If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Gazette)   Problem: College students who know their legal rights are refusing to let the police enter their homes when they knock. Solution: Make that a civil offense, with fines up to $1000 per offense   (thegazette.com) divider line 255
    More: Scary, Iowa City, Iowa, local ordinance, Iowa City Press-Citizen, disorderly house, police Chief Sam Hargadine  
•       •       •

20606 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Aug 2012 at 2:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



255 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-22 03:28:05 PM
*gets on roof*
poietes.files.wordpress.com
"Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!"
 
2012-08-22 03:30:47 PM

RandomRandom: If I were a judge and woken in the middle of the night for this kind of crap, I'd tell the cops to write out a civil fine and let me get back to sleep. If they did it again, I'd tell them they were idiots and any subsequent arrests wouldn't stick.


So what you are saying is people don't like being woken up in the middle of the night because of loud parties. Imagine that. Sounds like a stricter noise ordinance is required.
 
2012-08-22 03:31:06 PM
images.wikia.com

'We're not hosting an intergalactic kegger down here.'
 
2012-08-22 03:33:12 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com
Police noise complaint response uniform.
 
2012-08-22 03:34:51 PM
Problem: college kids are throwing illegally wild parties and disturbing the peace, often with underage drinking, then abusing a loophole that says they can't be charged if they don't answer the . Officers have to waste hours of their time and our money getting warrants, and often the party's ended by the time they go through.

Solution: Remove that loophole
 
2012-08-22 03:35:04 PM

lennavan: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Why shouldn't I be able to? You can step out on the porch and conduct our business. I am not going to make you keep the door open.

So, if I pull you over for speeding at 1am should I hold my breath so I can't tell if you have been drinking?

Why should I? I'm a busy guy, I got better things to do. I'm playin on my Xbox and my kill/death ratio is farking awesome. Why the fark should I be required to answer my door? You want to force me to answer my door, get a warrant, otherwise I got more important shiat to do


I am not arguing about the warrant to enter issue. I was referring to the guy that stands in the open doorway to talk with drugs littering the table behind him. (happens more often than you think) I am a huge defender of the constitution and would never overstep anyone's protections. In this case I see it further protecting the resident from searches and seizures not the other way.

lennavan: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: So, if I pull you over for speeding at 1am should I hold my breath so I can't tell if you have been drinking?

A great analogy. Similar situation - getting a warrant to draw blood takes hours. Link Those pesky warrantses. Let's pass a law that says if you don't let me sniff your breath, hell if you pop a mint at 1AM you are automatically declared drunk and get your fine. No need for a warrant!


Not sure what your correlation is here. The original statement (paraphrased) was complaining about police using a plain view doctrine in this particular instance. Also, I don't need a warrant to draw blood in this case all I have to do is take you to the ER.
 
2012-08-22 03:35:04 PM

consider this: lennavan: Heh yeah, the only people who need rights are the guilty ones. Repeal the 5th amendment, right?

Yeah, that's exactly what that means. Holy hell, these threads really do turn some of you retarded.


Yea, actually that was what you just argued.

consider this: have an idea that's just crazy enough to work, how about you don't do illegal shiat


Don't like cops searching your house without a warrant? Stop doing illegal shiat.
 
2012-08-22 03:35:25 PM

Old Smokie: How come people move to college towns and then complain about noise?

I mean I'm pretty sure the University was there before your house, jackass.


That's not so much the case anymore. Unviersity enrollment is expanding so students are living in areas where before they weren't even close. It's not like (I hope) people are buying a house in the middle of student neighborhood. More like they bough a house 15 years ago that was four blocks from the student neighborhood, today it's in the student neighborhood.
 
2012-08-22 03:36:27 PM

ThrobblefootSpectre: RandomRandom: If I were a judge and woken in the middle of the night for this kind of crap, I'd tell the cops to write out a civil fine and let me get back to sleep. If they did it again, I'd tell them they were idiots and any subsequent arrests wouldn't stick.

So what you are saying is people don't like being woken up in the middle of the night because of loud parties. Imagine that. Sounds like a stricter noise ordinance is required.


based on the article the way they are operating now is working just fine, if you can't see this as a local government cash grab you must live in a really quaint little town.
 
2012-08-22 03:36:44 PM

Old Smokie: How come people move to college towns and then complain about noise?


Not every student who enrolls at that college is liberal arts. Some of them have to study and attend class the next day.
 
2012-08-22 03:37:12 PM

BolloxReader: I've never felt the need to call the cops on anyone for noise.


I called the cops about a noise complaint exactly once. I had two babies who were startled awake repeatedly by music being blasted through outdoor speakers and other noises. Then, small fireworks started going off. I called the police, they rode by the party, then stopped by our house to tell me they had spoken to the homeowner.

They mentioned that it was a Quinceanera and I felt awful. I apologized to the cops for calling them and asked them not to bother the little girl anymore. Then, to limit the crying, I kicked my husband out of the bed and brought the babies in to sleep with me.
 
2012-08-22 03:40:35 PM

ROGUECOP: Ok, I get the constitutional arguments and I agree with them. However, We do get call after call after call from pised off neighbors who demand the police enforce the peace disturbance laws. So let me ask, what would be a reasonable yet constitutionally protective way to handle these calls while at the same time understanding we can't spend all farking night on one noise complaint?

/hate these calls as a cop
//biggest violator of these laws when I was in college


Record the noise level at the sidewalk for evidence*. Knock on the door, then start writing it up. Violation of the 'peace distubance' or 'noise ordinance' probably consists of some fine, leave it taped to the door made out to tenant and be on your way. Mail the fine to tenant and landord just to be sure. If there isn't an ordinance then suggest the neighbor go over themselves and ask them to turn it down.

*Some actual noise meter would be nice, but video should be good enough.
 
2012-08-22 03:40:58 PM

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: I am not arguing about the warrant to enter issue. I was referring to the guy that stands in the open doorway to talk with drugs littering the table behind him. (happens more often than you think)


No I completely agree, that's why no one is answering the door when the cops come knockin.

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: I am a huge defender of the constitution and would never overstep anyone's protections. In this case I see it further protecting the resident from searches and seizures not the other way.


Not quite. You seem to think the solution is to force people to answer the door. If my kill/death ratio is 10/1 or higher, I'm not answering the door if it's the pope himself. (I actually don't play any games with a KDR anymore, I just think it's a funny example to use)

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Not sure what your correlation is here. The original statement (paraphrased) was complaining about police using a plain view doctrine in this particular instance.


The original argument was about preventing plain view doctrine by not answering the door. The correlation is in both cases getting a warrant is annoying. If you read the linked article, they complain about how in a few hours the BAC decreases. In a few hours I imagine some illegal drugs make their way down the toilet. But there's a reason it is a judge via warrants that makes the decision on these things and not cops.

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: , I don't need a warrant to draw blood in this case all I have to do is take you to the ER.


From the article I linked: However, this May Governor Bill Haslam signed Public Chapter No. 892 that allows law enforcement to seek search warrants for a blood sample if a person arrested for driving under the influence refuses to provide one.
 
2012-08-22 03:41:47 PM

ignacio: Problem: college kids are throwing illegally wild parties and disturbing the peace, often with underage drinking, then abusing a loophole that says they can't be charged if they don't answer the . Officers have to waste hours of their time and our money getting warrants, and often the party's ended by the time they go through.

Solution: Remove that loophole


If the parties end before a warrant can even be issued, how much of an inconvenience to others can they really pose?
And must we take a "tough on crime" attitude with everything no matter how silly that response is?
 
2012-08-22 03:43:59 PM

gretzkyscores: fireclown:
CSB: I made a policeman get a warrant to search my car once. I just sort of wanted to see what would happen. He radioed in, and the legal aces back at the station got a judge to issue a warrant. A cruiser dropped it off about an hour and a half later, they searched my trunk and found nothing. Looking back, it wasn't a good way to spend an afternoon.

*fist bump to fireclown*

Actually, IMO, forcing the cops to follow protocol is an *excellent* way to spend an afternoon. Would that more of us were willing to invest the time necessary to keep our public servants "honest", especially when we have nothing to hide. Perhaps if we did so en masse, over time cops would learn to not be so cavalier about citizen's rights, searches and search warrants.


I got tired of the moldy mulch on the side of my house, so I decided to replace it with those tiny white rocks. I went to home depot and got 6 50 lb bags of the stuff. Which went into the trunk of my mustang as I had no other vehicle. Now having 300 lbs in your trunk will lower your car a significant amount. Just so happens on the way home, I blaze through an orange light. I dunno, it was sort of yellow, sort of red. Of course there was a cop there.

He seems interested in the height of my car.
"You car is really riding low."
*This will be a fun time to be a smart-ass, I think* (it wasn't)
'Well sir, thats probably because I have over a hundred kilos of rock in the back'
"You have...what?"
'I have a bunch of bags of cracked rock'
Well that got his attention.
30 seconds later I was handcuffed on the side of the road. 5 minutes after that there was about 4 more squad cars there. Oh, and a dog for some reason.
They asked permission to search my trunk. Well, not so much asked, as they took my keys and opened it.
Officer: What. The. Fark?
Me: Like I said, a hundred or so kilos of cracked rock.

You know, I thought we'd all have a good laugh about it. There was no laughing. Not so much as a smile. What there was, was about an hour and a half of 'warrent checks'.

Oh and as far as running that redish-yellow light. You bet I got a ticket for it.
 
2012-08-22 03:45:03 PM

consider this: lennavan: Don't like cops searching your house without a warrant? Stop doing illegal shiat.

Cops don't need a warrant to search a home if they respond to a call and observe illegal activity. That's why these little dicks aren't answering the doors
, why is that so hard for you to understand?


Uh, yeah I understand it. I'm fine with it, you're the one who is not. So what exactly is your problem here then?
 
2012-08-22 03:47:07 PM
Last year, there were 175 first-time offenses, eight second offenses and no third offenses, said Doug Boothroy, Iowa City's director of housing and inspection services.

It sounds like their previous methods were working... why change it? Bored?
 
2012-08-22 03:47:28 PM

consider this: lennavan: Don't like cops searching your house without a warrant? Stop doing illegal shiat.

Cops don't need a warrant to search a home if they respond to a call and observe illegal activity. That's why these little dicks aren't answering the doors, why is that so hard for you to understand?


You're clearly against this practice, you clearly want something done about it. I now return you to the 5th amendment:

That's why I don't answer the cop's questions, because they might hear some illegal activity.

Do you want to do something about that one as well? It's truly outrageous that a kid might not answer the door because the cop might bust him doing something illegal but makes complete sense a kid might not want to answer questions because the cop might bust him doing something illegal? Why is the right to not incriminate yourself analogy so hard to understand?
 
2012-08-22 03:48:08 PM

CapeFearCadaver: Last year, there were 175 first-time offenses, eight second offenses and no third offenses, said Doug Boothroy, Iowa City's director of housing and inspection services.

It sounds like their previous methods were working... why change it? Bored?


They were working if your goal is to prevent future noise violations. The only reason to change it is if that was not your goal.
 
2012-08-22 03:48:15 PM

The Muthaship: Headso: local government trampling on rights, we should give them more power

No, dammit! That's the federal government's job!


(puts on HOA jackboots)

Can I get in on this?
 
2012-08-22 03:48:53 PM

consider this: Cops don't need a warrant to search a home if they respond to a call and observe illegal activity


Correction, they don't need a warrant if they observe criminal activity. Violating a civil noise ordinance is illegal, but not criminal.
 
2012-08-22 03:49:55 PM

consider this: lennavan: Uh, yeah I understand it. I'm fine with it, you're the one who is not. So what exactly is your problem here then?

I'm not fine with what, idiots refusing to answer the door? Hey, if that's what they choose to do, so be it. Just don't biatch when the $1,000 fine shows up in the mail.

What would you like to see happen here, the morons getting to party into the morning, with no consequences and annoying their neighbors?


The cops get a warrant and bust the fark out of everyone inside. That's what I'd like to see. I like me some constitutionally protected rights and I like me some peace and farking quiet. But my peace and quiet is not more important than someone else's constitutional rights.
 
2012-08-22 03:50:04 PM
These cops are amateurs as one of the earlier posts states. They can claim anything. College party and they didn't smell pot? Astonishing. Yes it's Iowa, they still have weed. They could also have done the "we heard screaming" line, that one works. Amateurs.

/ America is becoming a pitiful cartoon
 
2012-08-22 03:50:24 PM

lennavan: consider this: lennavan: Don't like cops searching your house without a warrant? Stop doing illegal shiat.

Cops don't need a warrant to search a home if they respond to a call and observe illegal activity. That's why these little dicks aren't answering the doors, why is that so hard for you to understand?

You're clearly against this practice, you clearly want something done about it. I now return you to the 5th amendment:

That's why I don't answer the cop's questions, because they might hear some illegal activity.

Do you want to do something about that one as well? It's truly outrageous that a kid might not answer the door because the cop might bust him doing something illegal but makes complete sense a kid might not want to answer questions because the cop might bust him doing something illegal? Why is the right to not incriminate yourself analogy so hard to understand?


Darn it Lennavan, we have to get tough on crime or there will be parties terrorizing our neighborhoods, decimating our schools, and undermining our values and our way of life.
 
2012-08-22 03:51:29 PM

DammitIForgotMyLogin: It's not that they're refusing to let officers in, it's that they're refusing to come and answer the door.

Personally, having lived next door to some annoying farktards who loved playing loud music at all hours of the night, i'd support just evicting the douchebags, rather than pansying around with a small fine.


If there's a loud party going on, there's actually a chance they don't even know somebody's at the door.
 
2012-08-22 03:53:17 PM

Lunaville: lennavan: consider this: lennavan: Don't like cops searching your house without a warrant? Stop doing illegal shiat.

Cops don't need a warrant to search a home if they respond to a call and observe illegal activity. That's why these little dicks aren't answering the doors, why is that so hard for you to understand?

You're clearly against this practice, you clearly want something done about it. I now return you to the 5th amendment:

That's why I don't answer the cop's questions, because they might hear some illegal activity.

Do you want to do something about that one as well? It's truly outrageous that a kid might not answer the door because the cop might bust him doing something illegal but makes complete sense a kid might not want to answer questions because the cop might bust him doing something illegal? Why is the right to not incriminate yourself analogy so hard to understand?

Darn it Lennavan, we have to get tough on crime or there will be parties terrorizing our neighborhoods, decimating our schools, and undermining our values and our way of life.


I guess so. I love that people simultaneously argue this is a big deal that something needs to be done about:

consider this: What would you like to see happen here, the morons getting to party into the morning, with no consequences and annoying their neighbors?


Yet also admitting it's not worth a few hours of a cop's time:

consider this: Do you really want police officers spending hours sitting around waiting for a warrant for a noise complaint rather than patrolling the streets?


We want the kids busted for this huge annoying infraction but we don't want to have to bother a cop for a couple of hours for it.
 
2012-08-22 03:55:28 PM
Police are idiots. Draconian thuggery is their only response to a problem

Deputize some cute college girls and send them out to noise complaints in plain clothes.
 
2012-08-22 03:57:06 PM

consider this: ThrobblefootSpectre: Correction, they don't need a warrant if they observe criminal activity. Violating a civil noise ordinance is illegal, but not criminal.

I've already said that loud music doesn't give them the right to enter a home. People on your side of the argument keep claiming that if somebody opens the door for an officer, they're just going to barge in and begin a search for something illegal going on and that's just not true.


I'm sure you can quote examples of this because otherwise this would be an example of... how do I put this delicately:

consider this: Holy hell, these threads really do turn some of you retarded

 
2012-08-22 03:57:07 PM

BolloxReader: consider this: BolloxReader: This is just a $1000 ticket for bruising someone's ego and for exerting Constitutional rights.

No, it's a way to get people to be considerate of their neighbors and to obey city noise ordinances. I guarantee that you wouldn't be on the side of a house full of morons screaming and blasting music at 2am if they lived next door to you. Do you really want police officers spending hours sitting around waiting for a warrant for a noise complaint rather than patrolling the streets?

Interestingly I have lived for almost 20 years in neighborhoods with large concentrations of college student renters. My first apartment was in such a place and I did security work there-- front-desk stuff, screening visitors and collecting dry cleaning and releasing packages to residents.

I've never felt the need to call the cops on anyone for noise. The only time I had to deal with noise complaints was a crazy lady who literally would hallucinate. As in the police wouldn't even come out for her anymore because they would stand there and hear absolutely nothing while she would insist music was blaring.

There are places I wouldn't move to, like Broad Ripple in Indianapolis, because of constant partying. I'm not going to move into it and demand that people not stumble drunkenly across my lawn, throw up on my front walk and piss in my flower bed at 4 am. That's the character of the neighborhood. Just like I wouldn't move to Speedway because I don't enjoy people turning my lawn into a rutted ruin. I'm not going to move there and tell people they can't park on my lawn on race week.


FYI, old telephone poles, or similarly heavy timber, cut into 6' lengths and sunk 3' deep along the road frontage will cut WAY down on that :)
 
2012-08-22 03:57:20 PM

consider this: lennavan: Uh, yeah I understand it. I'm fine with it, you're the one who is not. So what exactly is your problem here then?

I'm not fine with what, idiots refusing to answer the door? Hey, if that's what they choose to do, so be it. Just don't biatch when the $1,000 fine shows up in the mail.


but there's no reason that one has to answer their door. it's my farking door on my farking home, i'll answer when i feel like it. i'm sure as shiat not leaving the three russian chicks wrestling in jello to talk to a cop. fark that noise. not answering the door is not wrong. if they want to fine the house for the noise, go ahead and do that. mail a citation to the owner (sort of like how they do red light/speed cameras). there's no reason to attempt to force someone to answer their door by threatening a fine.
 
2012-08-22 03:58:07 PM
What's going to happen is that now cops will put as little effort as possible when trying to make contact. Loud party? Go lightly tap on the door once and you've done your job. Let them deal with the 750k-1k fine. Ohh and I will just be floored when they start handing out these fines pretty much anytime a noise complaint is lodged.

Just kidding it's not like police would selectively and aggressively go after/for certain offenses because they are very profitable for the city.
 
2012-08-22 04:03:51 PM

consider this: Kind of funny that you don't like the idea of cops entering a home if they suspect something illegal going on but you're fine with them getting a warrant and raiding a home for a party.


Holy shiat did you just write that and mock me for holding those beliefs? Holy farking shiat dude. Yes, apparently this is shocking news but I find warrants kinda important. I guess you don't. I feel like we're at the twisty-ending of a movie. You've been declaring these threads bring out the retards and right at the end we find out it was you who was retarded all along DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNN!

Holy farking shiat I can't believe you just posted that.
 
2012-08-22 04:04:29 PM

Selector: Is there any college kid in america under 21 who hasn't had at least one alcoholic drink?? Can't we just get rid of stupid laws already??


If you've ever seen the line for criminal court at certain times of year in a college town you'd know why. Any booze = crime. lol so silly.
 
2012-08-22 04:05:50 PM

consider this: lennavan: I'm sure you can quote examples of this because otherwise this would be an example of... how do I put this delicately:

Sure, I'll just look for the thousands of articles written on officers responding to noise complaints and not conducting a search. That's such a newsworthy item that I'm guessing that most local news dedicates an entire team to reporting on it.


Oh okay so it was no one here in the thread and all along you've been arguing against a boogeyman you totally know exists elsewhere on the internet and you're still sure they are all on the same side of the argument as the guy you were responding to. Further, there are only two sides to this argument. Got it.
 
2012-08-22 04:05:54 PM

lennavan: MycroftHolmes: You understand that the police chief is not advocating breaking the constitution, right?

He is advocating bypassing it. No need for a warrant or evidence if you can just declare guilt and send them their fine in the mail and demand they prove their innocence to get out of it. You get that, right?

MycroftHolmes: He is basically telling the city that he will not waste his men's time trying to get a search warrant for a noise complaint.

So... stop responding to noise complaints then. Either they are or they are not worth it. I don't get how you get to have it both ways. These things are so super duper important we must change the law immediately because if we don't, then they are not important enough for our time?


The city council and the chief of police are two different entities. That the city chooses to make it a civil charge has no implications on the police's actions. The police are not bypassing the constitution at all. If anyone is doing so, it is the city government. Two completely separate entities.

Regarding your second point, that is a very black and white way of looking at things. Saying 'Either we should tie up multiple police officers and a judge for several hours, or we should just not have the law' is a false dichotomy. The way the city is approaching it is a serviceable compromise.

As far as constitutionality, is unconstitutional to fine the owner of an abandoned car, or the owners of a decrepit house? How is fining someone for a noise violation linked to their property any different?
 
2012-08-22 04:05:57 PM
How can they know it's the police if they're not answering the door?

Is it now mandatory to open the door, just in case it's police?
 
2012-08-22 04:06:46 PM

lennavan: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: I am not arguing about the warrant to enter issue. I was referring to the guy that stands in the open doorway to talk with drugs littering the table behind him. (happens more often than you think)

No I completely agree, that's why no one is answering the door when the cops come knockin. SirDigbyChickenCaesar: I am a huge defender of the constitution and would never overstep anyone's protections. In this case I see it further protecting the resident from searches and seizures not the other way.

Not quite. You seem to think the solution is to force people to answer the door. If my kill/death ratio is 10/1 or higher, I'm not answering the door if it's the pope himself. (I actually don't play any games with a KDR anymore, I just think it's a funny example to use)

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Not sure what your correlation is here. The original statement (paraphrased) was complaining about police using a plain view doctrine in this particular instance.

The original argument was about preventing plain view doctrine by not answering the door. The correlation is in both cases getting a warrant is annoying. If you read the linked article, they complain about how in a few hours the BAC decreases. In a few hours I imagine some illegal drugs make their way down the toilet. But there's a reason it is a judge via warrants that makes the decision on these things and not cops.

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: , I don't need a warrant to draw blood in this case all I have to do is take you to the ER.

From the article I linked: However, this May Governor Bill Haslam signed Public Chapter No. 892 that allows law enforcement to seek search warrants for a blood sample if a person arrested for driving under the influence refuses to provide one.


Any person, whether licensed by Virginia or not, who operates a motor vehicle upon a highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth shall be deemed thereby, as a condition of such operation, to have consented to have samples of his blood, breath, or both blood and breath taken for a chemical test to determine the alcohol, drug, or both alcohol and drug content of his blood

There is no warrant if they refuse. If they refuse then I still charge them with the DUI (if I think I have enough evidence) and the judge uses only my testimony to convict and then they get a refusal charge which is just as bad as a DUI.

I think you misunderstand me, I cannot force you to open the door (nor do I think it is right) unless exigent circumstances are present, period. Would I like you to? Yes because the outcome is going to be a lot different if we politely conduct our business like adults. You ignoring a legal order requiring us to get a warrant and polite is no longer an option.

Remember, I am standing at your door because someone else called for our help. I am representing them in this case and it's their rights I am standing up for. You not answering the door isn't changing the equation.
 
2012-08-22 04:06:56 PM
LOL, You though when you got out of high school you would be in the "real world" and the rules would change?
You're still a student.
You get get farked.
 
2012-08-22 04:07:27 PM
When the cops came to a small party back in college. They busted in saying that since we did not answer the door, they assumed we were trespassing. After harrassing us for 30 minutes and put us in cuffs there were no tickets.
I always wanted to cause a stink about it, but I didn't have the money for lawyers or the know how.
 
2012-08-22 04:09:33 PM

Smingleigh: How can they know it's the police if they're not answering the door?

Is it now mandatory to open the door, just in case it's police?


well the police could identify themselves. of course maybe they aren't really police. maybe they are sadistic rapists impersonating the police? maybe they are male strippers sent as a prank? never can be too careful in this post-9/11 world.
 
2012-08-22 04:09:36 PM

consider this: Think before you post.


consider this: Kind of funny that you don't like the idea of cops entering a home if they suspect something illegal going on but you're fine with them getting a warrant and raiding a home for a party.


lol

Keep diggin dude, keep diggin. Fark that Lenny guy for thinking getting a warrant makes things better!

consider this: Wouldn't a better position for somebody with your way of thinking be that something as trivial as a noise complaint shouldn't be grounds for getting a warrant and storming a residence?


I imagine that would be up to the particular cop in the particular situation, as each situation is different. I guess you didn't know this - not all warrants are served via SWAT team. HOLY SHOCK AND AWE.
 
2012-08-22 04:12:00 PM

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Any person, whether licensed by Virginia or not, who operates a motor vehicle upon a highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth shall be deemed thereby, as a condition of such operation, to have consented to have samples of his blood, breath, or both blood and breath taken for a chemical test to determine the alcohol, drug, or both alcohol and drug content of his blood


You're posting a state law from a different state than the article I cited. I'm sure you know what I'll post next.

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Yes because the outcome is going to be a lot different if we politely conduct our business like adults. You ignoring a legal order requiring us to get a warrant and polite is no longer an option.


I fail to see why this necessitates a law change. I get it, when the kids don't open the door making the cop get a warrant things are gonna get a hell of a lot worse. That's their choice to make dude. Kids being annoying isn't a reason to ignore the whole warrant dealie.
 
2012-08-22 04:15:42 PM

Lunaville: BolloxReader: I've never felt the need to call the cops on anyone for noise.

I called the cops about a noise complaint exactly once. I had two babies who were startled awake repeatedly by music being blasted through outdoor speakers and other noises. Then, small fireworks started going off. I called the police, they rode by the party, then stopped by our house to tell me they had spoken to the homeowner.

They mentioned that it was a Quinceanera and I felt awful. I apologized to the cops for calling them and asked them not to bother the little girl anymore. Then, to limit the crying, I kicked my husband out of the bed and brought the babies in to sleep with me.


You meanie.
At lease you felt aweful.
 
2012-08-22 04:16:35 PM

MycroftHolmes: The city council and the chief of police are two different entities. That the city chooses to make it a civil charge has no implications on the police's actions. The police are not bypassing the constitution at all. If anyone is doing so, it is the city government. Two completely separate entities.


So we'll pretend the city council is doing this independent of the police and further, so are their budgets. You know what, whatever, that's pedantic and irrelevant to the points I want to make. So sure, why not.

MycroftHolmes: Regarding your second point, that is a very black and white way of looking at things


Er, did you read the first part of your post? Harsh dude, harsh.

MycroftHolmes: Saying 'Either we should tie up multiple police officers and a judge for several hours, or we should just not have the law' is a false dichotomy.


Why do you need multiple police officers and more than 5 minutes in front of a judge?

MycroftHolmes: As far as constitutionality, is unconstitutional to fine the owner of an abandoned car, or the owners of a decrepit house? How is fining someone for a noise violation linked to their property any different?


I'm pretty sure there is something illegal going on in your house. You won't let me look because of the 4th amendment? Fine, I'll just pass a law that declares you automatically guilty and let me issue you a fine on the spot and demand you prove yourself innocent if you don't want to. Nice.
 
2012-08-22 04:28:35 PM
You would think all the loudness and disturbing of the peace be reasonable cause to enter without a warrent. Unless the cops just "know" something illegal is going on but can't just walk right in. Must be very frustrating for them.
 
2012-08-22 04:30:21 PM
I see your civil offense and raise you one peaceful protest. I my good sir am not having a party - I am having a peaceful protest of the civil offense law that is a direct denial of my constitutional rights. If my neighbors don't like my parties please issue them 10 cent ear plugs or 5 hour energies.
 
2012-08-22 04:30:44 PM

lennavan: I'm pretty sure there is something illegal going on in your house. You won't let me look because of the 4th amendment? Fine, I'll just pass a law that declares you automatically guilty and let me issue you a fine on the spot and demand you prove yourself innocent if you don't want to. Nice.


They are fining them for a noise ordnance violation. They aren't assuming that they are manufacturing meth and then finding them guilty of that. The code enforcement officer ascertains what house is generating the violation, then fines them for it. I am not sure how they are being found guilty of a crime? Am I entitled to a jury trial if my trees don't have the appropriate clearance over the street? Do they need a search warrant to see that my grass is overgrown and out of compliance with ordnance?
 
2012-08-22 04:30:52 PM

JackieRabbit: Dog Welder: Not a lawyer, so maybe a real one could fill in the blanks here, but if the town had some sort of noise ordinance and the police:

1) Received a noise complaint at a residence, and
2) Arrived at said residence and while standing outside heard incredibly loud noises,

Wouldn't they have probable cause to enter the residence if the occupants didn't answer the door?

You don't need a lawyer for this. Violations of a noise ordinance is not a crime; it's civil disobedience. If the police have probably cause to believe that a crime is being committed inside the house, they may enter. If not, they must get a warrant from a judge before entering. That is Iowa City's problem. But the time the police could get a warrant to enter, the party would have moved on. And, while the police are going for a warrant, they can't be doing - duh! - police work.

These police could have abused their power and simply said that they smelled weed. These are college kids, so they would have had a drug bust most of the time. I think this is a measured response by city officials to what can become a serious problem in a college town.


Okay, that makes sense. Thanks!
 
2012-08-22 04:32:10 PM

badhatharry: You would think all the loudness and disturbing of the peace be reasonable cause to enter without a warrent. Unless the cops just "know" something illegal is going on but can't just walk right in. Must be very frustrating for them.


Your a Democrat aren't you?
 
2012-08-22 04:34:10 PM

lennavan: So we'll pretend the city council is doing this independent of the police and further, so are their budgets. You know what, whatever, that's pedantic and irrelevant to the points I want to make. So sure, why not.


Your original post that I was responding to was basically criticizing the police for implying that civil rights were a waste of time. These comments do not make any sense, as the police are not really any part of your perceived violation of civil rights.

And your assumption that police and city council move in lockstep is an assertion that is not validated in all (or even most) cases.

If you want to argue that the City is out of line for this ordnance, your comments should probably reflect that. My mistake for responding to what you wrote, rather than what you meant.
 
Displayed 50 of 255 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report