Wednesday, February 13, 2013

When Did The Constitution Change To Allow For Police To Burn Down Houses?

2010 Escondido "Bomb House" Fire
(Credit Youtube)
Back in April 19th of 1993, 76 men, women and children died after a 50 day standoff with federal authorities in Waco Texas when their compound was burned to the ground. Now according to Wikipedia, the Feds blame the Branch Davidians for the fire, but the survivors say the Feds started the fire. Either way, we know the compound burned and a lot of people died. Many were prevented from leaving while the compound burned.

Fast forward to my home town of Escondido, California in December of 2010 when an alleged bomb manufacturer's house was burned to the ground because the police said it was too dangerous to remove all the explosives. The house didn't even belong to the bomb manufacturer. He was renting it from a woman who lived near San Francisco. The local police burned it down, and they did not have to compensate the owner for her loss because, according to Reuters at the time:

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently issued an emergency declaration freeing the state of liability for destroying the house, owned by a San Francisco Bay-area woman, according to county property records.

Now just last night during the Christopher Dorner standoff in Big Bear Calfornia, the police once again burn down someone's home. This time a cabin. According to a recent Reality Check segment from Benn Swann, he reported that the police up in Big Bear were heard yelling on the police radio that they were going to burn Dorner out. He also reports that Dorner was trying to escape out the back, but was pushed back in the cabin before it was set ablaze "mysteriously."

Here's that video:

My question is since when did the Constitution change that gave so much power to local and Federal authorities to unilaterally decide when they can destroy personal property in the pursuit of justice? Let alone set buildings on fire with people in them?

I was under the impression that the 5th Amendment still applied to citizens in this country. If you are not familiar with the 5th Amendment here it is:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What do you think about this? Should the police be able to be the judge, jury and executioner? Before you answer, imagine yourself on the wrong side of the law, whether innocent or guilty. Would you want trigger happy, pyromaniacle police officers to be able to kill you, or burn down your house without any recourse? Let us know in the comments.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Mainwashed Copyright © 2013 | Powered By Bauer-Power | Contact Us | stop spam