warrantless searches and vehicles

[tomneal]

I realize that I might hold a minority opinion on this forum but...

The fact that some drugs are illegal in the US has many unintended consequences. Among them are:

- the bad guys are making too much money, too easily
- police officers are pushing the limits of the 4th amendment
- honest citizens are being killed in other countrys
- there is an over use of no-knock warrents in the US, mistakes are being made, honest citizens are dying


I am sure I could list more but life is intruding.


I don't use illegal drugs. But, I have an occasional adult beverage and always have my morning coffee.

I would prefer that people didn't take recreational drugs and think recreational drug use should be discuraged. But, I don't think they should be illegal.


I see the situation on the Texas-Mexico border as a conflict beteen Law Enforcement in the US and smuglers. The drugs are cheap on the South side and expensive on the North. There are always people willing to break the law if there is enough money to be made. If some drugs weren't illegal on one side of the boarder, the price would be the same on both sides and there would be no smugling.


I don't expect to convence anyone that I am right.
I don't expect anyone to convence me that I am wrong.


I see a lot of issues besides drugs that divide our county.
- Gun Control
- Global Warming
- Abortion
- the war on poverty
- undocumented workers (or whatever term you normaly use)
- taxes
- the war on terrorism

I suspect that I am on the same side of the fence with most readers of this forum on most of these issues.

Some times solutions are counter intuitive.
- More guns, less crime
- lower tax rates, more tax revenue
- give 'the poor' less, and there are fewer poor

Maybe the solution to 'the drug problem' is counter intuitive as well.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Maybe the solution to 'the drug problem' is counter intuitive as well.

Very well put.

[anygunanywhere]

Deep thinker.

Thanks for the food for thought.

Anygun

[KBCraig]

Maybe the solution to 'the drug problem' is counter intuitive as well.

It's not counter-intuitive to me. It's perfectly intuitive that prohibition doesn't work. It didn't work with alcohol, doesn't work with guns, and won't work with illegal drugs.

So here's one more on your side!

[KRM45]

I realize that I might hold a minority opinion on this forum but...

Maybe the solution to 'the drug problem' is counter intuitive as well.

Thank you for explaining your position in more detail. When I saw this quote above I strongly disagreed:

The druggies are just screwing up their own lives and neighborhoods.

While I still disagree I understand your position and respect your opinion.

[John]

While I still disagree I understand your position and respect your opinion.

Ditto

[tomneal]

Thanks for the kind words.

Sometimes I use short cuts and bumper sticker length descriptions when I try to state my opinion on recreational drugs.

My actual views are a lot more complicated.


I don't want children supplied with recreational drugs.

I don't want any of my rights or the rights of my children sacrificed because some folks abuse recreational drugs.

I don't want adults using recreational drugs when their actions could hurt me or my family. (I am thinking DWI.)



I'd like to stockpile a one year supply of antibiotics but I suspect that would violate some drug law.

When I hurt my back picking up a T-Post at the gun range, I would have liked to have taken one of the left over pills from my son's back injury in a car wreck. But that would have violated the drug laws.

My wife takes some perscription drugs daily. I'd like to buy them from a privider in Canada because they would be cheaper, but that might violate some drug law.

I have read that some folks dying of cancer think smoking pot will releave their suffering.
I have read that Doctors are being prosicuted (or persicuted) for perscribing 'too many' pain meds for pain sufferers.
I think it's just plain mean to deny someone that is suffering (or dying) anything that might help releave their suffering.


I suspect that some of the folks that think I am 'wrong' about the 'war on drugs' might have commited drug felonys by taking drugs perscribed to family or friends, or buy buying drugs from Canada.

I lost two parents to cancer. Towards the end, their pain was great. I'd hate to think that they suffered more, because a doctor was afraid to perscribe enough meds to keep them pain free, because of a possible drug law procution.


The 'war on drugs' has a lot of unintended concequences.


The problem is a lot more complicated than can be covered in a few paragraphs in an internet forum.
The solutions is as well.


Now for my bumper sticker:
The war on drugs seems more like a war on the bill of rights.

[CHL/LEO]

Tom Neal - you bring up some very good points that I don't have any issues with. All I know is that our "war on drugs" is not working. The drug problem in Dallas is not any better today than it was 20 or thirty years ago - in fact it's worse. I don't know what the answer is but that saying of, "The definition of insanity is to keep doing what you have been and expecting different results" comes to mind.

Prohibition didn't work regarding alcohol and it won't work with drugs either; at least using the methods we currently are. There is way too much of a demand and way too much money to be made in this industry. Look at what's happening in Mexico now - the drug cartels are better funded and equipped than the military and government are. That country is very close to having a disaster happen where the drug lords are in fact the de facto government. Nature abhors a vacuum and if they do capture or wipe out one cartel group another will just take its place.

At our department probably more than half of all our calls for service are somehow related to drugs - directly or indirectly. One thing officers will tell you is that the drug problem creates job security for LE.

[BadCo45ACP]

Fall of 1979 on a trip from Houston to New Braunfels, I was stopped by DPS for doing 70 in a 55 just east of Seguin. I was 21 and this was my 3rd traffic stop in as many years, all speed related. I was taught (be it right or wrong) by parents and drivers ed teacher, that when stopped to get out and meet the officer at the back of the vehicle w/ license in hand. I did so on this occasion offering the license w/ what I considered to be a very friendly "howdy", only to have the very young officer snatch the license from my grip and respond "this ain't no license check boy". He then proceeded past me, and with out asking for or being given permission to search my vehicle, opened my drivers side door and proceeded to dig through my ash tray. When I followed, he jerked out of the car with his hand on his pistol, and ordered me back to the rear of the car. He then resumed searching and came out of the car w/ an empty beer can (the only one in the vehicle. this was also before the open container law) and asked how many I'd had to drink. I answered "one as I was leaving Houston". He then asked what I'd been smoking, I responded "Marlboro menthols". He then climbed back in the car and came out with what the law would consider a "club". I don't know what the law was in 1979 concerning the carrying of weapons while traveling, so I may have been in violation. He asked what it was to which I did not offer a response. He then answered his own question by saying "this is a club. That means you're going to jail boy". I still offered no response. He came to the back of the car and handing the club to his partner got into his vehilce and began running my license while the older much more seasoned partner casually asked questions about what the weekend plans had been. When the first officer returned he asked why I had the club and what was I planning to do with it. The partner cut in and said "awe leave the boy alone, this is just a sawed off shovel handle". The two stared at each other for what seemd like a very long time when the young officer finally said "I'm gonna give you a ticket for speeding but I'm gonna forget about the club. You're not getting it back though. And I'd better not ever catch you speeding through here again. Breathing a big sigh of relief, I took my license and ticket, got back in my car and got out of there as fast as legally possible. Two weeks later the young officer was killed during a routine traffic stop by someone who matched my description so closely it wasn't funny. You can imagine my relief when they caught the guy a couple of hrs. later.

[CHL/LEO]

Here's a very recent story about what our War on Drugs will do when you have mandated activity by departmental leadership. By no means am I excusing any of these officer's behavior but now you have multiple lives destroyed:

Probe into Atlanta drug raid unveils widespread corruption

By GREG BLUESTEIN
Associated Press

ATLANTA — It started as a federal probe to determine how a botched police raid led to the shooting death of a 92-year-old woman but it has now expanded into a sweeping investigation into possible corruption in the Atlanta Police Department.

Federal indictments released Thursday assert that Atlanta narcotics officers - including others not implicated in the shooting case - repeatedly lied to judges in order to obtain search warrants, falsely claimed confidential informants purchased drugs and falsified warrants so they could meet goals set by police brass.

The allegations were part of the plea deals negotiated by prosecutors with narcotics officers Gregg Junnier and J.R. Smith in the killing of Kathryn Johnston, but they have implications beyond the three officers charged in the woman's death.


"When you look at the facts as they've developed so far, you have multiple officers involved in multiple actions on multiple occasions," said Gino Brogdon, one of Junnier's attorneys. "And that is systematic."

Federal officials seem to agree. U.S. Attorney David Nahmias said prosecutors will "find out just how wide the culture of misconduct that led to this tragedy extends" and FBI Special Agent Gregory Jones said investigators may pursue more charges.

The indictment stemmed from a Nov. 21 "no-knock" drug raid on Johnston's home in one of Atlanta's roughest neighborhoods.

According to the plea agreement, Smith and other officers were alerted to Johnston's home by a suspected drug dealer Fabian Sheats, who was standing outside a nearby store. Smith planted bags of marijuana under a rock near where Sheats was standing, and later authorities found 10 bags of marijuana and two bags of crack cocaine with him.

When they threatened to charge Sheats, he promised he could direct officers toward a bigger bust, and pointed them to Johnston's home. Sheats said he spotted a kilogram of cocaine there when he went to buy crack from a man named "Sam."

The officers never got an informant to buy drugs at the home, but told a magistrate judge that a drug deal had been made so they could get a search warrant.

Around 6:40 p.m., Smith and another officer pried the metal bars from Johnston's wooden front door and rammed it open. On the other side of the door, Johnston fired a single errant shot from her .38 caliber revolver. It struck none of the officers. Smith, Junnier and four other officers responded by unloading 39 rounds at the woman, striking her five or six times, including a fatal shot to the chest.

Three officers were wounded, apparently by bullets fired by their fellow officers.

After searching the home and finding no drugs, prosecutors said the officers tried to cover up the mistake. Smith handcuffed the dying woman and planted three baggies of marijuana in the basement of her house. He then called informant Alex White and told him to pretend he had bought crack cocaine at the house.

Smith, 35, and Junnier, 40, pleaded guilty Thursday to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation and making false statements. Smith also pleaded guilty to a state perjury charge.

Arthur Tesler, a third officer charged in the shooting, faces charges of violation of oath by a public officer, making false statements and false imprisonment under color of legal process.

Federal investigators will now be able to use Smith and Junnier to guide them through the department's policies.

One procedure that is sure to be scrutinized: Monthly goals the department asked its officer to meet. Defense attorney Rand Csehy called it the "nine-and-two system."

Csehy, who represents Junnier, said narcotics officers were required to make nine arrests and obtain two search warrants each month in an effort to show Atlanta residents that the war on drugs was working.

The indictment also raised more questions about the procedures under which officers obtain "no-knock" warrants - special warrants intended to prevent suspects from getting rid of evidence and to protect officers from potentially violent suspects.

Smith and Junnier claimed that police officers have repeatedly lied to judges to obtain the warrants by falsely claiming that homeowners have weapons, surveillance cameras or posed other threats.

Atlanta police officials did not immediately comment Friday, but Chief Richard Pennington told reporters Thursday that officers were not trained to lie and did not have performance quotas.

"I assure you that we will not tolerate any officers violating the law and mistreating our citizens in this city," he told reporters.

Junnier's attorneys stressed on Friday that the case is far from over.

"The lights are on now - and there's no place for the roaches to hide," said Brogdon. "I think they're going to find everything."

[tomneal]

I don't like warrentless searches and I don't like no knock searches.

According to the article, there is a systematic problem with drug arrests and searches in Atlanta. I remember similar stories about Houston Police in the 70's and 80's.

There is a web site devoted to describing honest citizens that died during no knock searches for drugs. Some of those honest citizens that died were LEO's that died at the hands honest citizens that thought the no knock search was a home invasion.

I don't think the War on Some Drugs is worth a single life.

[frankie_the_yankee]

I don't like warrentless searches and I don't like no knock searches.

Remember the original purpose of no-knock searches? It was so the BG's couldn't get rid of the drugs (down the toilet, etc.) while stalling the cops at the door.

I always wondered about the logic there. If the BG's involved really were major dealers, they would usually have too much stuff to get rid of quickly. And if they were not big time, why bother with the raid to begin with?

And I think arguments about "officer safety" have an uphill battle. A no-knock warrant might make it easier to take a BG (or a group of BG's) by surprise. But at the same time it creates an increased risk that the homeowner, BG or not, will mistake the raid for a home invasion and shoot.

Some might say that such a mistake is unlikely, because the cops are in uniform, announce who they are, etc. But that ignores the fact that some BG's PRETEND to be cops when doing actual home invasions, to get the homeowners to hesitate just long enough to be easily taken.

I don't think the War on Some Drugs is worth a single life.

I'm with you Tom. I don't like drugs. I agree that they are harmful. Under their influence, many people are tempted into wasting their lives. But by making them illegal, we have created a "cure" that is worse than the disease.

Just think. Where would criminal gangs get the money they need to operate if not for drugs?

[CHL/LEO]

And I think arguments about "officer safety" have an uphill battle. A no-knock warrant might make it easier to take a BG (or a group of BG's) by surprise. But at the same time it creates an increased risk that the homeowner, BG or not, will mistake the raid for a home invasion and shoot.

You can click on this link below and read this story about why we do "no-knock" warrants. This was a federal warrant that we were serving for the DEA and they didn't request a "no-knock warrant". You can read the story for all the details but the bottom line is we arrived, clearly and loudly announced who we were, and knocked. The suspect had time to get ready and started firing an assault rifle through the door. Trust me - there's more reason that just "flushing dope down the toilet" for getting a NK warrant.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... f8ba9.html

[frankie_the_yankee]

You can click on this link below and read this story about why we do "no-knock" warrants.

..........

Trust me - there's more reason that just "flushing dope down the toilet" for getting a NK warrant.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... f8ba9.html

Well, I didn't say that a no knock warrant was never in order, just that I didn't like them.

Also, the story tells what happened in this case when a normal 'knock and announce' warrant was served. But how do you know it would have worked out better if the team had simply burst in at 3AM? Maybe the BG would have grabbed the assault rifle and engaged the team in a (suicidal) close quarters gunfight where there could have been more casualties.

I mean we don't really know, right?

Then, think of what would have happened if someone could buy meth in a drug store. Nothing, that's what. No warrant. No raid. No gunfight. No drug ring. Just a quiet morning in Dallas.

Maybe some poor slob might have OD'ed somewhere along the line, but that would be about it.

And that type of thing tends to self-correct. Most people do not want to live in the gutter, after all.

[carlson1]

You can click on this link below and read this story about why we do "no-knock" warrants. This was a federal warrant that we were serving for the DEA and they didn't request a "no-knock warrant". You can read the story for all the details but the bottom line is we arrived, clearly and loudly announced who we were, and knocked. The suspect had time to get ready and started firing an assault rifle through the door. Trust me - there's more reason that just "flushing dope down the toilet" for getting a NK warrant.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... f8ba9.html

I worked Narcotics for the State for 8 years. I have my opinion that I will not share, but is this not the warrant that the SWAT officers actually shot themselves?