Day by day they are stripping away our rights...last year they made it so that you had to speak to invoke your right to silence...now they are violating the sanctity of the 4th amendment...where oh where will it go from here?



Original article found here

Reporting from Washington— The Supreme Court gave police more leeway to break into homes or apartments in search of illegal drugs when they suspect the evidence otherwise might be destroyed.

Ruling in a Kentucky case Monday, the justices said that officers who smell marijuana and loudly knock on the door may break in if they hear sounds that suggest the residents are scurrying to hide the drugs.

Residents who "attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame" when police burst in, said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. for an 8-1 majority.

In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she feared the ruling gave police an easy way to ignore 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. She said the amendment's "core requirement" is that officers have probable cause and a search warrant before they break into a house.

"How 'secure' do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and …forcibly enter?" Ginsburg asked.

An expert on criminal searches said the decision would encourage the police to undertake "knock and talk" raids.

"I'm surprised the Supreme Court would condone this, that if the police hear suspicious noises inside, they can break in. I'm even more surprised that nearly all of them went along," said John Wesley Hall, a criminal defense lawyer in Little Rock, Ark.

In the past, the court has insisted that homes are special preserves. As Alito said, "The 4th Amendment has drawn a firm line at the entrance to the house." One exception to the search warrant rule involves an emergency, such as screams coming from a house. Police may also pursue a fleeing suspect who enters a residence.

The Kentucky case began when police in Lexington sought to arrest a man who had sold crack cocaine to an informer. They followed the man to an apartment building, but lost contact with him. They smelled marijuana coming from one apartment. Though it turned out not to be the apartment of their suspect, they pounded on the door, called, "Police," and heard people moving inside.

At this, the officers announced they were coming in and broke down the door. Instead of the original suspect, they found Hollis King smoking marijuana and arrested him. They also found powder cocaine. King was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 11 years in prison.

The Supreme Court ruled in Kentucky vs. King that the officers' conduct "was entirely lawful," and they were justified in breaking in to prevent the destruction of the evidence.

"When law enforcement officers who are not armed with a warrant knock on a door, they do no more than any private citizen may do," Alito wrote. A resident need not respond, he added. But the sounds of people moving and perhaps toilets being flushed could justify police entering without a warrant.

The ruling was not a final loss for King. The justices said the Kentucky state court should consider again whether police had faced an emergency situation in this case.

In other words the police can enter any home at any time. There's no way to disprove a cop's assertion that he smelled something. Wonderful. This following the Indiana ruling that takes away a persons right to use force if a cop enters their house ILLEGALLY!

http://www.outsidethebel...t-unlawful-police-entry/

The land of the free, my ass.

Shit. There goes one of the best defenses against attempted police raids. That just pisses me the fuck off. On one hand, state governments and citizens are making moves towards legalizing drugs... and the federal government moves towards combating that.

Oh great, now the intimidation practices cops use to search vehicles will be used to search our homes.

This is the nasty part:

The Kentucky case began when police in Lexington sought to arrest a man who had sold crack cocaine to an informer. They followed the man to an apartment building, but lost contact with him. They smelled marijuana coming from one apartment. Though it turned out not to be the apartment of their suspect, they pounded on the door, called, "Police," and heard people moving inside.

At this, the officers announced they were coming in and broke down the door. Instead of the original suspect, they found Hollis King smoking marijuana and arrested him. They also found powder cocaine. King was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 11 years in prison.

The lesson to be learned: No matter WHAT your financial situation, start earning and saving to buy and install good steel doors (and door frames), with strong, welded hinges, and locks that can be made "unpickable" when you're inside (or other, similar methods). You CAN have doors in your home that are "impractical" for the police to break down (without previously arranging for more specialized equipment than mere battering rams). It is well worth spending some money to make it "practically impossible" for ANYONE to simply break down your door and come into your home--police OR criminals.

I can't even describe how angry I am right now. We just lost the last right that made me feel, if done responsibly, I could continue my current lifestyle without going to prison. Up till now, I smoked herb in my living room. After reading this, I immediately moved anything and everything associated with smoking upstairs. Who knows when someone could come by my door and smell something?

The U.S. continues to spend $40K plus per year housing and feeding non-violent drug offenders. Meanwhile, our $14 trillion debt continues to multiply. We truly live in bizarro world.

I think people lost all their rights long long ago, its just now its becoming official. Police do want they want anyone then say any old shit to justify it and 99% of the time the courts will agree.

Before this ruling, in the US a man's home was still his castle. What worries me is that, prior to this ruling, drug dogs were not legally allowed to be used on a house without a warrant. That is, the police could not walk their little k-9 up to your front stoop and start sniffing around, potentially prompting an "alert" and allowing for a warrant or entry. The supreme court ruled that this was an invasion of our implied "right to privacy" and the 4th amendment.

To my mind, this ruling is the first major step (at least with regards to personal dwellings, which have always been held sacrosanct in American law) in peeling away the few protections that were still in place, however flimsy they may have seemed to be.

Here the law is police need a warrant to search your house, but surprisingly often they raid houses without a warrant, and I've yet to see a case where a judge has cared. Now with a so called meth problem here they are trying to do something similar where they will have a reason to not use a warrant, to me its just making it official when they do it anyway.

A house should be a man's castle, it you don't have that what do you have.

I understand the supreme court ruling made it official, but I got news for ya, this has already been going on for years in the USA.

Police invoke the catch all called probable cause.
Probable cause allows law enforcement officers to do just about anything they feel like.
Whats more is, every officer is at his own liberty to define what that is.

If the officer testifies in court-

Your honor I had reason to believe that my life was in danger so I shot him.

Your honor I smelled something illegal so I made entry.

Your honor I heard the defendent say he had some dope.

YOU HONOR THE SUSPECT WAS ACTING SUSPICIOUS. Soooo having probable cause I searched him and found a joint, so I arrested him.

Your honor I felt the suspect was not being truthful to me so I decided to search him having probable cause.

Need I go on?

All of these examples stand up in court every single day in every court in America.

The cops know they can get away with it so the do it. Its much easier than getting a warrant.

Business as usual.

Long ago the government has become the enemy of "The People". The shootings at Kent State University of students were in my mind symptomatic of this in a very big way.

The war on this and the war on that is a coverup for the US Federal government to continue to get ever more deeply and intrusively disruptive to our privacy. Government always does this whatever its disguise as it more and more desperately tries to cling to and exercise control over its 'subjects'.

The US Federal Government has become a fascist regime that does not much resemble its consitutional roots any more.

It's the same thing whereever you live.

My sister was arrested once, when she took a walk with some friends in a neighbourhood where there where a lot of burglary's taking place at the time. She was 'behaving suspiciously'. Turned out a burglary had just been taking place. She didn't have anything like a loot with her or tools burglars use. They didn't even take har fingerprints.
Just the fact that a cop said she was behaving suspiciously was enough to arrest her and keep her in custody for a night. Eventually her attorney told her it was best to plea guilty because in a minor case like a small burglary, no judge would ever ask for evidence like fingerprints, etc.

Luckily she was minor then so she ended up having to work in a park and having to pay her alleged victims for the 'damage she had done', so that eventually costed my parents a few hundred euro's.

what a beautiful world we live in ... and everyone just talk and talk ... when will people start acting ? its too late when they come for you my friends coas there will be nobody to help

i saw so many videos with US cops and not just US but around the whole world how they can do anything to the people. people have no rights anymore, they are only good when they obey.

watch these cops in canada

Already current practice in germany. "Gefahr im Verzug" - if the police suspects that a suspect could flee or destroy evidence, they can raid a home without asking a judge first.

edit: oh, and you can be sure that they're using this as an excuse. Well, it doesn't really matter much as studies have found, that the average judge got 2 minutes of time to decide on a raid.

Well the sad thing is: from the incident with my sister i learned that in small cases, all the major principles of a constitutional state and a fair justice system are flushed down the drain anyway.

Something like 'reasonable doubt' is only applied in major cases. If a policeman 'finds' a small amount of hash in your house or your car, no judge is even gonna look into whether it could have been planted there or whether the police had the right to search, etc.

All the 'fair justice' crap is only aplied in major cases with lots of media attention etc. In small cases, the presence of a judge is only a formality. Cases are being 'hammered-off' like it's a verdict-factory. The word of a policeman is enough for a verdict. He doesn't even need to FIND any hash. He can say that you threw it away or flushed it through the toilet, but that he clearly saw you smoking it or that he clearly smelled it. That is enough for a verdict.

Oh well, here in Finland, the police dont need a warrant, just a suspicion that a person might have something illegal in their house will do. The police can raid just about anyones house and there's absolutely NOTHING you can do. You cant even complain to anyone because there isnt a institution that governs the police and their conduct.

my advice? get a proper steel door that requires a jackhammer or something like that to get through.

I assumed that this was the law already. Business as usual like icehouse said.
Ideally, after a steal door, there would be a laser scanner coupled with facial recognition software that would send blinding (temporarily) pulses of light directly at the eyes of anyone not on the white list. Try searching my castle when it looks like a pulsating sea of colored geometry heheh. It's on the to-do list.

Hell, I did that once, found it so much fun I bought a GVG.

The thing I most have noticed everyone looking at: is from the point of a 'drug user'...

Lets think, K-9s are there to SMELL DRUGS, so if they smell drugs, then you must have some. These laws are in place to 'protect us' when, I know, in reality they are there to provide more governmental money to each state by busting more and more 'criminals'.


Anyways... what happens if you have a pet skunk?

The trick is, to be smart, I mean do you guys really think that this site isn't known by the DEA? Even if it's protected, ANYONE CAN GET ON AND READ IT, they may not get your IP or info, but they can read exactly what is posted on these forums... and to think differently is just stupid, IMHO.

I for one actually like this, because in my eyes, it is just one more block on the road to an uprising... and I don't mean by 'us' I mean by honest hard working Americans who know their rights, and know that they are being fucked with.

The time will come, and it's not to far in the future, that the majority of people 'who are brainwashed' will see that their rights are dwindling down just as ours are, and they WILL realize exactly what this government is about, even if they don't agree with drugs, these new 'laws' affect them just like the effect us.


They combat peoples rights and thoughts about the 'police' with "you elected them"? I didn't elect any police officer, I used to pick on those kids in school... (not really I'm just saying). ANYONE without a criminal record can become a 'police officer'.... really? Did Ed Gene have a police record? How about the Unabomber? Oh how about these immigrants who come from different countries? (NOT bashing anyone, just pointing out a fact)


Good cops are the ones who know what they do is total bullshit, they are the ones trying to actually catch criminals, and in my eyes, anyone who DOES DRUGS (ANY DRUG) is not a criminal, they are an individual who wants to injest a substance... The real criminals, the people who should be put into prison? Thieves, child molesters, rapists... and your occasional murderer... (I say occasional because sometimes some people deserve to die, argue all you would like, but this is my opinion.)

Anyways, I've began to rant.... This bill pisses me off, but I'll continue to look to the better (of a national uprising)...


EDIT:

Oh and the BEST possible defense to this new law is to have crystal LSD being funneled through your vent system in your house Anyone breaking in would be in for a DEFINITE SURPRISE!


EDIT AGAIN: HAhaha I shared this news with some friends of mine and this is waht one had to say:

"God forbid your taking a nice shit, give your self a courtesy flush and fucking cops kick in your door becuase they thought you was flushing your stash."

I just had to post it

^^ Since you're anti-authoritarian, AND you ask about defeating scent dogs...

I heartily recommend viewing the movie "Cool Hand Luke." There's a scene where the anti-authoritarian hero spreads hot pepper powder for the bloodhounds to inhale that are tracking him.