advise you to go outside too.

I honestly wish they had handled it differently, because I'm sure many of the officers involved in this were merely doing their job.. Now many of them are catching flak for it. I wonder how many officers complained about violating the people's rights, and I wonder what happened for doing so? Not every authority figure is trying to program civilians to the sort of things that had taken place. I hope you guys aren't blaming those who were genuinely trying to catch the kid.

Anyway, it sucks that shit went down the way it did. This could have definitely been handled in a way that didn't violate people's rights.. Unfortunately the events of that night happened pretty quickly, and I assume they had this guy running things in Watertown. While they did violate people's rights, at least they didn't go further than that. They didn't illegally seize personal belongings, try to pin something illegal(like drugs) on anyone, and left as quickly as they came. It could have been worse. To me that made me think it was less a conspiracy to prepare the public for this sorta stuff, but more likely poor decision making by those in command.. The worst part is we will never know for sure if they were doing it to actually find the kid, or train the public to accept this sorta thing.. Maybe they thought some crazy conspiracy theorist would give him safe haven because they believed the bros were set-up and amputees were used at the bombings?

What should have happened was have someone who can recite the constitution word for word to be in charge of the operations. Secondly, don't demand to search the homes.. Simply ask the neighbors if they heard anyone trying to break in during the night. If they say "yes" then authorities could ASK the residents for permission to do a walk through. Otherwise move on to the next neighbor, rinse and repeat.

I bet every gun owner had their gun by their side that night.. Quite obvious they didn't have to go home to home.

edit: added a couple sentences.

Devil's Advocate: Nothing in this video showed me a lack of consent to search. It's disturbing to see police raid a home like this, but you can't hear what's being said on the porch and in the house. Furthermore, this search may qualify as an exception to the 4th Amendment as an emergency search for a fleeing felon.

Read your constitution. I'm foreign and still know more. They need to be in HOT pursuit or have credible evidence, sources and suspicious. Searching hundreds of houses seemingly at random, since some weren't searched, doesn't qualify. They literally needed to see him run in the house or in the close area around the house to have any grounds for searching the house without consent from the owner. And pointing a rifle at his face and screaming at him to get his hands up, step outside and let them search the house does not qualify as consent. It is called coercion. You can see and hear more than enough in the video to prove that.

Beat cops and detectives would have been just as effective and wouldn't have stepped all over peoples rights, that's what they are paid for and trained to do. No need for military police, SWAT and different agencies's tactical teams with armored vehicles, that are not trained to interact with civilians, to be doing the beat cops and detectives jobs.

It's my Constitution and since you are such a scholar, you should know that the Fourth Amendment has been interpreted by our state and federal courts to permit certain exceptions. ONE of those exceptions is emergency or hot pursuit the other is consent. This video does not prove there was not consent to search that house.

Furthermore, we aren't talking about a kid who just robbed a convenience store. Acts of terror are acts of war. This kid was suspected - is still suspected - of being a terrorist in possession of bombs capable of causing widespread damage. This creates a public safety emergency that might qualify as a fourth amendment exception.

The video proves there was coercion. In the presence of coercion there can be no legal consent. And the man hunt in this case does not fit with the definition of hot pursuit.

A gang member on drugs with a fully loaded AK is also a danger, while this kid is a terrorist, pure semantic difference.

Being your constitution, can you enlighten me why do you hate it so much and are so eager to see it made optional whenever someone decides it is more convenient for them to just ignore it?

I can't seems to grasp why you would do that seeing as my people only won 'freedom' a bit over 2 decades ago and we still value it for what it actually is... some of your people seem to have forgotten...

Edit: Also could you tell me why 4 uniformed beat cops and a couple of detectives wouldn't have been just as effective or even more so at searching a house without actually holding innocent people at gunpoint and denying them their constitutional rights?

This isn't personal, this is a discussion about public safety procedures and the constitutionality thereof. If you can do that without insulting me then we will continue. If not, then you are cordially invited to take a hike.

I see no insults, and I'm sorry you view my arguments and question as such and choose to ignore them. That is exactly what your government is hoping for when they drop the ball.

Have fun with your new totalitarian regime!

Yes, I get insulted when people tell me I hate my Constitution.

I'm not an expert, but I think 20 men can search a street faster than 6 people. 10,000 of them can search an entire city (save for a boat - bonehead move missing that) in under a day.

All that was needed was for 1 cop to knock at the door and ask politely if the house was secured and the owner was sure he was alright and tell the owner that if he was ok with it he could double check and check the yard and garage.

Multiple guys with assault rifles for 1 house is a waste of resources unless you are 100% certain he is in there, then of course you need 20 guys instead of 6 to do the job in twice the time. And so you have to send SWAT and federal tactical units to do jobs they were not trained for and call in the national guard and their military police to police your streets stepping all over peoples right in the the process, intentionally or unintentionally.

All I can say is the entire thing was just a mess in the way it unfolded.

Whatever the equivalent of "armchair quarterbacking" is in Romania is what you are doing right now.

My government looks up to your government and learns from it what to do and how to do it, has been doing so for the past 20 years. So yeah, I'm interested about what America's future holds because there is a high chance it will come here at some point. We've had our share of 'terrorists' and terror scares. Thankfully it has never come to this yet.

Hope the normally quite useless EU government will prohibit my government from actually practicing this kind of stuff, since if there is one thing the EU is good at is giving all people all kinds of sometimes even crazy rights.

And having military units in my city that have fought in Iraq and Afganistan and seeing their live demonstrations of how they did house to house searches over there, I can identify a military search in a war zone when I see one.

Sorry for being interested. Didn't know that bothered anyone...

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I think the exigent circumstances of a manhunt in progress would give authorities considerable leeway in pursuing their suspects. I note that Glenn Greenwald hasn't argued any constitutional problems on the searches, but he is arguing that authorities ignoring Zhokhar's request for an attorney and continuing to question him is a serious breach of civil liberties.

Considerable leway is one thing...going into homes likes its iraq is another

Are there prior examples of house to house searches during a manhunt in US history? SC case decisions? No one has asked that question yet there's been endless pontification of 4th amendment breaches.

Really? Without a prior court ruling you cant just say that going into someones home when they are gone..without consent doesnt constitute a violation? Nothing is wrong with going door to door and asking questions ..that is standard practice in an investigation. Look for signs of distress then send in SWAT. We skipped the lets talk to the home owner part. They didnt even catch the guy. a normal home owner did. All of it achieved nothing but now that they did it once of course they will do it again.

now that they did it once of course they will do it again.

My question was, 'have authorities done this before and when? Is there prior case law on the question?' And that relates to the issue of whether this is a 4th amendment violation because the SC decides those issues per their right of constitutional arbitration. If there is longstanding case law, then this issue was decided long ago.

I don't know the answer to that question. But I note that no one has been asking it. All I read is a bunch of blanket outrage without any consideration for prior case law.

The only difference was they werent breach/banging every house. Or tearing fencing/gates down with their armor.

Well if was actually in breach of the 4th ammendment, you could sue... Otherwise the only thing its in breach of is your personal opinion on what constitutes the laws of the United States of America. Which carries literally no weight whatsoever... While i have no doubt you are qualified on constitutional interpretation, thats actually a job for the courts, not you.

So stick your money where your mouth is and take them to court, see how you go :)

You have my upboat sir.

^

Home of the Brave

And they yelled at them and berated them like they were dogs.

Nail. Head.

just get something that people aren't panicking over. the old .30-30 lever action will do the job fine, and i don't see a shortage of that ammo anywhere. same with a lot of bolt action ammo, 7.62x54r, .303 brit, 8mm mauser, even .30-06 is still found around here.

It didn't happen to me granted...but when I see all the "Ohhh, if they tried to pull that shit on me, I'd have a rifle in their faces" types, I know those people weren't there either.

Hot pursuit has long formed a part of English common law as one of the exceptions to the castle doctrine which affords owners of private property protection against the intrusion of government agents as well as civilian trespassers. As such, it has been exported to many former colonies of the British Empire, including the United States and Canada.

I don't think it's too difficult to understand how exceptional the Boston case is unless you are of the type who is convinced that (nearly) any government action is a coordinated effort to destroy liberty. When was the last time a serial murderer using improvised explosives was at large and being pursued in an urban area?

If the authorities knew where the suspect was the searches would be unwarranted. If the authorities weren't dealing with what potentially could have been a serious terrorist threat, the searches would be unwarranted. But the combination of the two outweighs your right to be king of the castle. If you don't like the possibility of living in a specific neighborhood of a specific city in the country and having your apartment swept once in a lifetime, you had better not choose your castle in those neighborhoods.

That said, if there was a bomb-making murderer in my small town and the cops weren't going door to door to find them and make sure they weren't holding hostages anywhere, I would put together a posse and do it myself.

I hope people stop everything and start to think what really happened and realize they got screwed over the govt. I hope some of these homeowners file a suit against the govt. for infringing on there rights as a citizen.

They dealt with the situation as it came...they had a serial terrorist on the loose and flushed him out and captured him. If they had not Boston would still be under increased security today until the suspect was uncovered. If there was a third attack, Boston would be under martial law. They came, they saw, they did their job, and got the fuck out...isn't that the textbook case for needing SWAT teams and national guards?

But if there would have been beat cops used, instead of SWAT and federal tactical teams, be sure they would have been flaunting that warrant in the face of everyone coming out of that house. Because they are trained to do things like that, these guys aren't. They also aren't trained to get warrants, I doubt any of them know how to.

So I'm quite sure there is no warrant. And how do you know they didn't ask? You can't hear that, all you can hear is the shouting of commands and the radios.

I would like to point out that in the US civilian police are not trained to take the peoples rights into consideration either. They are in fact trained to trick people into voluntarily giving up their rights.