Shocking Footage: Americans Ordered Out Of Homes At Gunpoint By SWAT teams

Arguing over this is meaningless. Our Government was well aware of these guys. It's beginning to look more & more like a botched Fast & Furious-type operation. Our Government likely funded and fascilitated this attack. But don't expect the Government/Media Complex to ever tell you that. Truth is Treason in this empire of lies.

You've come to the conclusion that this was a government-run event? Shocking! :eek:

I'm leaning that way. It's clear our Government was well aware of these guys. It's not so farfetched to think they funded and fascilitated this event. They've done it before. The only question is, was it an intentional False Flag, or a horribly botched operation ala Fast & Furious. I haven't decided on that yet.
 
Arguing over this is meaningless. Our Government was well aware of these guys. It's beginning to look more & more like a botched Fast & Furious-type operation. Our Government likely funded and fascilitated this attack. But don't expect the Government/Media Complex to ever tell you that. Truth is Treason in this empire of lies.

Take your fucking nonsense to the Conspiracy Forum where it belongs, head case.
 
"Hot Pursuit" allows a Police Officer to go into a house or business when that Officer SEES THE SUSPECT HE'S CHASING ENTER THAT HOUSE OR BUSINESS.

It doesn't mean that the Pigs can cordon off an entire area and go house to house like their in f*ckin' Iraq...



"Pigs"? Really? Are you playing dress-up today with your tie-dye shirt and hemp sandals, 'dude'? What a fucking clown. :rolleyes:
 
Arguing over this is meaningless. Our Government was well aware of these guys. It's beginning to look more & more like a botched Fast & Furious-type operation. Our Government likely funded and fascilitated this attack. But don't expect the Government/Media Complex to ever tell you that. Truth is Treason in this empire of lies.

Take your fucking nonsense to the Conspiracy Forum where it belongs, head case.

Piss off Nazi-wannabe.
 
Arguing over this is meaningless. Our Government was well aware of these guys. It's beginning to look more & more like a botched Fast & Furious-type operation. Our Government likely funded and fascilitated this attack. But don't expect the Government/Media Complex to ever tell you that. Truth is Treason in this empire of lies.

Take your fucking nonsense to the Conspiracy Forum where it belongs, head case.

Piss off Nazi-wannabe.


Conspiracy Forum >>> thataway, head case >>>
 
If you're going to insist on making this into just another nonsense conspiracy thread, then you shouldn't object to moving it to the proper forum.
 
yes, they were. It was a situation where waiting to obtain "a valid search warrant could compromise public safety or could lead to a loss of evidence" and they had every reason to believe that "a suspect (was) about to escape."

no judge would find otherwise given the circumstances. Save your self-righteousness for a situation where it actually applies.

site the law for hot pursuit.

Not taking sides but here is a discussion on hot pursuit:

Thus, the Court has recognized two specific conditions that justify warrantless searches under the rule of hot pursuit:

Hot Pursuit legal definition of Hot Pursuit. Hot Pursuit synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

the need to circumvent the destruction of evidence, and the need to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

My opinion is that it would be hard for you to win an argument in MA that they the police were not acting in fashion to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

True those would apply for conditions of a warrantless search. However,what the cops did did not justify what they did because he was not seen going in or near those homes.
 
site the law for hot pursuit.

Not taking sides but here is a discussion on hot pursuit:

Thus, the Court has recognized two specific conditions that justify warrantless searches under the rule of hot pursuit:

Hot Pursuit legal definition of Hot Pursuit. Hot Pursuit synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

the need to circumvent the destruction of evidence, and the need to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

My opinion is that it would be hard for you to win an argument in MA that they the police were not acting in fashion to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

True those would apply for conditions of a warrantless search. However,what the cops did did not justify what they did because he was not seen going in or near those homes.

Exactly.
The same behavior could be excused, by that line of reasoning, if cops were invading homes in Boston and/or Cambridge and/or Baltimore and/or NYC
 
site the law for hot pursuit.

Not taking sides but here is a discussion on hot pursuit:

Thus, the Court has recognized two specific conditions that justify warrantless searches under the rule of hot pursuit:

Hot Pursuit legal definition of Hot Pursuit. Hot Pursuit synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

the need to circumvent the destruction of evidence, and the need to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

My opinion is that it would be hard for you to win an argument in MA that they the police were not acting in fashion to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

True those would apply for conditions of a warrantless search. However,what the cops did did not justify what they did because he was not seen going in or near those homes.


He was believed to be in the area being searched, of course. Your insistence cannot change reality, and your emotions do not carry the weight of law.
 
Not taking sides but here is a discussion on hot pursuit:

Thus, the Court has recognized two specific conditions that justify warrantless searches under the rule of hot pursuit:

Hot Pursuit legal definition of Hot Pursuit. Hot Pursuit synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

the need to circumvent the destruction of evidence, and the need to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

My opinion is that it would be hard for you to win an argument in MA that they the police were not acting in fashion to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.

True those would apply for conditions of a warrantless search. However,what the cops did did not justify what they did because he was not seen going in or near those homes.


He was believed to be in the area being searched, of course. Your insistence cannot change reality, and your emotions do not carry the weight of law.
He was believed to be in 20 different places at once just because they said so. Does not justify what they did.
 
True those would apply for conditions of a warrantless search. However,what the cops did did not justify what they did because he was not seen going in or near those homes.


He was believed to be in the area being searched, of course. Your insistence cannot change reality, and your emotions do not carry the weight of law.
He was believed to be in 20 different places at once just because they said so. Does not justify what they did.


No judge will agree with you.
 
He was believed to be in the area being searched, of course. Your insistence cannot change reality, and your emotions do not carry the weight of law.
He was believed to be in 20 different places at once just because they said so. Does not justify what they did.


No judge will agree with you.
Just because they say so is not a valid argument either, no one and I don't care what the emergency is has a right to be in my home unless I say they can enter.
 
He was believed to be in 20 different places at once just because they said so. Does not justify what they did.


No judge will agree with you.
Just because they say so is not a valid argument either, no one and I don't care what the emergency is has a right to be in my home unless I say they can enter.



Yes they do, under certain circumstances. It doesn't matter how much you emote over it.

And, just because the law says so IS a valid argument. You kind of look like a 5 year old stomping his feet at this point, champ.
 
He was believed to be in 20 different places at once just because they said so. Does not justify what they did.


No judge will agree with you.
Just because they say so is not a valid argument either, no one and I don't care what the emergency is has a right to be in my home unless I say they can enter.

Constitutional Rights are being violated at every turn these days.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
No judge will agree with you.
Just because they say so is not a valid argument either, no one and I don't care what the emergency is has a right to be in my home unless I say they can enter.



Yes they do, under certain circumstances. It doesn't matter how much you emote over it.

And, just because the law says so IS a valid argument. You kind of look like a 5 year old stomping his feet at this point, champ.

NO you cannot enter.
Only a child would act like you believe any lie as if they were being protected.
 
Last edited:
Just because they say so is not a valid argument either, no one and I don't care what the emergency is has a right to be in my home unless I say they can enter.



Yes they do, under certain circumstances. It doesn't matter how much you emote over it.

And, just because the law says so IS a valid argument. You kind of look like a 5 year old stomping his feet at this point, champ.

NO you cannot enter.


Yes, under certain circumstances they can. And you would step aside and let them. Yes, you would.
 

Forum List

Back
Top