« Testing – One mo’ tahme (updated 11may20) | Main | Image of ignorance and/or incompetence (updated 14may20) »

13 May 2020



Don’t they have to have a warrant? It might help law enforcement know they have the right house and people involved before they break in, the shooting starts and innocent people are killed.


"Don’t they have to have a warrant?"

I believe there are a number of exceptions. Emergencies/hot pursuit. Consent from searchee. Plain view for things not on the warrant.

George's article got me to thinking about the history of policing. It's a fairly new concept (as are prisons) and, as you might expect, it's pretty likely that police under pressure will often act in terms of their safety, not yours. One interesting side effect looks to be the use of massive overkill (probably not the best term) in resources. A traffic stop can result in five police cars, a home search requires an infantry squad, rather than simply a guy with a .38 revolver.

Dunno exactly why it has turned into such a large industry. The newish concept of illegal drugs? The birth of traffic control? Risk intolerance by the general public? Urbanization? This last is where it usually starts. At least we've mostly avoided the additional reasons that socialists always build such huge law enforcement apparatus, black markets and political crimes. You can expect more of that in the future I think.

Scott O

Bonnie 10:30 - "Don’t they have to have a warrant?"
Sure - a 'no-knock' warrant.
I can remember when these were starting to be used in large numbers because those darn hippies would just flush their joints down the toilet if the police had to announce their presence first before entering.
I knew darn well back then this was going to lead to nothing but trouble.
Plenty of innocent citizens and quite a few officers have lost their lives due to this stupidity.

The comments to this entry are closed.