Look, I'm just trying to save your a$$ from getting roasted as in every other thread. That statement as is could be taken the wrong way by the person it was directed to or anyone reading it. Do you know him/her well enough that you can say that and know it'll be taken the way you meant it?

__________________
"Breathe, Stretch, Shake, Let it go."
"You'll be my dirty little secret."
Want info on becoming a Premier Member? Click Here
Visit my very own X5world X page!
Newer SRT8 page

I'll but in by saying that I think your question is not relevant to the issue Wagner, not Wanger, has raised. These rules and 'technicalities' exist to protect the rights of those who are NOT expecting the cops to bust into their house with a warrant.

And there is no apostrophe in cops.

__________________
-----

-'13 E93 M3 Cab, Interlagos Blue, Carbon Black leather, DCT, all options, and fun, endless fun!
-'13 X5 35i M-Sport, Carbon Black & Cinnamon, Dinan Stage 2!
-'15 Toyota Sienna Limited Premium AWD, Silver & Grey, Nav & BluRay, and less lame than the 2011 it replaced
-'07 Mini Cab S, Laser Blue, 6sp, endless fun that ended (sold)
-'04 X5 4.4i, loaded, loved, modded and sold

First things first: KNOCK IT OFF!!!

Second, I am always interested in Wagner's posts and I think we share quite a few opinions in common but this issue needs some clarification. The Supreme Court has not eliminated the requirement that a search warrant is required for a search of someone's home, reviewed and approved by a magistrate. I won't get into it but there are a bunch of exceptions to needing a search warrant that have been upheld throughout the years. Television is not the best way to learn about search and seizure law. Anyway, the issue is what is called "knock notice". Cops are required to knock and give notice of their presence before entry. The issue in this case was the amount of time they waited before entering if they waited at all. There is no magic number.

As you can imagine, there are many cases where if you are the cops you don't want the bad guys to have time to flush the dope, flee, or worst yet, arm themselves. I have been witness to many search warrants where it was a "soft knock" when it goes down like a visitor to your house. Knock, knock, door opens, cops go in and nothing gets broken. Then again, there have been some high risk warrants where the bad guys are known to be armed, have fortified the doors and windows, and make every effort to not let the cops in. Clearly, requiring the police to wait after knocking is neither smart nor safe. Prime example: A crack house had a security screen, reinforced door jambs, the windows were all reinforced with metal bars and plywood, and even the bathroom door had a security screen ON THE INTERIOR DOOR, and a big bucket of water to flush the dope in a hurry. Those kinds of places and people do not say understand a request to please open the door. What they got was a truck yanking out the security screen and a ram through the door.

Just remember that a search warrant is generally still required. Also, for added peace of mind, know that when a search warrant is to be served before 7:00 am and after 10:00 pm, a special endorsement is required based on good reasons for serving the warrant at those times.

__________________

Bingo. Two of my friends are Sheriffs Deputies and they do a similar approach to serve a warrant, tap on the door, yell Deputies we have a warrant and then give about two seconds for a response before banging the door down. In high test situation the SWAT would be used, if the person was such a threat to arm themselves. I recall an incident in Maryland where two deputies serving warrants were shot, one killed, by the individual. However, this was the only incident in MD I have heard of in the last decade that this has happened. To me, the threat does not justify the means. And contrary to poplular belief some search warrants issued are against persons that didn't do anything...not to mention the high chance of breaking in to a home the 'person' does not reside in.

__________________

An unwavering defender of those I see worth protecting.

"promote the general welfare, not provide the general welfare"

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I think we live in a world of compromises.

1) We are at war and theorists have evaded the world and kill innocent people.

2) As result the government has taken steps that impact our basic rights but these actions help protect us from theorists.

3) I am aware of cases where police have storm in the homes of sweet little old ladies and created damage and fear. These mistakes happened before and they will happen again.

I don't think we have too much to fear from theorists.

Terrorists are a different matter, and a group that should be destroyed.

__________________

So the Wangers of the world and myself can pretty much relax after 10:00PM? Except for Islamic theorists?

PS Are there any Fourth Amendment experts here? Where's the gentleman with that caustic Kevin Spacey avatar...(touchy subject, my wife has a thing for 'ole Kevin).

__________________

Not sure are you a theorists?

Wish I could spell better.

I think PersonaNonGrata is right to say that there is not very much to worry about here. Compared to the rights squandered in the Patriot Act, this is nothing.

At least there is still the requirement of a warrent, which means there is oversight. What scares me about some of the things in the Patriot Act is that it eliminates any oversight, meaning that such powers can easily be abused. And as we know from past American history and the Church Committee hearings during the 1970s, such powers have been abused many times in the past.

As long as there is oversight over law enforcement by a court of some sort, then I am ok with it.