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.
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And furthermore the law regarding failure to assist a police officer (CRS 18-8-107) has been repealed.
Read above. In Colorado you have a right to not talk to the police.
It refers to placing something physical in their way.
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.
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.
Well this is what you said:
Explain to me what I misunderstood.
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.
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.
I don’t care. I said that police will threaten or really arrest you for not cooperating with them.
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.”
Great. We agree. Let’s move on with our lives.
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.
I guess don’t cooperate with the government doesn’t include the police.
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.
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.
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!
Not to belabor the point, but objectively you did say that. You said:
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.
In every state you have a right not to talk to the police, outside of your name,. etc.
Yeah, you have beaten this dead horse to hamburger. He has made it very clear.
I was not going after you for something you never say. I asked you questions about something you said in this thread.
There’s no law like that that I’m aware of.
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?
Quote me where I said it is OK to lie to police.
I’ll also point out that my post was in direct response to
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.
Why are you doing this to yourself?
Anybody who wants to know what you wrote and what I wrote can read it.
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.