Do the police have rights too?

posted at 12:31 pm on September 23, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

At first glance it looks like something out of an Orwellian horror film. Police with high power weapons and riot shields shutting down an intersection on a busy city street, rousting families out of cars, handcuffing them all and lining them up on the pavement. But in this case, there was a method to the mayhem. An unknown individual wearing a beekeeper’s mask – hiding not only their identity, race, age, etc. but their gender as well – had robbed a nearby bank and the police were out to get the bad guy.

The Wells Fargo at Chambers and Hampden was robbed just before closing time on Saturday. Shortly afterwards police shut down the intersection of Buckley and Iliff just southeast of the bank, corralling nearly two dozen cars in search for the suspect.

Police Chief Daniel Oates on Monday apologized to the innocent bystanders that got caught up in the search for the suspect. Oates also said the ends justify the means since the suspect was caught.

The police are still apologizing for the inconvenience and trauma to all of the motorists caught up in the sweep, but insist that there was no question of the location of the suspect.

“We had a virtual certainty that the bank robber was in one of those cars,” Oates said.

Officers did find the suspect in one of the cars, and he will likely face bank robbery charges in federal court, Oates said. Investigators also found a beekeeper mask they say the man wore during the robbery as well as two pistols connected to the crime, he said.

So how did they have a “virtual certainty” that the bank robber would be found at that location? The bank teller had inserted a GPS device in the bag of money they gave the suspect and the police were tracking him. When it became obvious that the getaway car was approaching a choke point in the traffic, officials moved in, shut it down and began methodically going through every car at that intersection. And they found the guy, who the police described as “extraordinarily dangerous.”

But now some of the motorists are raising questions as to whether their civil rights were violated with the mass detention. And adding insult to injury, the lawyer for the suspect is already claiming that his client initially refused the police demand to search his vehicle until he felt “pressured” to do so and that all the evidence obtained from the search – money, guns, beekeeper mask – should be thrown out. (No link on that portion of the story yet, but CNN is covering it on their morning lineup.) Seriously?

I hope there is a judge out there with the common sense to toss this notion out to the curb. Yes, many people were inconvenienced, and the police have already offered an apology. But the cops were in the process of quickly apprehending a violent, heavily armed felon right in their midst. And as to the suspect’s claims of some sort of illegal search… how high does that bar have to be? If you can narrow down the location of the evidence to a group of twenty or so cars, is that not “probably cause” enough?

If this guy walks, the world has truly gone mad.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8

Yes, we have a bad job, yes it is stressful and frankly not given the due it should by you. I laugh at some of you making big statements. You have no idea what we deal with on a day to day level. Most people are idiots. Most people we deal with on the street are intentionally or unintentionally dangerous to themselves or us. Every call, every day, every week, every year, for some of us thirty years. The officer you deal with may have just left a dead body, bloated and stinking, or a child drowning where he was trying CPR on a baby left unattended near a pool by its parents, knowing full well he is too late and he’s doing it for them.

This has always bothered me. If you don’t like your job get out. Don’t ask us for our eternal gratitude. What if everybody had that kind of chip. The plumber walks in and says you just don’t understand I’m all that stands between you and the shit hitting the fan.

There is supposed to be an agreement between the police and the citizens we serve. You do was we think is right, based on the laws your representatives put in place, and you do it peacefully. We in turn promise not to abuse you, keep you in good health, allow you the opportunity for bail and a chance to defend yourself in court.

It only goes bad when one side or the other screws up. Usually, it has been my experience, we aren’t the side screwing up.

archer52 on September 24, 2012 at 4:46 PM

That is one of the most messed up big brother statements I have ever seen on this blog. Wow!

DFCtomm on September 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Was going to say that you and I disagree on degree, not kind, in that post. Then you have to go and say something as ignorant, stupid and offensive as this. You’ve made anything else you have to say totally irrelevant.

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 5:51 PM

I know, people like you look for any excuse to ignore reality and truth. I thought about leaving it out. But then again, I see it as truth looking at your posts.

astonerii on September 24, 2012 at 5:57 PM

I’m a thug because I would apologize (“I did it often”) to citizens when I thought they were wronged or maligned by officers? I think your reading comprehension skills need a lot of work. Did you even read what I responding to? What elicited my response above was another who thought officers should apologize if they did something wrong. I agreed with him/her. So that makes me a thug? For agreeing to apologizing when an officer does wrong?

No, you’re a thug because you hide behind a badge of state-sanctioned force. You are a defender and enabler of tyranny.

You also called me a “sheep” in a later post because I stated a fact about the “motor vehicle exception” to the search warrant rule. That has been a fact since 1925. I wasn’t giving my personal thoughts on if I agreed or not with the decision. I was stating it as a fact.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 12:22 PM

There is no “motor vehicle exception” found anywhere in the 4th Amendment. THAT is a fact. “Because the government said so” is a laughable argument.

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Are you and SWalker the same person? Give specifics. Which post of mine shows me as a “thug” How can I be “defender and enabler of tyranny?” Which post proves your point. Quote me if you can.

Now your next point. I never stated there is a “motor vehicle exception” in the “4th Amendment.” I stated a fact that SCOTUS has said there is one in 1925. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? (Rhetorical) That case has been used since 1925. That is a fact. I never stated support, nor did I ever say it was written in the 4th Amendment. You are projecting.

So quote me to prove your silly immature name calling. We both know you can’t. Same for you as Walker. Grow up.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I’m still waiting for you to find just ONE post of mine, or all of them to prove your point. You still haven’t quoted me once to show that I’m a “thug” “bully” or show “abusive behavior” Come on SWalker, quote me.

So far all you have your generalized hated for all police officers. You are bigot for those hate generalizations.

Are just lazy too look for just one post of mine to prove your point? Come on, just one to show that I’m a “thug.” Even you can do it, can’t you?

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 5:52 PM

What part of EVERY SINGLE ONE of your post display the typical god delusional arrogance and disregard for the average citizen is it that you are so utterly incapable of grasping?

Thank you sir for having the magnanimosity of agreeing that every law abiding citizen should have the ability to own and carry a firearm, it’s not like it’s a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT or anything.

What part of, despite your best efforts to appear as though you are “one of the good ones”, the simple truth that you have clearly and indisputably singled yourself out as one of the Praetorian Class and above us peon sheeple and it comes out in EVERYTHING you say is it you still are not getting?

You think you are being reasonable, you think you are displaying restraint and compassionate judgement. When in reality, every single thing you have said carries an amazingly condescending and arrogant assumption of authority. You are NOT a civilian and you do not get it.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:10 PM

/Round up the usual suspects. That’s coming next

AZfederalist on September 24, 2012 at 5:55 PM

No, it most assuredly is not coming “NEXT”, this WAS Round up the usual suspects. What comes next is arresting anyone who has the audacity to object to the Rounding up of the usual suspects.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:13 PM

What part of EVERY SINGLE ONE of your post display the typical god delusional arrogance and disregard for the average citizen is it that you are so utterly incapable of grasping?

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Which one specifically? If they all are, then it should be easy to quote me. If you have trouble using the quote function, try the FAQ of this site to give you guidance.

Be specific. Which post of mine proves your point that I’m a “thug?” I’m guessing you can’t but need to hold on to your hated of all police officers to keep you warm at night.

But if that isn’t the case, quote me.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:15 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Which one specifically? If they all are, then it should be easy to quote me. If you have trouble using the quote function, try the FAQ of this site to give you guidance.

Be specific. Which post of mine proves your point that I’m a “thug?” I’m guessing you can’t but need to hold on to your hated of all police officers to keep you warm at night.

But if that isn’t the case, quote me.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Holy crap, are you really that stupid?, Or still futility attempting to be intellectually intimidating?

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Which one specifically? If they all are, then it should be easy to quote me. If you have trouble using the quote function, try the FAQ of this site to give you guidance.

Be specific. Which post of mine proves your point that I’m a “thug?” I’m guessing you can’t but need to hold on to your hated of all police officers to keep you warm at night.

But if that isn’t the case, quote me.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Okay, there, I quoted you. That one very post right there, and virtually every other post you have made, displays your arrogant, condescending attitude.

Shump on September 24, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Holy crap, are you really that stupid?, Or still futility attempting to be intellectually intimidating?

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Prove your point. Quote me. It really is a simple request. You decided to name call. I’m asking you to prove I earned that name. Just quote me. Very simple and reasonable request. Quote me

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Okay, there, I quoted you. That one very post right there, and virtually every other post you have made, displays your arrogant, condescending attitude.

Shump on September 24, 2012 at 6:23 PM

I’m dealing with children here I see…..

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I’m dealing with children here I see…..

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Dude, you’re learning the hard way. There is no educating or having a reasonable conversation with the “chairborne rangers” that come out during one of Hot Air’s police threads.

This, over an incident that happened in June. And in which none of the people actually involved have complained.

None of the 40 people detained have lodged complaints, Oates said, but the department has heard complaints form other people who weren’t involved in the stops.

I like Hot Air, but my advice is to avoid the cop story threads if you like to keep your blood pressure low.

Moron Lube!

Dukeboy01 on September 24, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Shump on September 24, 2012 at 6:23 PM

I’m dealing with children here I see…..

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:25 PM

No, you are dealing with people who do not appreciate your arrogant and condescending attitude.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Okay, there, I quoted you. That one very post right there, and virtually every other post you have made, displays your arrogant, condescending attitude.

Shump on September 24, 2012 at 6:23 PM

I’m dealing with children here I see…..

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Let me guess, it finally dawned on you right after you hit the submit button that this was exactly what you were demanding I provide, evidence of thuggish condescending arrogance.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 7:14 PM

I’m dealing with children here I see…..

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Yes. You have to admit, though, that you should have figured that out hours ago. (Maybe you’re a bigger idealist than me!)

If I knew where these folks lived, I would seriously contemplate flying little black RC helicopters over their house at night, just to mess with their heads.* As it is, I anticipate my stock in Reynolds to be going nowhere but up!

* (I expect some responses about drones, more 4th Amendment flourishes, and several threats to shoot down said drones.)

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Let me guess, it finally dawned on you right after you hit the submit button that this was exactly what you were demanding I provide, evidence of thuggish condescending arrogance.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 7:14 PM

What dawned on that you are a child is when you have been making an assertion about me for for over 24 hours and me asking you to quote me prove that assertion. Then you grab a quote that was just made to prove the assertion from over 24 hours ago.

Dealing with child is exactly that. Mind-boggling.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Yes. You have to admit, though, that you should have figured that out hours ago. (Maybe you’re a bigger idealist than me!)

If I knew where these folks lived, I would seriously contemplate flying little black RC helicopters over their house at night, just to mess with their heads.* As it is, I anticipate my stock in Reynolds to be going nowhere but up!

* (I expect some responses about drones, more 4th Amendment flourishes, and several threats to shoot down said drones.)

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 7:41 PM

I knew it all along. I’m just stubborn. It is and always has been one of my biggest character weaknesses. My wife just laughs at me and always says the same thing. “Drop it honey you can’t reason with a brick wall.”

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 7:48 PM

What dawned on that you are a child is when you have been making an assertion about me for for over 24 hours and me asking you to quote me prove that assertion. Then you grab a quote that was just made to prove the assertion from over 24 hours ago.

Dealing with child is exactly that. Mind-boggling.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Still not getting it. I am not a child, I don’t act like a child, I’m a 51 year old college graduate who takes offense at being treated like a child, who takes offense at being condescending to and who finds the arrogant abuse of authority of 99 percent of all LEO’s to be offensive.

I am an adult who takes great offense at seeing the constitutional rights of my fellow citizens trampled and then seeing a$$holes both defend those violation while simultaneously attempting to intimidate anyone who give voice to their offense at those violations.

Sit your fat a$$ down and shut the hell up, I do not need you telling me what constitutes adult behavior.

I knew it all along. I’m just stubborn. It is and always has been one of my biggest character weaknesses. My wife just laughs at me and always says the same thing. “Drop it honey you can’t reason with a brick wall.”

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 7:48 PM

No, your biggest character weakness is not being stubborn, it’s being profoundly arrogant and damned insulting. You are not attempting to reason, you are attempting to dictate. To many years in the Gestapo have apparently deprived you of the ability to comprehend the difference between reasoning with people and bullying them into submission.

While you may have been able to do that as a cop because of your gun and your badge, you profoundly lack that ability without the physical threats being a cop provided you before.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 8:10 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Which only re-enforces my belief of you. You are child like. Not once have you been able to quote me to prove you assertions (child like name calling) that I’m a “thug” You called me that and still couldn’t find one quote prior to your assertion (name calling) that I’m a “thug”

Why can’t you find this quote that made you believe I was a “thug?” You have been asserting this for over 24 hours now. Where is the my quote prior to that child like name calling that you have been doing? I’ve been reasonable in my request. Your only response is more name calling. That makes you a child in my book.

Where am I being unreasonable asking you to provide this quote that makes you “feel” this way?

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Where am I being unreasonable asking you to provide this quote that makes you “feel” this way?

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 8:19 PM

How about the part where I told you point blank that every one of your posts is condescendingly arrogant and you arrogantly refuse to even consider that it might be true? Then arrogantly demand that I produce an example of that arrogant thuggish behavior while arrogantly and thuggishly continue to attempt to bully me? Na, just not bright enough to get it.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM

How about the part where I told you point blank that every one of your posts is condescendingly arrogant and you arrogantly refuse to even consider that it might be true? Then arrogantly demand that I produce an example of that arrogant thuggish behavior while arrogantly and thuggishly continue to attempt to bully me? Na, just not bright enough to get it.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Which means you can’t. Blanket, generalized statements are not proof just because you say so. You can’t be 51.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 8:45 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM

I’m just waiting for you to yell out SQUIRREL!

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Who cares about attitudes? Simply deport supporters of the police in this case to the police state of their choice, and revoke their citizenship.

Let them live every day in what they desire for the rest of us.

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

I love all these ex-cops who spent their careers trampling the constitution and making excuses for it, lecturing us on the tender feelings of on duty officers.

Why they HAVE to throw people to the ground and cuff them when they know damn well they’re innocent!!!

What do you think their job description is anyway? What else are they gonna do all day?

For their own safety of course. Obviously.

Oh and we don’t need no stinkin 4th amendment.

If you can find 10 cops or ex cops, out of 100, who can recite the 4th and 5th amendments to the constitution, I’ll pay $100.

You never will.

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 8:55 PM

What else is hilarious? The chief. He trots out the old fascist “the end justifies the means” line, and its like hes baiting the limited government types. Openly taunting us with Marxist/Fuhrer talk.

The ex cops? They love it of course. No worries at all.

MORE PLEASE!

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 9:06 PM

If you can find 10 cops or ex cops, out of 100, who can recite the 4th and 5th amendments to the constitution, I’ll pay $100.

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 8:55 PM

No you won’t.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 9:08 PM

No you won’t.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Of course I will, not that I’d ever have to. No such ten cops exist.

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Ed, AP, is SWalker actually contributing to the discussion at this point? Or, at any point? This sort of spittle-flecked invective and personal attack is really not conducive to the spirit of debate here at HA.

(More accusations of being a fascist for wanting SWalker “shut down” in 3… 2… 1…….)

(BTW, where do I go for my jackboot issue? I never got mine, and I think they would look really nifty./s )

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Ed, AP, is SWalker actually contributing to the discussion at this point? Or, at any point? This sort of spittle-flecked invective and personal attack is really not conducive to the spirit of debate here at HA.

(More accusations of being a fascist for wanting SWalker “shut down” in 3… 2… 1…….)

(BTW, where do I go for my jackboot issue? I never got mine, and I think they would look really nifty./s )

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM

That wouldn’t be an accusation, given the evidence at hand, now would it. Oh, wait, you used to be a cop, ergo the term “evidence” is not one you are actually familiar with, well, unless you had it in your trunk before hand.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Go to the leftwing jackals, where you belong, police-stater.

rightwingyahooo on September 24, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Now your next point. I never stated there is a “motor vehicle exception” in the “4th Amendment.” I stated a fact that SCOTUS has said there is one in 1925. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? (Rhetorical) That case has been used since 1925. That is a fact. I never stated support, nor did I ever say it was written in the 4th Amendment. You are projecting.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:06 PM

One more time, a home has more Constitutional protections for searches than a motor vehicle has.

Conservative4Ever on September 23, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Give specifics. Which post of mine shows me as a “thug” How can I be “defender and enabler of tyranny?” Which post proves your point. Quote me if you can.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 6:06 PM

The post in which you stated you are/were a cop.

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 9:42 PM

This sort of spittle-flecked invective and personal attack is really not conducive to the spirit of debate here at HA.

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Oh, and news flash (since I know you obviously never learned this at Nazi camp) debate doesn’t not constitute those of opposing viewpoint surrendering their viewpoint to dick.head authoritarians just because they are or were once cops. A debate is defined as a contest of idea between two or more opposing parties which often involves the exchange of heated rhetoric.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

One more time, a home has more Constitutional protections for searches than a motor vehicle has.

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Which is a true statement since a SCOTUS case from 1925. It is commonly referred to as the “motor vehicle exception to the search warrant rule” All I did is state it as a fact. Which it is. That isn’t me offering my opinion. I’m stating a fact of which all courts must recognize it since 1925. You can look it up if have never heard of it.

Just like Obamacare is a tax. I don’t think it is. But since SCOTUS has said it is, it is a fact for now. You might not like that fact. I don’t like it. But it is still a true statement until another SCOTUS rules differently.

Me stating a fact is not proof of proving I’m a “thug.” If you think so then it is in fact hard to reason with a brick wall.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I just re-read your post. So you truly believe ALL police officers are “thug(s)?” Really?

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:03 PM

BTW I never stated I am one (police officer). I said I’m retired which in fact no longer makes me.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:04 PM

one.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

You are not debating. You are only name calling. There is a difference.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Which is a true statement since a SCOTUS case from 1925. It is commonly referred to as the “motor vehicle exception to the search warrant rule” All I did is state it as a fact. Which it is. That isn’t me offering my opinion. I’m stating a fact of which all courts must recognize it since 1925. You can look it up if have never heard of it.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:01 PM

It is not a true statement. There is no “motor vehicle exception” to be found anywhere in the 4th amendment. Government had claimed a new power for itself, and then a branch of government said it had the power to do so. That’s a pretty convenient setup, wouldn’t you say? Shocking you would defend that. Of course, nowhere in the Constitution was the Supreme Court granted the power to decide Constitutional matters. That was another power claimed by government.

And no, all courts do not have to recognize it. Further, and more importantly, the PEOPLE do not have ot recognize it. It is the people who ultimately decide what is or isn’t constitutional.

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Test your theory and don’t pay the ObamaCare tax. Let me know how that works out.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:20 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

You are not debating. You are only name calling. There is a difference.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:06 PM

See, this is something you are obviously complete ignorant of and basically incapable of comprehending, it’s called a difference of opinion. It is your opinion that all I am doing is name calling.

Being an authoritarian a$$hole who is unused to being challenged by individuals you can’t beat the hell out or arrest it is of course something you do not recognize or comprehend. In the real world, the rest of us recognize that differences of opinions are not always British tea and crumpets polite affairs.

Frequently they are marked by extremely heated rhetorical exchanges especially when one of the individuals just happens to be an ex-cop nazi thug type personality. But hey, on the other hand, maybe you can continue with your masterful application of rational and logical dissection of my childish ranting, thereby genuinely intimidating me on a profoundly intellectual level.

Oh… wait, that’s right, you’re a former cop, you couldn’t intellectually intimidate common garden fungus.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 10:22 PM

debate doesn’t not constitute those of opposing viewpoint surrendering their viewpoint to dick.head authoritarians

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

It generally doesn’t include calling people “d***head” or “fascist” or “thug”, either. But, I never took debate in school, so what do I know?

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 10:32 PM

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

It generally doesn’t include calling people “d***head” or “fascist” or “thug”, either. But, I never took debate in school, so what do I know?

GWB on September 24, 2012 at 10:32 PM

NEWS FLASH… This isn’t high school, this is the real world, and in the real world, it frequently does.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 10:36 PM

This isn’t high school, this is the real world, and in the real world, it frequently does.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 10:36 PM

You have this backwards. From what I remember in HS one name calls like an immature adolescent. The adult world debates with reason w/o throwing insults.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:46 PM

You have this backwards. From what I remember in HS one name calls like an immature adolescent. The adult world debates with reason w/o throwing insults.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:46 PM

Being a cop, you obviously wouldn’t know how real adults act when an a$$hole with a gun threatening to arrest them isn’t standing nearby. On second though, being a cop, you should know, seeing as how your job was to clean up the mess after real adults prove that this is exactly how real adults act when not being threatened with being shot or arrested, which means, either you’re an idiot, or just dishonest, which of course would be typical behavior for a cop.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Test your theory and don’t pay the ObamaCare tax. Let me know how that works out.

Conservative4Ever on September 24, 2012 at 10:20 PM

There’s no theory about it. Given your ignorance of the 4th Amendment, it’s no surprise you would be ignorant of the rest of the Constitution and the arguments made in the ratifying conventions.

Dante on September 25, 2012 at 12:41 AM

No, it most assuredly is not coming “NEXT”, this WAS Round up the usual suspects. What comes next is arresting anyone who has the audacity to object to the Rounding up of the usual suspects.

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Well, at least they didn’t arrest the cameramen…this time…so I guess there’s still hope for our Republic.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 25, 2012 at 4:56 AM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8