The news report basically made it appear that it was completely optional.The article didn't say what would happen if you didn't "consent" to a search. It just says that if they find anything that they will confiscate it... Hmmmmm.
They want to get guns off the street... Then why are they going door-to-doortrying to pry them out of the homes of the citizens?
So, we have resorted to Door-to-door confiscations now, without there even being a "natural disaster" to blame. This is in the name of crime reduction.These nightmares arelike dropping a frog in the water and bringing it to a boil.
The police chief also stated that the guns would be ran and any returning to a crime wouldcause them to start a criminal investigation and return to investigate. I am very confident that a search warrant would be obtained for the house.
Whoops. My browser kept saying error so I kept trying to post and i guess it posted every time.
Nowhere does the IV Amendment say that the consent of the resident/homeowner causes a search that would otherwise be unreasonable to cease being unreasonable.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated [...]
http://bpdnews.com/safehomes/safehomes.pdf]Boston Safe Home Initiative (part of Operation Homesafe) was targeting juveniles with firearms in "troubled" neighborhoods there. We were discussing this at work yesterday as it came up in another news story. This was a stupid idea full of potential loopholes then, I can only imagine how bad the DC version is. Here are some of things brought up by the conversations on the Boston version:
1. Police show up with a detective and two officers in plain clothes and explain the need to search your house because neighbors/friends/school agents are worried about your child with access to illegal firearms
2. ANY adult present in the house can authorize the search. This includes a visiting friend that is 18 and not aware of the impact of what he is doing
3. Consenting person MAY provide a scope of where to search. From what I've seen, it appears that you must choose to limit the scope of the search or the default is the entire house
4. Any illegal firearms that are not linked to a crime may be forfieted without charges, but crime guns will invoke immediate charges.
5. It is up to the officer if they decide to press charges for any additional items they find. This is a big loophole for abuse if drugs are found (leverage?)
6. The officers will do their best not to break anything or leave the place in shambles, but they are not responsible for accidents in the thorough search
Reading the details in the flyer on the initiative made my skin crawl and I hoped that Boston would set an example of how NOT to deal with crime in the community by going door to door. I guess I should have expected DC to pervert an already poor example of police policy even further!
I hope someone in DC stands up to the political stupidity!!! But then again they do keep re-electing Marion Barry!
[/font]
Perhaps the vagueness is intentional. Don't let the people know what their rights are during these voluntary searches, and then they can be charged however the DA feels. Is anyone going to have the money to fight it legally? Nope.