Be sure to share your comments in the Class Participation section below -- that's often the best part! The comments are never closed; you're always welcome to add to the discussion. Also, if you get tired of clicking on the buttons, you can always use the arrows on your keyboard ← → to move around.

Buy the books on Amazon ___ ___
Join the conversation! There are now 19 comments on “Police vs Privacy pg 21
  1. Superglucose says

    “possession of a weapon”?

    • Just take it as read that, in whatever state this is taking place, that kid’s sword is something you could potentially get arrested for. “Potentially” being the operative word.

      You should really skim your own state’s penal law some time, and see what idiotic things you could get arrested merely for possessing. In New York, for example, the nunchucks kids mess with in their martial arts classes are just as illegal as a handgun. So are slingshots. People go to jail for assault with a deadly weapon for kicking someone while wearing sneakers.

      I would imagine that this kid’s sword, like nunchuks and slingshots, was one of those things that police in his state ordinarily use some discretion about. But the detective was so pissed off that discretion went out the window.

        • When NC passed its CCW law, I actually knew people who were bent out of shape because it didn’t cover swords…

        • The second amendment refers to the right to bear “arms,” not guns.
          Claymores, claymore mines, tanks, helicopter gunships, F-18’s, and nuclear weapons are arms.
          Luckily most judges are not willing to follow the literal meaning of the constitution.

          • kinda wish they would. also, it isn’t the f-18 or helicopter that is a weapon, it’s the bombs, missiles and main gun that are. that said, I want one!!

          • The literal meaning is that you have the right to bear weapons. That doesn’t necessarily mean *any* weapon you might be able to get a hold of is fair game.

      • I could imagine being arrested for possessing a sword.

        But it seems pretty implausible that someone would be waving a real sword around while playing a tabletop game. It’s far more likely to be a toy or prop, no more likely to impale you than that wizard’s magic wand is to shoot a fireball.

  2. pingo1387 says

    I’m guessing that this particular part is going to lead up to what happens when the police, whether accidentally or on purpose, go to the wrong house on a warrant…

    • I would expect that would depend on whether the officers are in the wrong place, or the wrong place was listed on the warrant. In the former case, the evidence should all be inadmissible since they didn’t have a warrant for this house. In the latter case I guess the poor buggers are screwed, unless a warrant with typos is invalid.

  3. Robert says

    And the next day, the newspapers will discuss about the MAJOR DRUG BUST IN SUBURBIA with four teenagers with DEADLY WEAPONS and SATANIC OCCULTIST PARAPHERNALIA.

    Granted, I think that’s just my general cynicism of the media cultivated from being a Journalism major.

  4. Raen says

    Gotta say, lighting up during a raid is gutsy…

  5. Neil R says

    Two things: I’ve really enjoyed this series and I appreciate the Monty Python reference

  6. Alex Lockwood says

    I just noticed, is the swordsman wearing a JTHM t-shirt?

  7. Bob Loblaw says

    Once again, thanks to the brave efforts of our boys in blue, society is safe. Through quick, unthinking action they shut down a deadly, drug-fueled game of D&D.

  8. WJS says

    I would hardly consider panel 1 to be an appropriate level of force when lives aren’t at stake.

    • In the U.S., it is routine for even administrative warrants these days to be executed by a full SWAT team, with overwhelming force, combat gear, and military weapons. It’s absurd, but that’s how it is.

      The level of force used here was relatively minor, compared to that.

Class Participation

___