Do you dare to search for pressure cooker now?

A simple investigation doesn't need three SUV's rolling in and six cops surrounding the house.You're really sugar-coating this one.

Three SUV's rolling in and six cops surrounding the house *IS* intimidation. Mmhmm, yeah. And you call the wife's report colored and suspicious.We all know how cops like to trick people into giving up their rights..."Asking" Would you mind stepping out of the car? when they don't have the right to order you out of the car. Can I get you to pull over there? at a DHS checkpoint where they shouldn't have stopped you in the first place. Sure, they're "just asking" Get real. Take the rose-colored glasses off.

When a cop talks to someone at a DUI or DHS checkpoint, they have not initiated a traffic stop. Since they haven't initiated a traffic stop, i.e. "pulled you over", then they don't have the right to order you to the side of the road, or to order you out of the car.So instead they use tricky language like Can I get you to pull over there? or Would you mind stepping out of the car?. People who don't know their rights take that as being ordered to pull over or step out of the car and so they comply with the officers "orders". But actually the cops know they can't order people to do that so instead they use clever ways of phrasing the question so as to trick the person into yielding their rights.Another way the trick you into revoking you're rights through questions is to use a series of "rolling no's". They'll ask you a bunch of questions that they know you'll answer "no" too and then slip in the trick question to get you to give up your right."Do you have an warrants?"
-No
"Do you have any weapons?"
-No
"Do you have any drugs?"
-No
"Do you have any acohol?"
-No
"Do you mind if I search your car?"
-No
-...
-oh wait... shit.Neither are actually "illegal" and the cops know what they're doing. They're tricking people into giving up their rights so they don't have to actually "violate" them and break the law. Its dirty rotten tactics.Just like rolling up in 3 SUV's and having 6 cops surround the house and then "just asking" if they can search the house.

And because it wasn't explicitly stated in the OP, then of course I have not made any pertinent points at all and you can just shrug it off without having to actually address any of the points of my argument.Great job debating there, buddy. Good day, troll.

Send an officer over in a squad car and have him knock on the front door. Don't send three SUV's with six cops and surround the house before contacting the owner.

Uh-huh. Keep evading and run away ABE:I was responding to your questions and I tied my answers back to the events described in the OP.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

Your sugar-coating denial-mode shoulder-shrugging has been a waste of everyone's time.

The cops were called about an employee searching for a pressure cooker on the internet. *sarcastic gasp* You don't determine rights by assuming people are criminals. They shouldn't have rolled up task-force-style. For a minor increase in security, its not worth glossing over what's right.

Its obvious that jar is trolling our asses. He's got 20,000+ posts here, he know's what he's doing: just play dumb and when do they catch you just point out that its not in the OP and therefore "off topic" so no more "need" to respond. Keep it vague and call it "simple". *shrug* What? What did I do? Mmhmm. He's not fooling us all, thus the censorship. It not actually a violation of the 4th because the dude relinquished his rights. But that doesn't make it right. jar will not fold on that one. He won't actually address your point because that'll ruin the disguise. So, none of that matters. Of course it was a ridiculous response. Of course they went over the top. The trolling cannot be maintained if that's admitted, so it ain't gonna happen.
Just stop trying. You can see his cry of irrelevancy... as if you weren't drawn to those responses by his questioning. Again, the censorship is there for a reason.We can see he's not adding anything to the discussion. He's in sugar-coating denial shoulder-shrugging mode. It's best to just leave him be.

And that is what we're referring to as giving up a permanent freedom for a temporary security.

How did you find out what teams those 6 officers were on?

Where, specifically, did you find that information?

quote:

---

In a statement, the office of the county's police commissioner said:

​

Suffolk County criminal intelligence detectives received a tip from a Bay Shore-based computer company regarding suspicious computer searches conducted by a recently released employee. The former employee's computer searches took place on this employee's workplace computer. On that computer, the employee searched the terms 'pressure cooker bombs' and 'backpacks'.

---

Seems they're were "criminal intelligence detectives" involved...The point you keep desperately evading remains the same:Being moderately educated and over the age of 12 doesn't qualify anyone as a bomb suspect worthy of an investigation by criminal intelligence detectives.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

Who knows? I don't know what teams those officers were on and neither do you.You were just lying when you said that not a single one of them was on a JTTF. They very well could have been. Many officers are on multiple teams. That's exactly what happened and exactly what you have been explicitly advocating in this thread.But of course since you're just trolling you're gonna cry misrepresentation, or claim we're off topic, or inform us that we're welcome to our opinions, or whatever else you have to do to get away from manning up to the idiotic statements you've been making in this thread.Par for the course with you, though. Waste of time for everyone else.

Ha! I'm still waiting for your's that "not a single one of them" were. That's quite a claim. Oh, so you do admit there's some. You really were lying weren't you? Sure, but you implied that you went further than that and found that they were not, in fact, on one of those team. To which I replied "yeah, it did" So simple its retarded.

Its a problem when the people are only willing because of the intimidation by the threat of violence from the state.Like when six armed men show up at your house and "just ask" if they can take a peek.