Voluntary gun searches, a good idea or another gun grab ploy?

Don

New member
""A Welcome Mat for Gun Searches"

By STEVEN GRAY

Kieran Doherty / Reuters / CorbisArticle

Buzz In the coming weeks, Boston police will begin asking parents in several impoverished, high-crime neighborhoods to allow searches of their homes — without the need for warrants. The surprising reaction: many parents and community leaders are all for it. And that is making for an intriguing civil liberties debate.


Under the experimental program, dubbed "Safe Homes," teams of police officers assigned to Boston's public schools will hunt for leads on youths believed to have guns. Tips might come from neighbors, or even parents or guardians, who are often fearful of their own children. Three plainclothes officers and a clergyperson or community activist will show up at the youth's home. The officers will ask parents to sign a form allowing the search of the home, including the child's room. Weapons found in the child's possession will be seized, and no charges will be filed unless the weapon is linked to a violent crime. "This is an interaction between human beings, where common sense will prevail," Edward Davis, Boston's police commissioner, told TIME.

It is a risky endeavor for Davis. He was tapped to lead Boston's 2,200-officer force in October 2006 after having spent a dozen years as police superintendent in Lowell, Mass., a city with roughly one-sixth Boston's population. Davis arrived in Boston as the number of homicides and shootings were falling. However, a string of high-profile youth shootings gripped the city. The tipping point for Davis was last summer's fatal shooting of Liquarry Jefferson, just eight years old, by a seven-year-old cousin. "Every time I go to the scene of a crime and see a young kid who's been shot, it causes you to reflect on what you're doing, and search for best practices to test," Davis says.

In recent weeks, Davis rallied support for the program among several community leaders. Some of Davis' staunchest supporters have been black leaders, particularly ministers, who are desperate for anything that will quell youth violence. "There's a cry from the parents and neighborhoods to do whatever it takes to reduce this gun violence," says Emmett Folgert, executive director of the Boston Youth Collaborative, in the city's Dorchester neighborhood. Folgert says he supports the experiment with mixed feelings. Much of its success, he says, "relies on the integrity of individual police officers and their leaders, and so far, they've proven themselves to be trustworthy in the eyes of the community."

The American Civil Liberties Union swiftly assailed the program and announced plans to issue leaflets in several neighborhoods to inform residents about the potential ramifications of allowing police officers to search their homes. Jorge Martinez, executive director of Project Right Inc., a social service organization in the Dorchester neighborhood, asked the police department to require a defense attorney to be present at all searches and tell residents that such searches are voluntary. "Many of these folks are from third world countries, where anyone in uniform symbolizes oppression," says Martinez, referring to the Grove Hall neighborhood, home to a mix of African-Americans, Haitians, Dominicans and Cape Verdeans.

The ACLU's opposition, however, has failed to move many community residents in neighborhoods directly impacted. "I understand political correctness and the potential civil liberties risks. But until you have bullets flying over your head, I suggest you take your leaflets and keep them in the suburbs," says the Rev. Jeffrey Brown, interim executive director of Boston TenPoint Coalition, a group heavily involved in reducing gang violence, particularly among the city's black and Latino youth. Brown says he plans to walk with police officers during searches.

Some critics warn, however, that the "Safe Homes" experiment could potentially incite allegations of racial profiling. And there's concern that parents and children who refuse searches will face retaliation or unfair scrutiny from law enforcement and school officials. The program's track record, moreover, is not encouraging. "Safe Homes" is modeled on a program started in St. Louis in the mid-1990s. Early on, about 98% of St. Louis residents approached by police officers consented to searches of their homes, according to a 2004 U.S. Justice Department report. Guns were found in about half the homes searched, and an average of three guns were seized per household. But by decade's end, the program had failed, partly because of poor support from residents of high-crime neighborhoods, and the inconsistent way the program was administered by the police department.

If the St. Louis effort is a guide, there's little reason to believe the Boston program will significantly reduce the number of guns in high-crime areas, particularly where so-called "neighborhood guns" are routinely passed between friends and relatives. Boston police say they don't have an estimate of how many guns are in the hands of youth, although the department seizes about 700 guns a year. Davis says he hasn't set formal benchmarks to measure success. "But if I can get my hands on a dozen guns, I'll be very happy," he says, adding, "It'll be successful."
 
In 1997 or so, Richmond VA began a program of aggressively prosecuting all crimes involving firearms. In 10 years, they have cut the number of murders to about half of the 1997 figure.
Several LE agencies work together on this. Sounds like a good program to me.
Article was in WSJ, either Sat or Monday, I think.
 
There's a similar program starting in Oakland, CA. Same premise. Police are quoted as saying any guns found during voluntary searches will not be used to prosecute people in the home; only those guns which can be traced to a crime.

Those who trade freedom for security, end up with neither.

Best,
Dennis
 
Taking unregistered alley sweepers and Saturday night specials and zip guns from the homes of underaged high risk kids is a good thing. I cannot find a downside here. I wouldn't want my wife to call the police about my 40X or my hunting rifles.

Concho Bill
 
Could this "program" be considered a slippery slope?
vinny
 
Could this "program" be considered a slippery slope?
vinny

you betcha, and any residence where a firearm is found or recovered will be put on a list and in the future if any household member attempts to make a legal gun purchase the'll be delayed or denied by NCIS, simply because they were a participant in the govt program, then it's up to you to cleanse youself cuz gov't don't gaf what happens after the fact. First step NCIS requires you to submit your fingerprints on a card they have so conviently availiable and it goes on and on and on. Friggin NRA dropped the ball on this one as well. :mad:

BTW ... St. Louis, accordiny to the FBI reports is and has been in the top 5 high crime areas amoung major cities despite the "safe house" program initiated in the last decade, the cops did a pretty good job of cleaning up the streets in StL a few cop's were shot and killed in the process:(
I think it the mindset of the "morons" that live there, their "CRAZY"...:eek:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After thinking about it,..............

I dont like it.

If the authorities/schools/neighbors suspect that someone in my household is dangerous and hiding a gun, without enough evidence for a search warrant, than the authorities can inform me of the situation and I can than perform the search myself and take the appropriate action (of course that will never happen, authorities dont operate that way).

I dont want to grant someone unlimited search authorization to toss my property, dig up yards/foundations, punch holes in walls, rip into furnishings..........have the authority to do all those things that can happen in extreme searches, without any limits.

I dont want to grant someone else the authority to decide which guns in my household are legititamally owned by me or someone else.

I dont want to be put in the position of being declared guilty until I can otherwise prove innocent, for gun items like threaded muzzles/tuners vs. silencers, etc.
 
Don,

Feeling the way you do, just say no and go search your kid's room yourself. If you find any, you better have the best talk with your child that you ever had. That is exactly what I would do. These are parents who are not like us. In many cases they are single parents with out of control 14, 15, and 16 year old gang bangers who don't listen anyway. This way they will have to break into your house or mine and steal another "piece".

Don, I don't like the smell of this thing either. Parents should raise their children so they don't sneak around at night with guns looking for trouble. Please understand, these are the bad guys we speak of. Most will be in prison soon anyway but maybe it won't be for murder or armed robbery.

Just another thought. What it they find a gun that was stolen from you in the kid's room?

Concho Bill
 
Last edited:
this isn't new news: (From a March 25 article)

"Boston police officials, surprised by intense opposition from residents, have significantly scaled back and delayed the start of a program that would allow officers to go into people's homes and search for guns without a warrant.

The program, dubbed Safe Homes, was supposed to start in December, but has been delayed at least three times because of misgivings in the community. March 1 was the latest missed start date."

Link to story: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/25/police_limit_searches_for_guns/

I do think this is a bad idea. There is probably a need for something to be done in Boston, but I don't believe that this is it. To akin (if I remember history) to McCarthyism. A solution might lay in allowing the law abiding to carry concealed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What does this have to do with "McCarthyism"?

W. Owens, what does this voluntary home search program have to do with "McCarthyism"?

I am opposed to the search program and feel as others that the provence of our home is our own responsibility. This is a slippery slope.

best, nrb
 
maybe a poor choice of words on my part. I was trying to draw the parallel of spying out your neighbors who may be communist. That is unless my memory of history is wrong. And my memory might be wrong.
 
In 1997 or so, Richmond VA began a program of aggressively prosecuting all crimes involving firearms. In 10 years, they have cut the number of murders to about half of the 1997 figure.
Several LE agencies work together on this. Sounds like a good program to me.
Article was in WSJ, either Sat or Monday, I think.
Are you kidding,They will not search any of my property with out probable cause and a search warrant.
Thats just another way of invading my rights,i'll take care of my house and kids if they have a gun,i will not allow the cops to do it for me,my house and cars are my personel property and i take case of my own security
 
rhaney2, Jay does not agree with the searchs. He's talking about putting away the bad guys so they don't continue to commit crimes. Kind of like the 3 strike laws. No way will I let them in my home without a warrant.
 
Are you kidding,They will not search any of my property with out probable cause and a search warrant.
Thats just another way of invading my rights,i'll take care of my house and kids if they have a gun,i will not allow the cops to do it for me,my house and cars are my personel property and i take case of my own security

Whoa! I did NOT comment on the voluntary search program. I mentioned the program that strongly and strictly enforces laws where firearms are used in criminal activity.

Jay, Idaho
 
Another feature that I find troubling......

............about this voluntary gun search program, is that it seems to fall into the same category of voluntary rights programs as voluntary consent to a polygraph exam or voluntary right to an attorney.........................if either is revoked/envoked against the wishes of authority, then an individual automatically becomes a "person of interest".

And we all know what can happen to a "person of interest", just ask Richard Jewell or Steven Hatfield.............many years later, hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees, lost careers, and you might finally get your life back, what is left of it.

And to those who think that this program can only occur in "bad neighborhoods", think again. Once a program is put in place, successfully funded, and deemed politically acceptable and popular under the feel good guise of "law and order", it can spread anywhere.
 
Whoa! I did NOT comment on the voluntary search program. I mentioned the program that strongly and strictly enforces laws where firearms are used in criminal activity.

Jay, Idaho

Sorry Jay,i get your point now.
We have so many laws the cops don't know when to enforce or stop and call the station on laws.
If we were to lift all gun laws,it might work better,that way,we could protect ourselves.
 
Keep the police out of your home period!

I have been a law enforcement officer for 32 years. We have a constitution in this great land. Having Police in your home is only inviting trouble for you. You should police your own home and know what your children have in their possession. Roger is absolutely correct, the police must have probable cause and a search warrant.

Here in North Carolina If you have a CCW permit it comes up on your license and vehicle registration. If you are a CCW permitee and are "approached by a law enforcement officer" and you are in possession of a firearm you are require by law to disclose to the officer you have the firearm. This may be a catch 22.

The city of Raleigh takes this one more step. I you disclose you have a firearm they will search you and or your vehicle with out making an arrest, with out your consent , and without a search warrant. They then will run your firearms make, model, serial number through DCI and NCIC looking for any wants. They do this under the guise they are mandated to do so by a Federal U. S. Department of Justice Program they are participating in. I contacted the U.S. Department of Justice and they said this program is only to run the serial numbers of guns taken in the course of a criminal act. They agreed that Raleigh PD was over stepping its legal authority. As well as misrepresnting the U.S. Department Of Justice Program. But refused to do anything about it.

I know of several other Departments in the US that are also over stepping their authority.

Put your foot down and contact the NRA and let them know what is going on. You have rights and should not give them away.

If you are not a criminal they will make you a criminal.

Rustystud
 
Sounds like another version of "if you have nothing to hide why shouldn't the police be able to kick you door down and search your house??"
By going at it piece meal, and targeting the poor folks to start, they are getting support from the middle and rich class. But then, having opened the door, they will pick another section and then another until the cops will have what is in reality a no knock, no warrent search ability anywhere in the city.

IMO, it is a very slippery slope.
 
Patriot Act

With some of the legal language used in this, LEO have a pretty wide range of options.
 
Several of you have touched upon the solution.

Your children, until they reach the age of majority (most states, age 18), do not have Fourth Amendment rights, per se, since they live in your home. Search their rooms, their cars, wherever they can hide things. That's the best way to keep drugs, guns, and anything else illegal, out of your home. Run a benign dictatorship.

Trust? The word didn't appear in my dictionary when we raised our kids. When they got to driving age, the rule was no booze, no matter what. The punishment was total permanent ban from driving family cars.

Best,
Dennis
 
Back
Top