# Fourth Amendment questions (Liberty Safe controversy) **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 15, 2023, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594 "2023-10-15T12:31:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/21 "2023-10-15T20:46:32Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > IMHO, the company should have waited and required a subpoena for the info. > > However, what could have been in the safe that would aid the FBI for the charges made? or were they just hoping to find an illegal weapon? > > Here is a non-paywalled article- > > [Liberty Safe Responds to Backlash as Anger Grows Over Giving FBI Code](https://www.newsweek.com/liberty-safe-responds-backlash-anger-fbi-code-1825252) > > [MAGA Calls for Boycott After Gun Safe Company Complies With FBI Warrant](https://www.newsweek.com/backlash-against-gun-safe-company-results-boycott-1825125) > > [District of Columbia | Arkansas Man Arrested on Felony and Misdemeanor Charges for Actions During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach | United States Department of Justice](https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/arkansas-man-arrested-felony-and-misdemeanor-charges-actions-during-jan-6-capitol-breach) > > Now, of course, if convicted , he could no longer own the guns, but generally he could sell them. If they want a warrant to open a safe it would have to be laid out in the search warrant what they are looking for and why they think it could be in the safe. Just because it’s called a gun safe doesn’t mean it couldn’t be used to hide anything you don’t want found. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/22 "2023-10-15T21:39:05Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Are you saying this would be legal in Colorado? That you can knowingly misdirect a police officer and thereby obstruct them in their job but it’s not illegal because you didn’t use any force? Not at all what I said. I was talking about not cooperating with police or answering their questions. I did not say giving wrong information or false reporting. CRS 18-8-102(1) A person commits obstructing government operations if he intentionally obstructs, impairs, or hinders the performance of a governmental function by a public servant, **by using or threatening to use violence, force, or physical interference or obstacle**. CRS 18-8-104(1) (a) A person commits obstructing a peace officer, firefighter, emergency medical service provider, rescue specialist, or volunteer when, **by using or threatening to use violence, force, physical interference, or an obstacle,** such person knowingly obstructs, impairs, or hinders the enforcement of the penal law or the preservation of the peace by a peace officer, acting under color of his or her official authority; And furthermore the law regarding failure to assist a police officer (CRS 18-8-107) has been repealed. > [@Riemann](#): > > To say that it is “standing on your rights” is just assuming your conclusion of what your rights actual are under the law Read above. In Colorado you have a right to not talk to the police. > [@Riemann](#): > > And if “use…an obstacle” is intended to encompass something _other_ than purely physical means, it’s a strange way to express it. It refers to placing something physical in their way. > [@Riemann](#): > > But this Colorado law firm website does include “giving law officers false information” under their examples of obstruction. Again, that is NOT what I talked about. So I will wait for you or Little\_Nemo to show me the law that makes it illegal in Colorado to simply **not answer** an officer’s question. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/23 "2023-10-15T21:57:49Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > The DOJ demand that Apple find and share with them a way to break their own product was still in court when DOJ’s own hackers figured out an exploit I’m curious if Apple patched this exploit or if they’re still trying to figure it out. I’d assume the DOJ would keep it in their back pocket and not tell Apple what it is. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/24 "2023-10-15T21:59:07Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > Are you saying this would be legal in Colorado? That you can knowingly misdirect a police officer and thereby obstruct them in their job but it’s not illegal because you didn’t use any force? > > Not at all what I said. I was talking about not cooperating with police or answering their questions. I did not say giving wrong information or false reporting. Well this is what you said: > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > in Colorado (and many states) obstruction requires force or the threat of force. Explain to me what I misunderstood. > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > So I will wait for you or Little\_Nemo to show me the law that makes it illegal in Colorado to simply **not answer** an officer’s question. I didn’t say it was obstruction to not answer a police officer’s question. I asked you if it was obstruction to knowingly give a police officer false information. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/25 "2023-10-15T22:04:59Z")
It seems to me that Liberty Safe should have designed their safes so they don’t have an access code. That way they could honestly tell the police that they can’t assist them and not offend any of their customers. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/26 "2023-10-15T22:06:56Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I didn’t say it was obstruction to not answer a police officer’s question. I asked you if it was obstruction to knowingly give a police officer false information. I don’t care. I said that police will threaten or really arrest you for not cooperating with them. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Explain to me what I misunderstood. That I never said it was OK to give police false information. I said it is not obstruction in my state to simply refuse to assist them. If you think I did, please quote me where I said, “It is OK to lie to police.” > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I didn’t say it was obstruction to not answer a police officer’s question. Great. We agree. Let’s move on with our lives. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/27 "2023-10-15T22:24:51Z")
That’s the pickle these patriot types are in. They’re all about those things, yes, but now they’re _also_ all about back the blue, blue lives matter, thin blue line, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/28 "2023-10-15T22:28:38Z")
I guess don’t cooperate with the government doesn’t include the police. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/29 "2023-10-15T23:01:34Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Great. We agree. Let’s move on with our lives. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to try to disentangle things that have been conflated in this thread - Constitutional rights, what the law says you must do (if anything) to assist in a lawful search, and opinions about civic duty that have nothing to do with rights or laws. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/30 "2023-10-15T23:09:25Z")
I have to defend myself after Little\_Nemo goes after me for something I never said. I have to defend the 5th Amendment in that not talking to police is a right. If it were something ambiguous, sure, but this is ridiculous. **I never said it was OK to give police false information!** I’m tired of being told I’m wrong **for something I never said**. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/31 "2023-10-15T23:12:25Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > There’s a good argument that not following the law is anti-patriotism. What law says you have to help a police officer with their investigation? Please point to statute or case law. For the record: **I am not saying it is OK for Liberty Safes to lie to the police!** ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/32 "2023-10-15T23:18:20Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I never said it was OK to give police false information! > I’m tired of being told I’m wrong **for something I never said**. Not to belabor the point, but objectively you did say that. You said: > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > in Colorado (and many states) obstruction requires force or the threat of force which would imply that giving false information (no force involved) is not obstruction. This struck both @Little_Nemo and I as odd, so that’s what we queried. I now appreciate that it was not your _intention_ to imply that (perhaps you assumed context that we didn’t), but I don’t see any basis for getting upset that we inferred anything that wasn’t objectively there in what you wrote. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/33 "2023-10-15T23:36:18Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Read above. In Colorado you have a right to not talk to the police. In _every state_ you have a right not to talk to the police, outside of your name,. etc. > [@Riemann](#): > > Not to belabor the point, but objectively you did say that. You said: Yeah, you have beaten this dead horse to hamburger. He has made it very clear. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/34 "2023-10-15T23:46:24Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I have to defend myself after Little\_Nemo goes after me for something I never said. I was not going after you for something you never say. I asked you questions about something you said in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2023, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/35 "2023-10-15T23:48:52Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > There’s a good argument that not following the law is anti-patriotism. > > What law says you have to help a police officer with their investigation? Please point to statute or case law. There’s no law like that that I’m aware of. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2023, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/36 "2023-10-16T00:31:00Z")
Stating that something does not meet the specific definition of the crime of obstruction is not the same thing as saying that it’s OK to do that thing. It could be that it’s a violation of some other law. It could be that it’s something that is perfectly legal, but which is nonetheless something that a person ought not do do. I don’t see basis for the claims that @Saint_Cad said that it’s OK to give the police false info. But back to the case at hand, suppose that Liberty had, in fact, chosen not to cooperate with the police? Surely, the outcome would have still been the same, in that the police would still have gained access to the safe. Except that, in that case, the safe would have been irreparably destroyed, and the homeowner would have been out that cost. The only effect of Liberty cooperating with the police was to save their customer some money. What’s to object to, in a company saving their customer’s money? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2023, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/37 "2023-10-16T00:34:40Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I asked you questions about something you said in this thread. Quote me where I said it is OK to lie to police. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2023, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/38 "2023-10-16T00:55:54Z")
I’ll also point out that my post was in direct response to > [@pullin](#): > > First: Is a suspect or homeowner _legally_ required to assist or provide access to police with a warrant? There is nothing in that quote that even hints at “can the homeowner lie to police”. I could pull up a dozen videos right now where people do not want to cooperate with police or refuse to identify themselves in a non-ID state (yes I know you have to ID when driving or reasonable suspicion of a crime. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about when a cop tries to ID you “for their report”) and they are threatened with being arrested for obstruction in states where (like Colorado) simply refusing to talk to police is not obstruction. In fact, I would argue that such a law would be a violation of the 5th Amendment. That being said, if you refuse to divulge the combination a cop is likely to intimidate you by threatening arrest for obstruction and thank to being protected by qualified immunity and the blue line, they may actually arrest you. Oh, they’ll let you go eventually, but they proved their point that your job is to submit despite your rights. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2023, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/39 "2023-10-16T02:17:09Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > I asked you questions about something you said in this thread. > > Quote me where I said it is OK to lie to police. Why are you doing this to yourself? Anybody who wants to know what you wrote and what I wrote can read it. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2023, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594/40 "2023-10-16T02:23:08Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Remember a few years ago when some people were all over Apple for **not** having an access “backdoor” to give to authorities to crack the iPhone encryption in the case of the San Bernardino shooters? And that was a case in which it happens that the system _by design_ was _made_ to NOT have an easy backdoor. Many VPN companies prominently advertise that they do not keep records of what their customers do on their system. The government cannot obtain data the company does not have. Other companies might do the same. IIRC, from previous threads here in the past, the government cannot force you to divulge something that is in your head (e.g. a password or code). But, they can use your fingerprint (as an example) to unlock (say) your phone against your will. I wonder why the police just do not tell the safe owner that they are getting in one way or another? Be it a cutting torch or angle grinder or some other destructive means or, the owner can hand over the code and leave their expensive safe undamaged. Being difficult in no way benefits them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fourth-amendment-questions-liberty-safe-controversy/991594.md?page=3)