Liberty Dollar office raided

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At some point long before they "climbed to the top of their career ladder" every law enforcement officer faces many situations where believing in the liberty of others, the rule of law, or even right and wrong, is going to be a liability to their career. So, they make the choice. Of course, if you don't have any of those morals things are much simpler. Have you ever had to make those decisions? The arguement that I've been here to long for my morals too have any relevance is ridiculous (to me).

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I haven't. All warrants go through a constitutional process, if they don't the findings of the search are thrown out of court. I may not personally agree with the reason for every warrant I've ever served,

[/ QUOTE ]

Why did you serve them?

[ QUOTE ]
but I've also never felt that I was causing irreconcilable damage to anyone either. Go to court, fight it. That's why the courts are in place.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you consider irreconcilable damage? Does shutting down someones business and seizing all their assets meet the stadard? Causing someone to lose their job? Incarcerating them for any period of time when they committed no crime? How do you fight in court with no assets? How do you pay the rent and expenses generated by your business when you have no revenue and no assets? How do you reconcile things if the court does eventually throw out the warrant? Will they unbankrupt you? Will they contact all your lost customers and explain that it was all a big mistake and that you did nothing wrong? Will they decide that the person who requested or issued the bogus warrant should pay for their actions?

[ QUOTE ]
Can you please explain to me the details you know of the process a sworn law officer goes through to obtain a warrant? I'm just curious because I'm trying to figure out exactly who I'm dealing with here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you understand the process for obtaining warrants much better than I do. However, if the process isn't subject to some level of abuse by LE and the DA, could you explain to me why the courts would ever throw out a warrant?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I will tell you of an experience of mine that will put this all into perspective. When I first started, I was involved in the serving of a warrant which involved child pornography. Nothing was found, the man who we were serving the warrant on beat the criminal case, sued the city for $2.4 million, sued the county for $9.2 Mil, won both. (Both agencies were involved in the raid) FWIW, no personal injury was done to him, and the damage done to his property was probably around 4-5k. Now, I ask you, can you tell me he wasn't properly reconciled for this mistake?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No one was beaten, no one was held at gun point, no one was killed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think would have happened if the people working there had started to run?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a question with no definitive answer, although I'm sure in your mind, the answer is "They would've been gunned down".

The truth, however, is much more complicated. It would've depended on the agent's pre-determined threat level assessment prior to the raid, to the agent's determination of the involvement of low level employees, to thousands of other factors that would've been involved in answering that question that I don't know the answer to because I wasn't involved in the planning of the raid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Handwaving. You said no one was held at gunpoint. Do you think guns would have been drawn had someone run? Yes or no.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to call a few guys in suits walking in with shiny badges saying "FBI, this is a raid, step away from your desk and file out of the office in an orderly fashion" "force", then we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I walk into a bank, hand the teller a note, and she gives me a bag full of money, would you say that no force was used? Would you say the money is now mine fair and square, she voluntarily gave it to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

My question would be "Should I even attempt to continue a conversation with someone who believes this analogy has the slightest bit of relevance to this discussion?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Handwave, backtrack.

[ QUOTE ]
FBI agents going to a judge, taking an oath acknowledging they had knowledge of activities illegal per US code are taking place at ________ location, and _______ items are to be searched for, and if present seized, isn't even close to you robbing a bank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Derail. The matter of who said it was OK to do this isn't very interesting. You wanted to talk about force. Now you want to shift over to approval. Quit squirming.

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, you're not going to get anything from a teller by writing a note that says "Hi, I'd like some cash." The note will have to have a threat, or else the teller will not respond. Yet you already knew that, I'm sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is a "threat" a form of "force" in your book? Yes or no.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I walk into a bank, hand the teller a note, and she gives me a bag full of money, would you say that no force was used? Would you say the money is now mine fair and square, she voluntarily gave it to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think that civilians and law enforcement should be equal when it comes to legally using force or threat of force?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're [censored] right I do. All men are created equal. Government agents are not some morally distinct class, with special dispensation to do things that are immoral for commoners.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that using threat of force by law enforcement to seize property for use in a legal case is equal to civilians using threat of force to seize others property?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, that's a derailment. The point I was disputing was that the raid did not make use of "force". Whether that force is "equal" to some other force is just an attempt to muddy the waters.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you opposed to the role of law enforcement (being in charge of stopping those who are breaking the laws of the country)in general?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am opposed to a large number of methods employed by state-supplied law enforcement. But again, that's neither here nor there.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No one was beaten, no one was held at gun point, no one was killed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think would have happened if the people working there had started to run?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a question with no definitive answer, although I'm sure in your mind, the answer is "They would've been gunned down".

The truth, however, is much more complicated. It would've depended on the agent's pre-determined threat level assessment prior to the raid, to the agent's determination of the involvement of low level employees, to thousands of other factors that would've been involved in answering that question that I don't know the answer to because I wasn't involved in the planning of the raid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Handwaving. You said no one was held at gunpoint. Do you think guns would have been drawn had someone run? Yes or no.

[/ QUOTE ]

I already answered that. "It depends". Go through the Academy, they'll explain the 10,000+ factors that are involved in answering that question.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FBI agents going to a judge, taking an oath acknowledging they had knowledge of activities illegal per US code are taking place at ________ location, and _______ items are to be searched for, and if present seized, isn't even close to you robbing a bank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Derail. The matter of who said it was OK to do this isn't very interesting. You wanted to talk about force. Now you want to shift over to approval. Quit squirming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was trying to explain the difference in the two. Obviously, it's not worth having a conversation with someone too immature to see the difference in legally serving a warrant and robbing a bank.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, you're not going to get anything from a teller by writing a note that says "Hi, I'd like some cash." The note will have to have a threat, or else the teller will not respond. Yet you already knew that, I'm sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is a "threat" a form of "force" in your book? Yes or no.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the credibility of the threat. I say "You're dead, [censored]" after you beat me in a game of Madden. Is that a credible threat? To someone, it probably is.

I'm sure you'll attack me for not saying what you want to hear, but I won't even attempt to answer complicated questions related to police force tactics, most of which are loaded questions filled with thousands of variables, with yes or no answers.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you opposed to the role of law enforcement (being in charge of stopping those who are breaking the laws of the country)in general?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's opposed to law in general, or government, actually.

I actually agree with most of the sentiment, I'm just driven nuts by people who are willing to crucify the low level agents given the task of serving this warrant, when I have yet to read an attack on the agent or the judge who signed the warrant. A judge, btw, is free to refuse to sign any warrant at any time.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) "low level agents" know that this sort of stuff is part of the job when they sign up.

2) a low level agent is free to refuse to serve any warrant at any time. Yes, he might lose his job. Am I supposed to feel sorry for him? If anything, we should have MORE contempt for people who believe something is wrong but do it anyway to keep their jobs. They're taking money to perform immoral acts. I have a lot less disrespect for someone who honestly thinks he's doing the right thing.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
I am opposed to a large number of methods employed by state-supplied law enforcement. But again, that's neither here nor there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bull [censored]. That has everything to do with this. You're opposed to law enforcement, so obviously law enforcement agents serving a legal warrant are "evil".

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you opposed to the role of law enforcement (being in charge of stopping those who are breaking the laws of the country)in general?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's opposed to law in general, or government, actually.

I actually agree with most of the sentiment

[/ QUOTE ]
OK. Even though I believe that government as we have it now is too big and are to intrusive of the rights of the individual I would never want to be in a society/area without government that make laws and an agency that enforce them.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can have laws without government.

You can have agencies without government.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am opposed to a large number of methods employed by state-supplied law enforcement. But again, that's neither here nor there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bull [censored]. That has everything to do with this. You're opposed to law enforcement,

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. I'm opposed to state-supplied monopolized "law enforcement".

[ QUOTE ]
so obviously law enforcement agents serving a legal warrant are "evil".

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got the cart before the horse. They're not evil because I'm opposed.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am opposed to a large number of methods employed by state-supplied law enforcement. But again, that's neither here nor there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bull [censored]. That has everything to do with this. You're opposed to law enforcement,

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. I'm opposed to state-supplied monopolized "law enforcement".

[/ QUOTE ]


As am I. I could make 5x as much working for Blackwater than my agency, but this is the culture we live in. If you want me to starve for an ideal that isn't going to happen, you need to reach out and grasp reality.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so obviously law enforcement agents serving a legal warrant are "evil".

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got the cart before the horse. They're not evil because I'm opposed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why are they? Because they do things that dont fit into your personal definition of right and wrong?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No one was beaten, no one was held at gun point, no one was killed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think would have happened if the people working there had started to run?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a question with no definitive answer, although I'm sure in your mind, the answer is "They would've been gunned down".

The truth, however, is much more complicated. It would've depended on the agent's pre-determined threat level assessment prior to the raid, to the agent's determination of the involvement of low level employees, to thousands of other factors that would've been involved in answering that question that I don't know the answer to because I wasn't involved in the planning of the raid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Handwaving. You said no one was held at gunpoint. Do you think guns would have been drawn had someone run? Yes or no.

[/ QUOTE ]

I already answered that. "It depends". Go through the Academy, they'll explain the 10,000+ factors that are involved in answering that question.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you didn't answer it. You went straight to "gunning them down".

Be serious. An FBI/secret service raid. Agents come in. Someone runs. You're seriously going to tell me you don't know if a gun is going to be unholstered?

Please.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FBI agents going to a judge, taking an oath acknowledging they had knowledge of activities illegal per US code are taking place at ________ location, and _______ items are to be searched for, and if present seized, isn't even close to you robbing a bank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Derail. The matter of who said it was OK to do this isn't very interesting. You wanted to talk about force. Now you want to shift over to approval. Quit squirming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was trying to explain the difference in the two. Obviously, it's not worth having a conversation with someone too immature to see the difference in legally serving a warrant and robbing a bank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Run to the ad hominem.

Please, tell me the difference. We're talking about using force. Is a bank robbery where no gun is actually shown an event that involves a use of force or not? It's a simple question. If you want to claim a FBI raid without guns drawn does not involve force, please explain why a bank robbery without guns drawn does involve force. What is the difference between the two than makes one a forceless event and the other a forceful event? You say I can't tell the difference, you're implying that you DO know the difference, so enlighten me.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, you're not going to get anything from a teller by writing a note that says "Hi, I'd like some cash." The note will have to have a threat, or else the teller will not respond. Yet you already knew that, I'm sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is a "threat" a form of "force" in your book? Yes or no.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the credibility of the threat. I say "You're dead, [censored]" after you beat me in a game of Madden. Is that a credible threat? To someone, it probably is.

I'm sure you'll attack me for not saying what you want to hear, but I won't even attempt to answer complicated questions related to police force tactics, most of which are loaded questions filled with thousands of variables, with yes or no answers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I want *an answer*. I'm still waiting. Assume the threat is "credible enough" to get the teller to give up the money. That should have been obvious. Quit squirming.