What would you do (watch vid)

[Thrumud]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a87_1178288577

[cheropride]

Oh my gosh, that is such bull, the owner is so right.  If he does not grant the permission, no one can enter his property and search without a warrant.  I mean comeon, even if it were murder case, you have to a warrant.  Now they can enter if the probable cause to believe someone was imminent danger, but this so not the case.  I cant believe that this woman didn't even have her name on her id.....  Got to love it.....


Hope they get whats coming to them.  That owner knew his right, he was good, and he never did anything that but the right thing.  I bet he is laughing now....

[Bigscrb15]

thats nuts!!!!! she is lucky he did not forcefully remove her. i wish there was another clip though to show the rest of it.

[Thrumud]

The officer just told her go in, waiting for the owner to do something physical and then arrest him. Guy sure kept his cool. If it was me - her head stuck inside the mailbox my eyes spayed with pepper sprayed with handcuffs.  "Man, I need to control myself"   

[GrizzlyBear]

Whatever crime they thought was committed by the man will never be prosecuted as anything she may have found would have to be excluded from the prosecution.  He did right to let her enter, not get forceful.  Now he has a great harressment case.

[Young Gun]

i would do exactly what he did, not do anything wrong and videotape them.  Hes going to make some bookoo byucks suing them.

[FishaHallic]

Sorry I disagree.   The right of public safety should supersede any ones individual rights.  I don't know that this clip shows enough information to make a judgement either way but if you ask me the guy filming sounds like a physico.  Sounds like one of those guys that is obsessed with the government and his rights, he most likely thinks the UN is ultimately behind the whole thing.  Just because he spouts off like he knows what he is talking about does not mean he does.  Lock him up for his and our own safety.

[450rcrazy]

Sorry I disagree.   The right of public safety should supersede any ones individual rights.  I don't know that this clip shows enough information to make a judgement either way but if you ask me the guy filming sounds like a physico.  Sounds like one of those guys that is obsessed with the government and his rights, he most likely thinks the UN is ultimately behind the whole thing.  Just because he spouts off like he knows what he is talking about does not mean he does.  Lock him up for his and our own safety.

The right of puplic safety does supersede any one individuals rights but only after a judge decides and issues a warrent or if an officer has probable cause that a CRIME is being commited not a health violation as in the video .This is how I remember the law stateing it anyhow. I do not know what trouble if any the cop will be in but i am sure she will be introuble for trespass unless she stayed on county easment.

[gearhead400]

hey can get in trouble for not upholding the law. Like the dudes say, he toke an oath, anddd he broke it.

If he has no tresspassing signs posted on his property the only person in danger is himself. NO ONE else should be on his property unless he invited them onto it. In which case he would be responsible for whatever happened to that person. I wouldnt of been able to keep my cool, i woulda punched the pregnant dog in the face. Dont act hard unless you ready to fall hard. F**k the policeeee, jk <3 you guys that DO your job, your the greatest but f**k the guys and gals that dont.

[eldiablo64]

Looks like fair game to my 4 pitbulls to me.

[Kawa3]

I'm with bigscrb15 I want to see more!

[dreth]

I would love to see or hear the final outcome.

[dynodon]

I agree with Scrub also !!!!!
 Besides the FACT that no-one has the right to just enter your property like that. Even a property appraiser needs permision, or look from the road ( unless permits are pulled fro improvements).
 I think he did the right thing, keep his cool, film it , then take it to court

[cheropride]

Sorry I disagree.   The right of public safety should supersede any ones individual rights.  I don't know that this clip shows enough information to make a judgement either way but if you ask me the guy filming sounds like a physico.  Sounds like one of those guys that is obsessed with the government and his rights, he most likely thinks the UN is ultimately behind the whole thing.  Just because he spouts off like he knows what he is talking about does not mean he does.  Lock him up for his and our own safety.

you could look at it that way, but remember, evidently this woman was there the day before, so she must of already pissed this guy off.  I really don't see him as psycho, I seem him as someone is pist off cause his rights are being violated.  If she has such great evidence of an issue w/public safety, well she had a whole day to come back w/a warrant.  We must protect our rights, and in this case I have to agree with the land owner.  Also look at this way, while she was walking around back there, she could of also planted evidence.  But evidently she is an IDIOT because anything that she found could not be used against him, due process...  You ask me she's the psycho wantabe cop.....

Well then again, it's just my thougths.  Better go help hubby finish loading he sees me in here typing, he'll kick my butt....lol

[FishaHallic]

I agree this could go either way and without knowing more it's hard to say but the home owner looks to me like he is looking for a law suit any way he can get it.

[dynodon]

All the more reason for the gov. officials to do things properly, instead of forcefully.
 Yes , without seeing the rest of what was taped, it could go either way. BUT, from what is shown, I would agree with the land owner

[2strokinIt]

i was waiting for her to trip in a hole and break her ankle....

the land owner was too nice....all it would have taken was a"get the f*** off my property..and come back with a warrant..you have no right..and you as an officer of the law needs to stop this crime of tresspassing before it is committed...." end of story. why didnt he step in front of her and not let her pass??? i would of been all over her...not with my hands tho....couldnt he have just got on the phone with 911 to report a burglary in progress? he didnt know what they were doing?
 
nice job of upholding the law you d***** bag

[MATT1969]

i think the guy was trying to put in a septic system in,atleast thats what it looks like.thats why she was asking about the well.drainfields have to be atleast a 100 ft away from all well and ponds.thats what is was when i used to install them.I'm not sure about the tresspass ,but the health dept has a lot of pull when they think public safety it at risk,like if he is installing a septic system 25 ft from a neighbors well or pond or with out the proper permits and supply's.but if he was doing nothing wrong i sure would be pissed the way she walked right by.

[Hawgin4x4]

See, that is Bs...I have my whole property fenced off,  and i keep my front gates shut at all times, and have signs of beware of dog and no tresspassing. But sometimes you get idiots who think they can do what ever the he!! they want to do... I love it when people look at the signs and dont see my dog and then try to enter my yard. Its fun to watch them run...IDIOTS!!!

[450rcrazy]

In texas he could have shot her.LoL

[tony pitts]

Sorry I disagree.   The right of public safety should supersede any ones individual rights.  I don't know that this clip shows enough information to make a judgement either way but if you ask me the guy filming sounds like a physico.  Sounds like one of those guys that is obsessed with the government and his rights, he most likely thinks the UN is ultimately behind the whole thing.  Just because he spouts off like he knows what he is talking about does not mean he does.  Lock him up for his and our own safety.

This statement is just so wrong, I don't even know where to begin!!! 

First, if this guy is a psycho, then so were the founding fathers of this country.  Do you really think that we should just roll over and let anyone, especially the government, take away our rights just because they feel that the public safety is at risk?  Or for any reason? 

Secondly, do you trust your government that much?  I surely don't.  When a government becomes too powerful, it becomes corrupt.  They already play too much of a role in my everyday life and I will fight to limit what they can and can't do. 

Thirdly, you stated that this guy was obsessed with his rights.  Well, you had better be glad that someone is and has been in the past and was willing to defend those rights or you wouldn't have the ones that you enjoy now. 

Fourthly, how about we lock you up for idiotic comments.  This of course would be for public safety, so it would be legal.

Lastly, if the rights of the public supersede, the rights of the individual, then I'll bet you endorse the concept of eminent domain for taking a person's land/house for the next Walmart superstore site.  I'll put your name in the hat for volunteering your property.

[FishaHallic]

Sorry I disagree.   The right of public safety should supersede any ones individual rights.  I don't know that this clip shows enough information to make a judgement either way but if you ask me the guy filming sounds like a physico.  Sounds like one of those guys that is obsessed with the government and his rights, he most likely thinks the UN is ultimately behind the whole thing.  Just because he spouts off like he knows what he is talking about does not mean he does.  Lock him up for his and our own safety.

This statement is just so wrong, I don't even know where to begin!!! 

First, if this guy is a psycho, then so were the founding fathers of this country.  Do you really think that we should just roll over and let anyone, especially the government, take away our rights just because they feel that the public safety is at risk?  Or for any reason? 

Secondly, do you trust your government that much?  I surely don't.  When a government becomes too powerful, it becomes corrupt.  They already play too much of a role in my everyday life and I will fight to limit what they can and can't do. 

Thirdly, you stated that this guy was obsessed with his rights.  Well, you had better be glad that someone is and has been in the past and was willing to defend those rights or you wouldn't have the ones that you enjoy now. 

Fourthly, how about we lock you up for idiotic comments.  This of course would be for public safety, so it would be legal.

Lastly, if the rights of the public supersede, the rights of the individual, then I'll bet you endorse the concept of eminent domain for taking a person's land/house for the next Walmart superstore site.  I'll put your name in the hat for volunteering your property.

Calm down Tony the original poster ask us for our opinion and I gave it.  Now lets go thru your point one by one.

Actually I do believe public safety should be a factor.  Like someone else posted that it look like the guy is putting in a septic tank and what if he was your neighbor and put his drain field right next to your well.  Now if you were his neighbor I suppose you would be ok with that, NOT.

I agree with your thoughts on the government playing too large a roll in our daily lives.  I think the government should not be involved in things like abortion, gay marriage and like the Terry Schiavo thing but these are personal things that people can make their own decisions and have nothing to do with public safety.

Obsessed with his rights, yea that's how it looks.  I believe in the constitution but I don't memorize it or carry it around in my back pocket.  Since you assumed so much about my beliefs I assume by some of your statements that you Tony, are a anti government militia guy like the ones that blew up the building in Oklahoma.

Lock me up for idiotic comments, I think not.  I do believe in Freedom of Speech because my speech can't hurt anyone.  Now if I scream FIRE, FIRE in a public theatre or something like that then they can lock me up because people would get hurt in the stampede, again I am all for public safety.

Lastly and finally how you made the connection that I would think it's right for the government to take my property to throw in a Walmart is beyond me.  Eminent domain has it's place but not for anything other than something like freeways, firestations or major roads not for a shopping center or housing projects.

Tony, since you assumed soooo much about me I assume that if someone saw a terrorist getting ready to blow up an atomic bomb on his property that you think the police should get a search warrant first before entering his property, remember the constitution now.  Now because of his constitutional rights millions are dead but by golly the constitution is still strong.  I find the people that scream the loudest about the constitution and their rights are usually the ones that have something to hide, I hope that's not the case with you.

Like I said before with the little we saw on the tape it's hard to know for sure what is going on.  But the reason that this is such a great country is because we are a country of law and order.  I assume by what the woman in the video said that she does not need a warrant to search this freaks property you assume she does but who knows.   Why Tony to I think that you have a book on your shelf called the Turner Diaries, let me know if you do.

[Mattism78]

To the previous poster. That is the whole issue. If someone saw a weapon being made, or something other that was highly illegal a court order would have been authorized. Or had some type of illegal activity occured within the officer's view then he could legally enter. What that woman did was BS. That's why I have a fence, and large dogs. My No Trespassing sign is on my gate. If you enter uninvited, and illegally I feel sorry for you.

[FishaHallic]

Your right that is the whole point.  The woman who is most likely a health inspector or city inspector saw something illegal going on and she may or may not need a warrant.  If you listen to the video she says she does not the freak says she does, who knows, that's why all these opinions you read here are based on the little we saw on video.  Like I said earlier it's hard to say by the little we saw but if you asked me (and the original poster did) I will side with the city worker over the freak that is consumed by his constitutional rights.

[450rcrazy]

she came back the next day knowing how the owner felt still without a warrent.If she thought there was illegal activity she had 24 hours to get a warrent nnd shove it in the guys face as she walked by to take her pictures .But she did not bother with following the law and obtaining a warrent.It would only take her a couple hours to get a search warrent before showing up the next day.