Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeWood
I'm concerned that that concerns you.
|
HomeWood, as a LEO, maybe you can answer some questions that I have.
When the tactical teams were going door-to-door in Watertown, did they need consent from the homeowners/occupants in order to enter the homes and conduct a search? If not, what exception to the 4th amendment applies in a situation such as this?
Was the shelter in place message from the governor (or whoever issued it) an order, or a request? If it was an order, under what authority (short of imposing martial law) can a government official order the citizens of a large city and four surrounding communities to stay inside? If citizens of Boston, Cambridge, Watertown, etc. had been found walking on the sidewalk yesterday, would they have been subject to arrest or detention?
These are not rhetorical questions. Without their ability to use 20/20 hindsight, I'm not surprised by the level of force that was brought to bear yesterday by the police and federal agencies. The suspects had already demonstrated the ability and willingness to kill and maim large numbers of innocent people, and nobody at the time knew if the remaining suspect (and possibly accomplices) had the capability to do even more. But, I don't think it's ever wrong to ask questions about how far our government can legally go in its efforts to protect those who have given their consent to be governed. The ends do not always justify the means.