Thursday, June 19, 2008

Iowa Homeowners Experience Police State

I've noticed that a lot of Iowa homeowners are angry because the police will not let them enter their homes to assess the damage, claiming it is too dangerous. Not only that, but police are kicking in people's doors and searching the homes under the guise of "assessing safety." Sounds a lot like unwarranted searches to me, particularly when they are damaging the homes by breaking windows and doors in order to gain entry -- when the homeowner could simply use the key and let them in. The homeowners are being arrested for trying to go home.

It doesn’t matter if there’s a flood, earthquake, tornado or an invasion by space aliens, the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land. The government does not have the right to block law abiding citizens from their own private property regardless of the situation. If someone wants to die in their home, they have that right. I know that may sound ridiculous, but where do we draw the line? If the government determines what is safe for us and whether or not we can go home... where does it end?

What is really insane about this whole deal is that while people are not allowed to access their homes, these inspectors from the government are allowed to wander around to people’s property for safety purposes. This is a recipe for corruption. How can people be assured that their homes are not being looted by these so called government officials? Governments have time and time again proven to be one of the most corrupt and criminal institutions in the history of mankind. If you don’t believe this to be true, take a look at the looting and pillaging that is currently taking place by the crooks in the federal government.

In Iowa City, the Mayor actually ordered hundreds of people to evacuate their homes. This government bureaucrat has no right to order people to leave their private property regardless of the situation. If people believe the conditions are unsafe, they’ll leave, if not, they’ll stay. It is up to the individual to make that decision, not the government.

A little fourth amendment review may be in order:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Am I wrong? Am I being too extreme? I was involved in checkpoint operations during Hurricane Katrina. We kept sightseers from accessing ravaged areas, but if your driver's license proved that you lived there, we let you in. That is how it should be. It may not be popular, and you may even be trying to help people -- but they have a right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."

What do you think?

No comments: