Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Charon on November 28, 2006, 09:26:26 AM
-
Filed under: Hey, if you have nothing to hide...
This poor 88-year-old woman just found out the hard way that the Bill of Rights is there for a purpose. Too bad our legislators and jurists seem to have a hard time with the concept.
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- An informant cited in a search warrant as having purchased narcotics at an elderly Atlanta woman's house denies buying drugs there, authorities say.
Undercover officers raiding the 88-year-old woman's house shot her to death last week after she fired on them while they broke down her door in a high-crime neighborhood.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/28/atlanta.shooting/index.html
Doesn't really sound like the police developed much of a case. An informant apparently "claimed" that he bought a couple of bags of crack from a "Sam" at the residence. I guess you don't need more than some street hood's claim before they kick down your door. No in-depth investigation, no "beyond a reasonable doubt," no "iron clad case" -- just violent search on rumor.
WTG Amerika!!!!
Charon
-
Seems odd that a judge would grant a search warrant based only on the information obtained from the "informant" without a police investigation of some sort.
I read that the victim shot three officers before she was killed. Anyone find any info on how many rounds she fired?
-
Charon,
Why do I suspect that you wish we just went back to the Wild West days of law enforcement, where there was little...:confused:
-
"but we followed procedure! everything was by the book!"
hrmmmm, methinks the "procedure" needs to be examined...
-
I blame bush ....
gotta wonder how many of her "relatives" are going to want a piece of that lawsuit pie ..
-
It was just an innocent old lady. What's the problem? Hey Eagler, what's your Mom's address?
-
Something similar happened in Southern California about 10 or 15 years ago. Some informant was paid for information and he named a street address. Cops broke down the door in the middle of the night without warning. Guy and his wife were in bed and I believe he reached for his nightstand in the dark and the cops morted him. The address turned out to be just a random address the informant gave. Cops claimed "self-defense" and I don't believe any were disciplined although the city paid out a nice little sum.
Interesting this woman opened fire. Imagine you were awakened from a deep sleep when your door was broken down without warning and a couple guys in black outfits and guns rushed in? What if they were shouting they were cops? Would you believe them? Would they be justified in shooting you if you had a gun considering the circumstances? I'm sure the cops will say they fired in self-defense but what would they expect a homeowner to do? They know they're cops but the homeowner doesn't.
We were discussing rules of engagement while operating in the Arabian Gulf about 15 years ago and the question came up about what would constitute a hostile act by a certain large country in the region. One guy (I'll call him "Bill") said that if one of this other country's fighters pointed his nose at him he'd shoot him down. We asked "Bill" what he expected the other guy to do if "Bill" pointed his nose at him? After all, how would we feel if we were flying off the coast of San Diego and this other country had a CV operating 30 miles off the coast. Did he think that it would be reasonable to expect to be shot down just because he pointed his nose at one of their fighters? In the end our CAG gave us the appropriate direction. A hostile act would be the other fighter actually firing on one of us. The reasoning was two-fold. First, we're better than they are and could probably easily defeat their shot and turn the tables on them. Second, if he got lucky and one of us got smacked that's the risk we're paid to take. Aren't cops paid to take the risk or are they going to fire just because someone, not knowing who they are, is defending himself?
-
This has become more and more common since cops started dressing like ninjas and flying thru the window in the middle of the night. Somehow, despite all the ninja suits and undercover "Rush" narcs there's still a drug problem.
Hmm.
-
Eagler, clarify please. What's your take on this?
-
Why do I suspect that you wish we just went back to the Wild West days of law enforcement, where there was little...
This whole action reeks of the "Wild West" only from the law enforcement aspect.
I just respect the Bill of Rights Rip. If you're going to kick in the door with guns drawn without announcing who you are then you better dammed well be doing it after clearly identifying criminal activity and that criminal activity had better be of a level appropriate for such action. It shouldn't be a casual course of action because some street hood said he bough two bags of crack from somebody (which hardly seems worth this use of force in any case).
Maybe tomorrow it will be your door, and one of your family members lying dead as collateral damage. Or just all of your stuff trashed, your beemer ripped apart, your family terrified for an "oops" moment.
I blame bush ....
gotta wonder how many of her "relatives" are going to want a piece of that lawsuit pie ....
I blame Klinton -- he was no friend of the 4th by any means. Y'all got so worked up over his little hummer in the White House, while I was getting pissed at his aggressive erosion of our rights (in a variety of 4th related areas) to appear "tough on crime." Not that Bush is any better in this regard though.
I hope they sue the **** out of Atlanta. If she were my Grandmother that would be the least I would want if there was no option for criminal charges of negligent homicide.
Charon
-
CHaron,
More people are killed by surgeons in malpractice suits not having the right information than elderly women by police officers, yet you focus on this one instance. :huh
-
i thought the "no knock" rule was dropped after some nijna cops were killed in a wrong address break in? it seems the cops need to learn the rules all over again.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
CHaron,
More people are killed by surgeons in malpractice suits not having the right information than elderly women by police officers, yet you focus on this one instance. :huh
i don't think too many surgeons break down your door in the middle of the night.
-
Ya gotta wonder why the police felt it necessary to invade this old woman's house in the middle of the night. If she was alone they should have known this going in and I don't think it was necessary to go in gang busters style. Wouldn't a sting op have worked better and at far less risk?
Did they even find any illegal drugs?
-
You're posting a false analogy there Rip. The two are not even remotely related. Here rights were violated in the most basic and ultimate manner possible by the "State." We have a Bill of Rights that is supposed to keep this from happening, broadly, in a range of areas. It states that your life, and my life and our individual rights matter. That her life or death is more than a statistic and more than collateral damage. A real basic, fundamental part of what it means to be an American.
The Supreme Court decided this year to remove some barriers to "No Knock." Actually, in this case, it was the liberals on the Court were the ones standing up for our rights while the "conservative" members, incluing the newly appointed Alito, disagreed.
Scalia argued that the law enforcement landscape has changed dramatically since 1961, when the Supreme Court first imposed an exclusionary rule on the states to protect against warrantless searches. Today's police are more professional than those of 45 years ago, he observed, and there is "increasing evidence that police forces across the United States take the constitutional rights of citizens seriously."
In this environment, Scalia argued, lawsuits and administrative proceedings are enough to ensure that police comply with the "knock and announce" rule.
That line of reasoning prompted a 30-page dissenting opinion from Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who disputed Scalia's upbeat view of modern policing and argued that lawsuits and police discipline have already proved inadequate to punish and deter "knock and announce" violations.
"Today's opinion," Breyer wrote in dissent, "weakens, perhaps destroys, much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce protection." Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Breyer.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/15/AR2006061500730_2.html
They also cleared the way for those roadside "security checks" that reek too much of a "show me your papers" state.
Charon
-
I personally think that the people should take responsibility.
That is to say that the people should inform the police forces, that anyone participating in a no-knock raid are guilty of criminal trespass, and are thus punishable by death.
How many no-knock raids do you think there would be?
-
Charon,
My point is this:
Just because surgeons kill people by screwing up on a daily basis, you don't see many people crying and changing laws.
Yet you get an instance like this where the cops screw up, and you automatically say "WTG AMERKIA" like this is a common occurance.
Unbelievable....
-
here is what some liberal rag :lol the Cato Institute has to say...
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/
Note the interactive map has detailed descriptions of the shootings click your state.
This crap happens more than you think...
When scalia and the supes decided no knocking was legitimate the critics predicted this would happen..
Now 88 year olds are being jacked defending their own homes...
I could stomach this if there was accountability of these actions but its always someone elses fault... read the statements.. its rarely we screwed up... always procedure, suspected, criminal record, wot, wod, oops, or insert whatever bogus entry you want to put in...
DoctorYo
PS: Props to Cato for documenting this...
-
i know where they aren't gonna film the golden girls reunion show:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :furious :furious
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Charon,
Yet you get an instance like this where the cops screw up, and you automatically say "WTG AMERKIA" like this is a common occurance.
if you care to do some research, you'll find that this HAS been happening with increasing frequency lately. look up Cory Maye for a particularily egregious example. The author of one of the blogs I read, Radley Balko, has written a paper detailing Cory's case and many others like it. The paper's at http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476. Foxnews covered it as well, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205040,00.html
gotta love this "new professionalism"...
edit: Cory's got a wikipedia enty now... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Maye
-
Originally posted by rpm
It was just an innocent old lady. What's the problem? Hey Eagler, what's your Mom's address?
she died suddenly in 1989 at age 51 .. I was 29
Pulmonary embolism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulmonary_embolism)
you just made the twit list rpm
-
My point is this:
Just because surgeons kill people by screwing up on a daily basis, you don't see many people crying and changing laws.
Yet you get an instance like this where the cops screw up, and you automatically say "WTG AMERKIA" like this is a common occurance.
Unbelievable....:
Show me the part of the Bill of Rights where medical liability is mentioned.
What's unbelievable is that the state can kick in your door with no knock, armed like a military force on little more than the word of a street hood all because it is a convenience for the state. If things are as stated, the "mistake" is not the ****ing issue -- directly. Mistakes do happen. The issue is how the "mistake" came to pass -- that they can do this now with apparently no more just cause than the word of someone you wouldn't normally trust asking the time of day. That is un American. Why do you hate freedom Rip :)
Charon
-
Did we miss the part where she shot 3 cops?
-
Did we miss the part where she shot 3 cops?
You mean the armed "intruders" that forced their way into her house in the middle of the night, apparently with no real proof of criminal activity and without clearly identifying themselvs as police officers as would have been previously required under the Knock and announce rules. No, at least I didn't miss that part.
You could perhaps argue that this is bad policy for the police as well. Someone thinking they are defending the home, family and life from potential violent criminal "intruders" should be far more dangerous than your average low-level drug dealer knowing it's a valid police search.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Mightytboy
Did we miss the part where she shot 3 cops?
You mean the part where she defended herself against an unannounced home invasion? What would you do if a bunch of people blew down your door and stormed in with guns aimed at you?
Are you a person who feels that rapists must also be protected from victims who defend themselves?
-
the judge who issued the warrant should be fired and sued.
The cops involved should be fired and charged with murder.
the city should be sued for millions.
All citizens should learn to take headshots only on intruders or, they should have only semi auto full power rifles with full metal jacket ammo by the bedside.
Any cop found in a ninja suit should be publicly lynched.
lazs
-
You guys seem to think a persons home is their castle, what do you think this is the 1970's or something?
In a war on drugs/terror you have to give up some of those rights that you used to have.
Get used to it...you aint seen nothing yet :)
shamus
-
Inalienable \In*al"ien*a*ble\, a. [Pref. in- not + alienable:
cf. F. inali['e]nable.]
Incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred to
another; not alienable; as, in inalienable birthright.
-
Originally posted by Charon
Doesn't really sound like the police developed much of a case. An informant apparently "claimed" that he bought a couple of bags of crack from a "Sam" at the residence. I guess you don't need more than some street hood's claim before they kick down your door. No in-depth investigation, no "beyond a reasonable doubt," no "iron clad case" -- just violent search on rumor.
WTG Amerika!!!!
Charon
A search warrant only needs probable cause, we required 2 controlled buys to paper a drug house... but 1 is enough. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not relevant to a search warrant, only in finding guilt or innocence at trail. And unless you have read their investigation, I'm not sure how you can comment on its quality based on a media report.
The police write a statement of facts and swear to it under oath before a judge signs it... if the judge thought it was enough, and they don't always, that's all the police need.
The so called "street hoods", also called CI's who are usually paid cash, are where the police get lots of great info, but CI's can be motivated to get rid of competition, or use the police to get some payback on an enemy.. which is why some agencies require separate and independent contacts.
This is only news because of the age of the old lady, and that she was a dead eye shot hitting 3 officers, there's NOTHING new or unusual about this warrant.
If you think using grannys house to slang is beyond the drug dealers, think again...
-
who cares?
you surround the house and You plug the sewer and you knock on the frigging door.
If that don't work you use a bullhorn and you announce that if no one opens the door you will break it down because you have a warrant to search.
lazs
-
if anyone is really interested in the issues surrounding this case, Radley Balko has been covering the details as they become evident. His blog is http://www.theagitator.com/ I realize some of you will write this off because of the name of his blog, so be it. If your mind's already made up then don't bother.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
who cares?
you surround the house and You plug the sewer and you knock on the frigging door.
If that don't work you use a bullhorn and you announce that if no one opens the door you will break it down because you have a warrant to search.
lazs
You knowledge of police training, resources and tactics is stunningly ignorant.
-
perhaps it is the police tactics that are ignorant.
lazs
-
So the cops should not have returned fire?
Just because the informant was wrong does not mean that the cops did anything wrong. They got a judge to give them a warrant and they went in to make an arrest.
I did not read anywhere where they never announced themselfs just that they never knocked.
Sad story for sure but not something that warrants a "WTG Amerika!!!!".
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
You knowledge of police training, resources and tactics is stunningly ignorant.
I realize that wasn't directed at me, but if it were my reply would be:
that may be so, but my understanding of the concepts of "the right to self-defense" and "innocent until proven guilty" is spot on.
-
A search warrant only needs probable cause, we required 2 controlled buys to paper a drug house... but 1 is enough. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not relevant to a search warrant, only in finding guilt or innocence at trail. And unless you have read their investigation, I'm not sure how you can comment on its quality based on a media report.
Personally, I think that if you use a paramilitary police unit to perform a no knock violent entry search with hair trigger fingers -- perhaps you should set a higher standard. I didn't really believe that any of this was "illegal" per se or far outside the norm. It's the "norm" that causes me problems. That and the wasted War on Drugs that leads to an erosion of our rights "for the common good" in the first place.
Again, I don't particularly blame the grunt officer on the ground (with some exceptions that go beyond just making a "bad call") I blame the environment where such searches are being conducted casually through the use of paramilitary police units that were initially developed to handle already deadly violent situations in progress or individuals with a history of violence where there is substantial risk. Even if Granny's grandson was using her house to occasionally deal drugs -- you would hope he was some Tony Montana to rate this level of response.
No Knock amplifies the chance of accidental fatalities. From the Cato site, even drug dealers who might peacably surrender sometimes fail to realize who's crashing in the door given that it might be other gangbangers looking to rob or settle a score.
And paramilitary operations can only increase the chance of an accidental police shooting, IMO, whether the target of the raid is guilty or innocent. The "make one flinch and I'll pop you" mindset that has to be instilled in such training. Like the Marines in Iraq that shot those three wounded insurgents in the Fallujah operation a while back. It was the wrong call, perhaps, but not a BAD call when your training focuses on threat elimination and survival and where if you hesitate even 1 second you might be dead along with your buddies.
These forces are a hammer -- but not every situation is a nail.
Charon
-
Charon & Lazs2 are spot on, in my opinion, especially Charon's hammer/nail analogy.
-
i think the pizza delivery guy should have the power to do these kind of forced no-knock entries & make you eat pizza
-
Originally posted by lazs2
perhaps it is the police tactics that are ignorant.
lazs
Check out case law on chain of evidence and "common pipes" relating to apartments, "blocking the drains", although not a real tactic, is covered there... thats more of a TV thing than reality. If its a location without common pipes, we shut off the water.. not block the pipes.
And its clear you've never once been to a ghetto dope haven apt complex where you find medicine cabinets / posters / framed pictures that are open holes to the apartment next door.. announce "we're here" and in less than a min the bag of dope will be 3 apartments over before some 10 year old kid rides off with it in a backpack waiving "hi po-lice" at the police cars.
Or you might see a dog haul bellybutton out the back window wearing a diggie back pack, trained to run 2 miles through houses, under fences to a safe house. Ever seen the "poof" of dope hitting an industrial fan?... try collecting it after that.
Dope dealers have refined their profession too, they have a dozen ways they are ready to make the evidence vanish in a split second which is why "no knock" warrants exist.
Police tactics have been molded by years of experience, case law, Dept policy, and FBI training you cannot possibly begin to imagine. Let the professionals handle the police work... and if you think you can be part of the 3% that get hired, go for it.. then you can ignore case law, policy, tactics and whatever rules you dont like and re-train everyone your way.
-
Originally posted by bsdaddict
I realize that wasn't directed at me, but if it were my reply would be:
that may be so, but my understanding of the concepts of "the right to self-defense" and "innocent until proven guilty" is spot on.
Spot on regarding what?, a search warrant? these terms DO NOT APPLY at the time the warrant is served... thats just the way it goes. The judge signing the warrant isnt concerned with the persons guilt, only that's there's enough PC.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is reserved for trial, the "right to self-defense" may or may not apply later in some court somewhere after the facts are known. Some civil jury might decide she acted properly and was defending herself, its happened before.
This warrant is business as usual.. but I get the anger at the .gov breaking into a house, but its not a big deal at face value.
Thats not to say how things really went down behind closed doors, I know there are shady cops with CIs so desperate for cash they'll swear to meeting Elvis, and drunk judges who sign warrants they can barely read at 3am... not that I have personal knowledge of such things... that's the scary part to be worried about.
And if that type of thing went down in this case, someone should go to Club Fed... but it wont change the system, the rights you think you have... are long gone thanks to the republican / democrat controlled .gov, the cops are just using, possibly abusing, the tools given to them.
-
Sad story for sure but not something that warrants a "WTG Amerika!!!!"
We're on that path, and this is a milestone event in the process of the incremental slide pushed by both parties. Of course the real milestone was the court decision, and this just illustrates the point. Many citizens -- conservatives and liberals, democrats and republican sadly fail to appreciate just how powerful and unique our freedoms are as set in the Bill of Rights. Safety and security concerns (overblown for the most part) driven by fear mongering and the fact that "Well I have nothing to hide…" and that the latest episode of American Idol is on the tube so who really cares plays into the hands of politicians looking for power and control at our expense.
Clinton hacked away at the 4th and 2nd to get “tough on crime.” Bush at the 4th and perhaps 5th, 6th and 7th (and, at the end of the day, I wouldn't put the 2nd beyond his reach) to “save us from the terrorists.” The 10th is free game and has been since the beginning. Current and future politicians are already priming to take on he 1st "to protect the children from Internet predators" and to save us from “terrorist communications networks.”
Freedom is not easy, it's messy and criminals and terrorist sometimes can take advantage of that. Politicians and prosecutors don't much like all this freedom. But, the alternative is not one that I even remotely want to explore. Hell, give us a decade or two and before you know it we’ve become a kinder, gentler People’s Republic of China. A strong capitalist economy with all of the “appropriate” individual freedoms we are allowed by the government.
Here's some spin for ya. If she didn't have that gun, she wouldn't have been shot.
I live in a state where my personal, direct, individual 4th and 2nd Amendment Rights are under regular attack. It's a reality for me. It's not even ****ing incremental here. As a firearm owner I'm already dangerously close to being an outlaw in this state, largely in my county and fully in the City of Chicago if I still lived there. The whole "If you have nothing to hide" thing only really works as long as the ground rules for the "nothing" part stay the same. But that is a moving target.
Charon
-
Im surprised the story about the to be groom getting shot to death, his two passengers shot and wounded and his car shot up after leaving a strip joint for his bachelor party didnt make news here
Groom Shooting (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/26/nyc.shooting.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories)
"One 12-year veteran fired his weapon 31 times, emptying two full magazines"
Dont know if it was a just shooting. And for all I know may very well have been but
Seems kinda dangerous to me.
For potential bystanders
-
Originally posted by Charon
Filed under: Hey, if you have nothing to hide...
This poor 88-year-old woman just found out the hard way that the Bill of Rights is there for a purpose. Too bad our legislators and jurists seem to have a hard time with the concept.
Doesn't really sound like the police developed much of a case. An informant apparently "claimed" that he bought a couple of bags of crack from a "Sam" at the residence. I guess you don't need more than some street hood's claim before they kick down your door. No in-depth investigation, no "beyond a reasonable doubt," no "iron clad case" -- just violent search on rumor.
WTG Amerika!!!!
Charon
Welcome to last week.
-
Welcome to last week.
I don't recall seeing a link. I waited to post until now because I wanted a few more details to surface, which they did today.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Charon
Many citizens -- conservatives and liberals, democrats and republican sadly fail to appreciate just how powerful and unique our freedoms are as set in the Bill of Rights.
All it takes to legally break into your house, my house, HTs office, your moms house.. the word of A CI re-characterized by a sworn officer signed by a judge. Or just the observations of a sworn officer signed by a judge.
There is no oversight, the suspect has zero opportunity to challenge the facts until after the warrant is served.. if the warrant is 'quashed', all thats lost is any evidence.. the fact the cops broke down your door & trashed your house is water under the bridge; file a complaint or hire a civil attorney.
Also something called "exigent circumstances", which if you look at case law can be very very thin.. it got this way thanks to the elected lawmakers, the ones who crow about "being tough on crime".. which is just a euphemism for eroding everyone's rights to target a select few.
Once the law makers give cops tools & toys... the cat is out of the bag, together with clever lawyers in the DAs office, cops will push the limits, and create new ones via case law, then use / abuse said tool in ways stupid lawmakers who authored the poorly worded law never imagined.
Poop rolls downhill; stupid lawmaker writes poorly wordrd law to target drug dealers, then cops / DAs find clever ways to use it on everyone and anyone.
So if y'all want... get pissed at the cops, Monday morning AM their tactics, piss'n moan all day about how ninja they are... they are dudes just like you and I doing a job using tools elected officials handed them on a silver platter... tools that end up inserted in the anus of regular folks... but this is nothing new really, it was like this when I started in 1990.
-
Enforcing poorly written laws and exploiting loopholes is as bad as writing them poorly or with loopholes. The *real* difference (and the one that really matters to most people) is who is kicking in their door Gestapo style at 3am.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Police tactics have been molded by years of experience, case law, Dept policy, and FBI training you cannot possibly begin to imagine.
I'd ask for further explanation, but I don't think we could possibly understand the answer.
-
Again, I don't particularly blame the grunt officer on the ground
I DO
Regardless of the laws, it is the ground troop's sole responsibility to determine if what they are doing is moral.
I say give them all the death penalty.
-
"to protect and serve", is just something that they paint on their cars.
the cops are a brotherhood, if your not a cop you are a civilian and to a cop a civilian is just a perp that hasn't been caught yet.
edit>>>> "i was just following orders" did not work for the nazis.
-
Originally posted by Mightytboy
Did we miss the part where she shot 3 cops?
Err, don't they yell "POLICE" as they enter?
She shot at 3 of em. I mean...people, asides getting stuck on whether were allowed to enter or not is kinda moot. If you take 3 shots at policemen identifying themselves as such...that's a different story.
As for the "CATO" institute....anytime I hear that name, I think of that twit that lived with OJ Simpson....
-
Originally posted by john9001
"to protect and serve", is just something that they paint on their cars.
the cops are a brotherhood, if your not a cop you are a civilian and to a cop a civilian is just a perp that hasn't been caught yet.
edit>>>> "i was just following orders" did not work for the nazis.
A voice from the right that I find myself agreeing with in this instance, wierd, huh?
-
Originally posted by john9001
"to protect and serve", is just something that they paint on their cars.
the cops are a brotherhood, if your not a cop you are a civilian and to a cop a civilian is just a perp that hasn't been caught yet.
edit>>>> "i was just following orders" did not work for the nazis.
As a former officer, I can say in all honesty that's the biggest load of crap I've seen in quite a while. The nazi reference is true brilliance as well.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I DO
Regardless of the laws, it is the ground troop's sole responsibility to determine if what they are doing is moral.
I say give them all the death penalty.
I say why don't you go try to the the job for a while. If you have the nerve, the will, and the ability.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I DO
Regardless of the laws, it is the ground troop's sole responsibility to determine if what they are doing is moral.
I say give them all the death penalty.
Spoken like someone who has never made entrance into a crack house to make an arrest.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I say why don't you go try to the the job for a while. If you have the nerve, the will, and the ability.
I'll take the job, and i'll use my ability to speak up and say how wrong this is. Just because you are an officer doesn't mean you are not a civilian anymore.
We have state troopers speaking out here and having their union step in on a civilian related matter. The inurance companies are badgering the state to hand out tickets, along with the state wanting money. They are trying to make warnings count as less time on the job, they want them to hand out tickets. Tickets will count as more time served on the clock towards ot as opposed to a warning.
The troopers see this as an obvious ploy and are really pissed. They don't write out a ticket to someone unless they really deserve one. The cost of a ticket is the ticket plus $50.00 a year(6 years) to the insurance co. They are trained to "think twice before you take $600.00 out of someone's pocket".
When something is wrong with the system they should have the balls to speak up. They are breaking into an innocent's home and blowing them away, that's pretty ****ed up. The very people you are supposed to protect!
I agree with Lazs 100%
This lady was 88 years old and defending herself from intruders who broke into her home in the middle of the night
They just murdered an 88 year old lady in cold blood, it was an assassination. You break into someone's home at that time of night you should expect to be fired upon, knowing this you are expecting to shoot someone. You are provoking a firefight.
I don't agree with this policy at all, but if you are going to use it you better make damn sure you have the right house. If you don't you should be held accountable and it should cost you your job.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
who cares?
you surround the house and You plug the sewer and you knock on the frigging door.
If that don't work you use a bullhorn and you announce that if no one opens the door you will break it down because you have a warrant to search.
lazs
That's exactly right. No reason at all to bust a door down and provoke a conflict with either a criminal or an innocent home owner.
-
Originally posted by Mace2004
Something similar happened in Southern California about 10 or 15 years ago. Some informant was paid for information and he named a street address. Cops broke down the door in the middle of the night without warning. Guy and his wife were in bed and I believe he reached for his nightstand in the dark and the cops morted him. The address turned out to be just a random address the informant gave. Cops claimed "self-defense" and I don't believe any were disciplined although the city paid out a nice little sum.
There was one like that in San Diego about 14 years ago. Man's house is raided with a warrant from faulty information from an informant. The man is nearly killed and a Customs agent was wounded.
Poway man wounded in shoot out. (http://beyond-the-illusion.com/files/Government/Abuse-of-Power/poway-1.txt)
ack-ack
-
There was also one like it in Phoenix about 8 years ago. The man and his wife were killed by "bounty hunters" who broke into the wrong house in the middle of the night.
They broke down the door and entered the bedroom, and the guy opend fire on them.
Granted, it was not the police, but it's the same thing really.
-
Ack-Ack, ByeBye, you guys are terrorists for believing there's anything wrong with that. Just ask Capt Virgil Hits, I'm sure he'll tell you that those people might have been innocent of what the WARRANTS said, but they were probably guilty of SOMETHING!
If an officer does something, it _becomes_ the law. Haven't you been listening?
-
Holy crap! I'm in 100% agreement with everything Lazs posted. :O
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Ack-Ack, ByeBye, you guys are terrorists for believing there's anything wrong with that. Just ask Capt Virgil Hits, I'm sure he'll tell you that those people might have been innocent of what the WARRANTS said, but they were probably guilty of SOMETHING!
If an officer does something, it _becomes_ the law. Haven't you been listening?
You know, that's REALLY STUPID. I never said any such thing. Not even close. Now did I?
Let's see you twist, spin, turn and plain lie your way out of this one hot shot.
You said something I never said, not even close, and you don't know what my thoughts on the matter are.
The plain fact is, if you could READ instead of run your mouth and make ASSumptions, I never came down on either side.
There have been major screw ups made, besides the mistake you made being so stupid and arrogant as to make ignorant statements about what you THINK my thoughts on the matter are.
It seems that a judge, and several police officers made major errors, and not just in the most recent case. Not knowing ALL the facts, I'm neither stupid enough, nor arrogant enough, to make a decision on this case or any other as to who made what errors where and when, before I know the facts.
-
"Today we sent a strong message to freedom hating grandmothers everywhere."
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
It seems that a judge, and several police officers made major errors, and not just in the most recent case. Not knowing ALL the facts, I'm neither stupid enough, nor arrogant enough, to make a decision on this case or any other as to who made what errors where and when, before I know the facts.
The fact is that an innocent 88 year old woman had her house invaded, and she defended herself.
-
And how much money or effort would it have cost if the police had knocked first?
-
Originally posted by ByeBye
The fact is that an innocent 88 year old woman had her house invaded, and she defended herself.
That is ONE fact. The word facts, note the letter "s" on the end, is PLURAL. The ONE fact means a tragedy has happened, through a series of mistakes. The ONE fact does not tell the whole story. Unlike people here who like to get their exercise jumping to conclusions, I like to know the whole story before I reach a conclusion. Especially when it comes to something like this.
-
Originally posted by ByeBye
And how much money or effort would it have cost if the police had knocked first?
An innocent woman is dead, and some police officers are wounded. She's not coming back, and they have to live with what they did. They may pay a very high price, and if they deserve to, then so be it. So I don't think money, effort, or cost are in question here.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
An innocent woman is dead, and some police officers are wounded. She's not coming back, and they have to live with what they did. They may pay a very high price, and if they deserve to, then so be it. So I don't think money, effort, or cost are in question here.
Sure it is. The police could have made an effort to enter the house in any number of ways, other than the method they chose.
The police should never enter a residence without first giving warning.
-
Well, I hate to say that there are some that I agree with in this thread when I think these types of raids are overdone....although I completely disagree with the psychotic paranoia about the Gestapo and Amerika.
The problem that I see is that nobody's perfect, including the cops. I worked in "professional" aviation for 24 years. My buddies and I had the best training the taxpayer could provide, yet there were still guys I flew with that I wouldn't trust with a rusty spoon because of their lack of judgement. So, a professional force is a good thing, but it is not a guarantee of infallibility.
I had a plane captain that accidentally stepped over a "red line" at Nellis AFB in the middle of a six-plane launch, in daytime, while doing final checks on my plane. It was perfectly obvious what my PC was doing and why but within about 20 seconds a USAF "Air Police" gentleman had my guy flat on his face on the concrete, hands cuffed, and was standing over him pressing a loaded M16 into the small of his back. Now I don't have problems with cops (or security forces) doing their jobs and, technically the cop was "following procedure", but you can not excuse poor judgement.
There is no doubt in my mind that the vast majority of police have the best intentions; however, using such insignificant and questionable information as has become common in making such a raid, knowing full well the perspective and potential reaction of unknowing and innocent occupants is tantamount to setting the conditions for a mishap. Just as the USAF guy could have had an accidental discharge really ruin my PCs day these no-knock raids are tailor made for a bad outcome and, in many many cases for similar piss-poor reasons. Sure the cops (and the USAF guy) would surely claim that whatever went wrong was just an "accident" and they would most assuredly believe this but they are the ones to set the conditions that made such an "accident" likely if not completely predictable. All they really need to do is think about how they would react if the situation were reversed. I sincerely doubt there is a single cop who's first thought and reaction would not be to take action in self-defense.
Some can excuse this lack of judgement because of a poorly written law or a not-so-intelligent judge but the bottom line is the police are the one's that must make the decision to do this type of raid. We must also remember that this is a life-and-death situation and should be treated as more than a John Wayne attack on this countries bad-guys. If you were to make a similarly bad judgement call, a call that could reasonably be expected to result in death or injury you'd be facing at least manslaughter charges. Should this not be the same for law-enforcement malpractice that results in the same thing?
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Not knowing ALL the facts, I'm neither stupid enough, nor arrogant enough, to make a decision on this case or any other as to who made what errors where and when, before I know the facts.
Well, if not the case, how about the procedure or protocol?
Fact: They are breaking into a strangers home in the middle of the night
Fact: People carry guns to protect themselves from intruders in their home, especially in the middle of the night.
Fact: People are allowed to and do shoot people who break into their home in the middle of the night.
Fact: If, while invading said home, any person reaches for a gun or is perceived to be reaching for a gun, they will be fired upon.
This is provoking a firefight, period. Because if you have a warrant and are invading a home in the middle of the night, chances are they will be armed. And chances are any innocent civilian will be armed and think he is being attacked.
If there is a gun in the home, civilian or bad guy, and you are breaking in @ 3:00AM, you can expect them to use that gun.
How is this a safer way to do things? How does it make it safer for the cops and civilians?
Especially if the source is scum from the street?
And the civilian, once he has his gun and is looking for the intruder, he's a dead man, he hasn't got a chance.
How can you defend or justify this?
I always thought the object was to get the job done without conflict, not provoke it.
And the cops, look at what they just went through. That poor cop has to go home, look at his kids, think of their grandmother, how much they love her and live with the guilt of what happened.
edit: didn't see Mace's post, but I think it pretty much says the same about the way the raids are done
-
I did not defend or justify anything. Jeez, how hard is that to grasp? I didn't make ANY judgement, other than to say it was a major screw up and a civilian paid with her life, and the cops who did it will have to live with that, and they may even pay a very high price for it, and if they deserve to, then so be it. How in the Hell people read that as defending or justifying something I just can't figure. I guess if you don't call for the cops to be taken out on the freakin street in front of her house and shot in the back of the head, then you're justifying their actions. At least in the eyes of some seriously myopic people here.
Yes, for crying out loud, there is a serious need for reform in the system. There is also a need for BALANCE, and MODERATION. You cannot eliminate no knock warrants and expect to catch professional criminals. Nor can you serve every warrant between the hours of 9AM and 4PM in broad daylight with bull horns, lights, and sirens. However, you can seriously restrict the issuing of such warrants, only allowing them with a great deal more pre issue investigation and much higher level of justification.
In this case, no warrant of any kind should have ever been issued. This was a tragic screw up from the word go. No one should have even asked the judge for a warrant, and the judge should never have issued one. The whole thing was a series of errors that would embarass the Keystone cops. There were enough policy errors and judgement errors to fill a small novel. However, that does not serve as an indictment of every officer on every force in the country, nor does it make them "nazis" as was so quaintly stated.
-
xmarine.. you claim you know the complexity of sewer lateral systems.
I have 20 years in the pipefitting and wastewater distribution system business.. I currently am in charge of wastewater treatment and distribution.
This was not an appartment or anything else... any city large enough to have a paramilitary ninja outfit is large enough to have a cleanout law...
you ignorance of building laterals is showing.
The police range is on my plants property... I watch police and sheriffs and DA and dea and swat and atf all train.
The paramilitary guys are decent one on one but are filled with more a holes than you can shake a stick at.. they are isolated and arrogant and cut off from fellow cops and citizens.. they have an adversarial attitude and elitist attitude that is not warranted... they are constantly compensating for the fact that they are doing a job no one needs.. this goes for the ATF and DEA guys too.
They fight to keep the regular police from having rifles and carbines so that they are forced to call the worthless swat out to solve any problem.
They are insecure and defensive and it shows.. they are killing people because they are trained to kill citizens.
They killed a grandma because their tactics invaded a home for the sole purpose of a drug bust. They killed a citizen in her own home who fought back against armed thugs breaking into her home.
At this point my only advise for homeowners is to shoot for the head or use a high powered rifle with full metal jacket or armor piercing rounds.
We should not fear that someone will break into our house in the middle of the night but we should certainly not fear that our employees.. those paid by us to protect us.. will be the thugs.
That should not happen... I would rather see 1,000 drug dealers let go than one citizen killed by the secret police ninjas attacking homes in the middle of the night.
lazs
-
Amen Lazs
-
I use to do this for a living so here's how it works.
A superior comes up hands you your orders, you will raid this house at this time and you're looking for this. You don't question the orders because he's your superior and he's given you a hundred orders just like it before.
You go to the house without a bull horn, unannounced, knock in the door while yelling at the occupants identifying yourself as police. Depending on the raid, you and your team could be clearly marked in several positions indicating you are police (typically a residential area). Once you encounter an individual you have a split second assess the situation, announce who you are again, tell the individual what you want them to do. Or if the situation is hostile you screw all that and shoot before they shoot you.
All the above is irrelevant if the resident(s) are disoriented (possibly elderly) or strung out at the time of the assault. Guilty or innocent they will defend themselves given the means. Once you knock in the door you are at a point of no return. Once shooting begins, training takes over and you do what the situation dictates.
Given 3 officers were wounded by an elderly lady suggests there was some hesitation by the police. Once the shooting begins it doesn't matter because at that point it's her or them and like I said, training takes over. You always assume the individuals in the home being raided could be hostile. We'll never know the finer details of what happened.
If there was a mistake made, it was on the intelligence used to decide to raid the home. (Iraq)
-
They need better intel and tactics before doing it. That lady could have been deaf. There are better ways to go about this stuff than dessing up in para-military outfits with bloused boots thinking they are gods, raiding houses that may belong to innocents. A part of me is happy she whacked 3 of them before she went down.
-
For once I agree with Lazs. If that was my grandma I'd want those cops dead.
-
If there was a mistake made, it was on the intelligence used to decide to raid the home. (Iraq)
Bull****. Just like in the military, it is the foot policemen's duty to tell the difference between a moral and immoral order.
Given 3 officers were wounded by an elderly lady suggests there was some hesitation by the police.
I was thinking that she bettered 3 police officers. It's the fourth one that got her.
Had she survived I would have sent her a box of bullets, or a new assault rifle (if I had some money).
-
Originally posted by Viking
For once I agree with Lazs. If that was my grandma I'd want those cops dead.
Cops on the raid likely had nothing to do with deciding on the raid.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Bull****. Just like in the military, it is the foot policemen's duty to tell the difference between a moral and immoral order.
I was thinking that she bettered 3 police officers. It's the fourth one that got her.
Correct, but like I said, once you kick in the door and the shooting starts the train is in motion? Perhaps the cops should have just curled up in the fetal position once the shooting started?
Mistake was already made before they kicked in the door. They had no way of know that mistake was made until the door was kicked in, but by then it's already to late isn't it.
Wishing the cops dead doesn't exacly teach us anything either.
-
Correct, but like I said, once you kick in the door and the shooting starts the train is in motion? Perhaps the cops should have just curled up in the fetal position once the shooting started?
Perhaps the cops should never have kicked in the door.
-
We've given up our rights for a pointless war on drugs and this is the result. (http://www.cato.org/raidmap/).
The 2nd amendment gives you the right to arm yourself.
So called "make my day" laws allow you to defend your home from intruders.
The dismantling of the constitution in the name of the drug war gives the police the right to bust into your house unanounced and with no credible reason and mow you down as you attempt to excercise your 2nd ammendment rights.
The morons who are "conservatives" in name only need to wake up to this hypocracy ad stop the war on drugs. It's way more dangerous to the values we hold dear than islamic terrorists.
-
in line with that raidmap, check this out... http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/08/17/drugWarVictims.html
-
motor oil that is bull.
I watch cops practice... they yell (in their best uninteligble marine corps Di voice "POLEEZEOBENOP" and two seconds latter smash in the door and go in guns hot. Maybe throw in a flash bang grenade... they are wearing all black.. armor and masks with "police" on the back of their armor...
they are doing this in the hours decent people are assleep.
Now, if you are a law abiding citizen (impossible given the amount of laws) but.. say you are pretty much one... you have the right to defend your home. You have the right to be armed. you have the right to shoot at gun toting ninjas breaking into your home.
I hope this helps to get rid of no knock but I doubt it.
We should have all been outraged when we seen our police wearing masks and making night time raids but... we trusted em.... never thought it would be used against citizens.... couldn't imagine a real homeowner let alone a grandma being roused in the middle of the night and killed when she fought off a group of these a holes.
but it is happening.
lazs
-
And as we get programed to law enforcement using the same tactics as criminals, this type of thing becomes more common.
http://www.countypress.com/stories/112906/loc_90061122002.shtml
If you had a gun in your hand what would you have done?
I know prior to no knock and warrantless raids becoming so common I would have felt justified in firing on these two clowns, now in the back of my mind is , if these morons really are LEO's that will get my family killed.
It's a quandary, who is most dangerous to you?
shamus
-
Trust me by the time its over I see full fault in the hands of LE..
http://www.11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=88239
or
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/28/atlanta.shooting/
Just like this case... when Mr. Mayfield teleported to spain and back for the madrid bombing.. (the timelines were unfeasible, the spanish said BS) But then was shackled anyway to cover up for the incompetence, to buy time to dig up legitimate or seed this guy illegally for evidence.. (oh yes patriot act allows seeding of property, what oversight is there during such a sneak and peek..., think about it..)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1130/dailyUpdate.html
If i was mayfield I would give a public statement to waive the majority of the settlement** (it comes from tax) for true accountability in the form of false imprisonment charges, purjury, kidnapping, breaking and entering, menacing, and whatever else you want to tack on.. money is meritless and hollow.. heads roll and vindication is justice.. fire all parties and supers for allowing it... tar and feather the chimpy's and walk em down main street with CNN documenting is fair justice to me.. lucky for them that would fall under cruel and unusual punishment for those that respect the constitution...
it amazes me that those who swear oath to the constitution respect it the least as proven by virgil's and others comments. Im torn between Trent Lotts recent jab at the first admendment and now some of the comments made on this grandmother case.. what a sad state of america do we live in..
DoctorYo
PS: its going to be a real story when this happens in Florida with our new self defense law has just been enacted.. creates a legal paradox...
** he could recoup the money thru a book deal.. at no burden to us tax payers.
Edited... : HERE IS THE WARRANT IF ANY ONE WANTS TO SEE IT...
http://www.11alive.com/news/pdf/apd_warrant1127.pdf
note the security camera claim.. Her house has no security cameras...
The officers were shot in the doorway at 1900 hrs.. nighttime.. the old lady had the bead on them.. that talk of oil about restraint is completely boot...
-
shamus... anyone who would break into your home is likely to kill you, your family and most certainly your pets. You should act accordingly.
If you die from a bad guy at least you tried... if you die from some alphabet soup ninja clad tax supported thug agency... well... maybe your surviving relatives can sue.
Best to have some warning and a fiream that will stop any kind thug breaking and entering even if he is wearing body armor.
I am angry about the state of affairs of the U.S. right now. If we can't even be secure in our homes from the people we pay to protect us then perhaps it is time to just say no thanks to taxes and "services".
lazs
-
Perhaps it's time for a 51st state.
http://www.jeffersonstate.com/
I live just a little bit too far north (Lane County) but I'd move.
-
Originally posted by DoctorYO
Trust me by the time its over I see full fault in the hands of LE..
[
Not me. Law Enforcement is behaving exactly as you might expect and predict that they would behave.
First, call it a WAR on drugs. Then offer substantial federal money to staff and train drug local drug enforcement and SWAT teams. Offer huge incentives both monetary for departments and career building for individuals to make drug busts. Finally, remove pesky little barriers like constitutional rights.
We, the American people, through our elected leaders, have clearly and loudly proclaimed to our law enforcement that this is a war and that we don't care if a few innocents are harmed or if our rights get trampled a little - JUST DO WHAT YOU MUST TO KEEP DRUGS AWAY FROM OUR KIDS. (Or maybe it's a lack of self controll issue and we have to keep drugs away from ourselves).
Don't blame law enforcement. They are doing what you said they can and should do to serve a greater good.
-
This is far from being an isolated or infrequent occurence. I copied the following from an article about the sovereignty of the home. If you are not familar with the Donald Scott case I recomend you do a search of it, scary stuff.
Quote
Take the case of Scott Bryant. Thirteen Wisconsin sheriff's deputies burst in the 29-year-old's trailer on the night of April 17, 1995, executing a no-knock warrant. Bryant, who was unarmed, was shot and killed during the assault while his 7-year-old son looked on. Police seized less than three grams of marijuana. On review, the county district attorney found that the shooting was "not in any way justified."
Robert Lee Peters had just settled down to watch a movie with his family when St. Petersburg police officers smashed through his front door unannounced with a battering ram in July 1994. Fearing that his home was being burglarized, Peters grabbed a gun and fired at his attackers. The officers returned fire, killing the 33-year-old father of two. Police confiscated two pounds of marijuana.
Sometimes victims possess no drugs. Just ask the family of Annie Rae Dixon an 84-year-old grandmother shot and killed during a 2 a.m. drug raid on her east Texas home in 1992. No drugs were ever found on the premises. One officer later hypothesized that his pistol accidentally discharged when he kicked open Dixon's bedroom door. "I started throwing my guts up crying because I knew I had shot somebody that didn't have no reason to be shot," he said. No less vicious was the 1998 shooting death of Pedro Oregon Navarro by Houston police. Six officers stormed his home at 1:40 a.m. in a military-style raid after a man arrested for public drunkenness said Navarro was a drug dealer. Agents shot the bleary-eyed Navarro 12 times, killing him. A search of his residence produced no illicit drugs or weapons.
California rancher Donald Scott, 61 met a similar fate in 1992, when a team of local and federal agents burst into his mansion during a midnight raid, ostensibly to search for marijuana. When Scott reached for a pistol to defend himself, he was shot dead. An investigation by the Ventura County district attorney later revealed that the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department had fabricated evidence that Scott was cultivating pot because it hoped to seize his property, which was adjacent to a federal park. Ventura County officials eventually agreed to pay the Scott family $4 million in damages; the federal government agreed to pay $1 million.
More recently a SWAT team from El Monte, California, raided a home in neighboring Compton on the evening of August 9, 1999, killing retired grandfather Mario Paz by shooting him twice in the back. Police executing the search warrant said they believed the house was sometimes used as a mail drop by a local drug dealer. Although police found no drugs and filed no charges against any surviving family members, they refused to return an estimated $11,000 dollars seized during the deadly raid.
Some victims are the victims of sheer error. Take the September 29, 1999, assault by Denver SWAT agents on the home of Ismael Mena. Mena, a 45-year-old father of nine, was shot eight times and killed by police in an unannounced raid. No drugs were found, and police now speculate that they may have had an incorrect address.
An equally vicious police blunder claimed the life of Reverend Accelyne Williams, a 75-year-old retired Methodist minister who suffered a fatal heart attack when Boston police broke into his apartment on March 24, 1994. Acting on false information provided by a confidential informant, anti-drug agents chased Williams to his bedroom, shoved him to the floor, and pointed guns at his head--inducing the heart attack that killed him. Boston Police Commissioner Paul Evans later admitted at a press conference that police likely raided the wrong apartment. "If that is the case, then there will be an apology," he said. Two years later, the city paid a $1 million settlement to Williams's widow.
William Pitt expressed the importance Americans once placed on the sanctity of the home from trespass when he said: "The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail--its, roof may shake--the wind may blow through it--the storm may enter--the rain may enter--but the King of England cannot enter--all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement."
The fact that our government and law enforcement personnel now view the sovereignty of the home as a quaint anachronism should disturb us all. Congress should address the issue of whether the escalating enforcement of drug prohibition threatens the right of all of us to be secure in our homes. To the families of the victims named above, the answer is all too clear.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Perhaps it's time for a 51st state.
http://www.jeffersonstate.com/
I live just a little bit too far north (Lane County) but I'd move.
Hey, great minds.. that's what I've been saying for a while, now. Thanks for the link Chairboy.
-
hippies & fishermen against rangers & farmers in an all out fight to the death over water rights
AKA
who will be the klamath basin suckers
that & the constitution prohibits making new states by carving up existing ones (too bad, i could use a couple extra senators)
-
Washington D.C. would be first in line for a 51st state if we were gonna have something like that. The Jefferson State would have to be the 52nd state. What would be the advantage to having more states?
Les
-
more college football
more miss america contestants
-
ever hear of the Free State Project? http://www.freestateproject.org/
-
bottom line is that whenever someone breaks down your door in the middle of the night..... things are not going to get better for you or your family or your rights from there.
I don't think we can make a state by carving up existing ones... wish we could.. I could retire where I live.
Northern Ca. is much different than southern kalifornia metrosexuals and gangbangers.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Suave
"Today we sent a strong message to freedom hating grandmothers everywhere."
LMAO! :rofl
-
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/crime/bal-md.blotter29nov29,0,6934445.story?coll=bal-local-headlines
Police were seeking four gunmen posing as police officers who forced their way into a house in the 600 block of Mosher St. about 2:30 a.m. yesterday and shot a man, 26, in the back and right arm as he jumped from a second-floor bedroom window. The victim was reported in good condition at Maryland Shock Trauma Center. The gunmen pistol-whipped several occupants before fleeing without property or money.
How in heck are we supposed to tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys" if they use the same tactics?
-
easy... the good guys knock on the door and aren't wearing masks... the bad guys dress in black and break down the door.
either may claim to be one thing or another and either may be wearing a bullet proof vest.
That is why it is important to "have enough gun". That is also why democrats want to make sure that no one has enough gun.
lazs
-
The democrats and republicans both appear to be working together against our constitutional rights. The democrats take away the guns we defend our rights with, and the republicans are taking away the rights we would defend.
I'm not sure if that counts as irony or if it's just frustrating and sad.
-
I hear so much talk, but why am I the only one who comes to the conclusion that a revolution is needed?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I hear so much talk, but why am I the only one who comes to the conclusion that a revolution is needed?
You're not, but most of us outgrew that kind of idealistic self-righteous thinking.
Don't take it too badly. I'll be the first to admit I was stupid when I was your age, too.
-
I won't take it personal. I agree that you were stupid when you were my age as well.
-
It's no secret to me anymore, so yeah..you're right. Things change and minds grow.
-
What happened to the american people that caused them to be so placid?
-
TV
-
laser... seriously...
What is "wrong" with us is... comfort. A lot of us older guys have spent time in the woods or have been seriously injured and have, at one time or another been broke beyond anything most today can imagine.
Many of us have hidden from armies or police and been on the run.
Now... we have homes and families and well... comfort. the comfort makes us willing to slowly lose our freedoms... so long as it doesn't happen too fast and we can see a personal way out.
Most of us feel we can milk the corrupt and evil system or appease it long enough to get enough money to hide from the infringmets on freedom..
The guys dieing at government hands or losing their life savings or being imprisoned are not us... we are too smart right? we are too divided.
We are also afraid of our neigbors... we have been taught that they are dangerous and expensive to maintain and that they are the problem and that only the government can save us. If our neigbors have guns they will kill us.. if they don't wear seatbelts or speed or do drugs or eat fatty food or smoke or don't mow their lawn the right way or part their hair correctly... it will cost us billions a year in taxes or other costs...
We must have wars on drugs or crime or terror and war.... is governments job right? "militia" is a dirty word or... twisted to mean "another government army but local"
We have been told that only the government can raise children or educate them and that we are allowed to pay for the privlidge.
We are told that we are destroying the globe... that we are making it warmer. We need to be restricted.
We are told that people not only have the right to pursue happiness but that there should be some sort of minimum guarentee of happiness no matter how little we do or how much we do to make our lives misserable.
Soooo... it is pretty easy to ignore when someone we don't know is killed by the government or imprisoned for many years for failing to pay a fee or using a substance that is on a banned list.
So long as we are comfortable... things aren't too bad yet. chances are... nothing too bad will come down on us before we die anyhow.
lazs
-
Good post, Lazs.
-
I suppose it's easier for us single guys to be idealistic. And I suppose it's natural for everyone to have thier own breaking point. Some may start to sing a different tune once Hillobama comes for their guns. Or if the draft is reinstituted. Or if the borders are locked down to the point where one needs clearance to leave the country. Or if detention centers start getting filled with protestors/dissidents. It's too depressing to think of more "what if's" so I digress... Anyhoo, the frog in the kettle analogy is probably appropriate, some of us just have more sensitive skin than others.
-
Who do you think did the majority of the fighting in the Revolutionary War, war of 1812 and Civil War?
-
Originally posted by bsdaddict
I suppose it's easier for us single guys to be idealistic. And I suppose it's natural for everyone to have thier own breaking point. Some may start to sing a different tune once Hillobama comes for their guns. Or if the draft is reinstituted. Or if the borders are locked down to the point where one needs clearance to leave the country. Or if detention centers start getting filled with protestors/dissidents. It's too depressing to think of more "what if's" so I digress... Anyhoo, the frog in the kettle analogy is probably appropriate,
It's not pie-in-the-skyism to stand for through-and-through integrity. Either something is right, or it isn't.. You can't pretend values and yet fish flop or give lukewarm responses, arbitrarily.
Values are no use if they're all sloshing about like letters of an alphabet soup in no real correlation to each other. They must be rooted in reason.
some of us just have more sensitive skin than others.
That's tropism to comfort, I think.
-
Oh.. don't get me wrong.. Us older guys who have been through the mill will go through it again if the right leader shows up.
There is nothing I own that I am more fond of than my freedom or that of my family.
We just aren't martyrs and we go into anything like this with eyes wide open.
If I get a chance to change things I will. If someone, some state, suceeds from the US and forms a free country modeled after the original constitution I will move there and fight for that new country. But... my eyes will be wide open.
I have seen no plans that will work at this time... No leader.
I see no option working within the system except to vote republican so that democrats won't get in... democrats will raise my taxes and make government bigger... republicans aren't much better but... those are the only chances we have. There will allways be some shrill shrew woman democrat in power who want's to take more of my individuality and freedom for "my own good" or for "the good of society".
Maybe we deserve it or maybe... we just got too crowded... or... too soft and too PC... we let women vote. It is rare indeed to find a woman who thinks the constitution is not just a work in progress... like the men in their lives... for them to mold into something that suits their ideal of security and PC.
lazs
-
(http://reason.com/files/58eba09a914d0927da75a44c928e9325.jpg)
-
hahaha i like the pennsylvania one.
some n0Obs say guns are phallic symbols, but the stormtrooper got it the other way around, lololol:rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I watch cops practice... they yell (in their best uninteligble marine corps Di voice "POLEEZEOBENOP" and two seconds latter smash in the door and go in guns hot. Maybe throw in a flash bang grenade... they are wearing all black.. armor and masks with "police" on the back of their armor...
they are doing this in the hours decent people are assleep.
Now, if you are a law abiding citizen (impossible given the amount of laws) but.. say you are pretty much one... you have the right to defend your home. You have the right to be armed. you have the right to shoot at gun toting ninjas breaking into your home.
I hope this helps to get rid of no knock but I doubt it.
We should have all been outraged when we seen our police wearing masks and making night time raids but... we trusted em.... never thought it would be used against citizens.... couldn't imagine a real homeowner let alone a grandma being roused in the middle of the night and killed when she fought off a group of these a holes.
but it is happening.
lazs
You're absolutely right, that's the way its done and I wouldn't do it any other way, but outraged by seeing police in masks???? I'll be sure to identify myself to the next Hell's Angels club owner whose house I could be raiding so he can follow me home when he doesn't get any jail time for the crime he's committed. (finger pointed at justice system)
Right to defend your home yes and that's why a raid is conducted with the impression the structure will be defended, only makes sense. There was likely a lot of confusion for an elderly lady during the raid.
Remember the average citizen doesn't have to fear a masked cop cause they are not seeing it. If your home is being raided it's because you are a threat to society. Assuming mistakes don't happen. If you were living in some kind of military state this kind of thing wouldn't hit the news.
When was the last time you or your neighbour had your door kicked in by masked cops and then hauled away never to be seen again?
Like I said this raid was a mistake, the error was made before the door was kicked in. The tactics of the raid are irrelevant.
-
not one person has ever been proven to have been executed unfairly and yet we have thousands, maybe millions of people who protest the death penalty on the off chance that even one person may be executed unfairly yet no one seems to care that the police are gunning down citizens in their homes after breaking into them in the middle of the night.
lazs
-
Do you read Reason, Chairboy? I read it online, thinking about subscribing...
-
motor oil... seriously... when was the last time a hells angel looked at some cops face and then followed em home and killed em?
sure seems to me that these "tactics" that you are defending are killing a lot of citizens that don't seserve to die. Lot more citizens are dieing at your hands than unmasked cops dieing at hells angles hands.
If you have no balls then you should get another job. or..... you could just stick with sending 100 swat guys in on every granny suspected of haveing an ounce of pot or maybe a legal firearm.... do it in the middle of the night in masks too because after all.... your guys are much more important than the lives of citizens right?
lazs
-
Originally posted by MotorOil1
You're absolutely right, that's the way its done and I wouldn't do it any other way, but outraged by seeing police in masks???? I'll be sure to identify myself to the next Hell's Angels club owner whose house I could be raiding so he can follow me home when he doesn't get any jail time for the crime he's committed. (finger pointed at justice system)
Right to defend your home yes and that's why a raid is conducted with the impression the structure will be defended, only makes sense. There was likely a lot of confusion for an elderly lady during the raid.
Remember the average citizen doesn't have to fear a masked cop cause they are not seeing it. If your home is being raided it's because you are a threat to society. Assuming mistakes don't happen. If you were living in some kind of military state this kind of thing wouldn't hit the news.
When was the last time you or your neighbour had your door kicked in by masked cops and then hauled away never to be seen again?
Like I said this raid was a mistake, the error was made before the door was kicked in. The tactics of the raid are irrelevant.
To say that the tactics are irrelevant, while knowing that mistakes can, and WILL, happen is foolish, shortsighted and shows a callousness to the welfare and rights of your fellow citizens that I find disgustingly unamerican. Irrelevant my you-know-what.
I'd better stop before I get this thread locked.
-
yep BS... I agree.. if any cops here think the American people are proud of them breaking into citizens homes in the middle of the night they are very much on the wrong side of this whole thing.
Sorry but we see sections of the cities that you brave ninjas won't go into even heavily armed. we don't see hells angels breaking into your homes in the middle of the night in riot gear and stomping your pets and shooting everyone in your house... we see you wearing masks and going 10 against one on slumbering citizens.
It wasn't allways this way... the joke is.... one riot.... one Texas Ranger.... One wino..... 400 swat. And the ranger isn't even wearing a mask.
lazs
-
I've been on close to 100 raids and never have we ever mistakenly raided the wrong place or killed someone innocent. Every mistake made by the police is widely publicised and criticised. You need to analyse the mistakes and correct them.
A doctor may do 1000 operations in his career, makes one mistake, someone dies. What do we do, get rid of all the doctors? Stop surgeries because someone died? No, you learn from it, perhaps punish those responsible and move on.
Funny how all but one of the raids I was on never made the news. We used the same tactics on all of them.
Also funny how no criminal has ever followed me home to murder me or my family. Perhaps it has been the results of the tactics used which have been developed over time?
When you find Osama or the residence you think he's at you should just gather around in a suit and tie, knock and politely ask him to come out, so no one gets hurt. That might work.
-
I for one find the hands of Cops being tied too often. Criminals have more rights, where they should have NONE.
Now that being said, I would find it dificult, if some ninja cops broke into my parents home and shot them in the middle of the night for trying to defend their home. Hunting season would be open just as if a criminal broke in and did the same. When lives are on the line.... there is no room for mistakes. Everything should be checked and rechecked to confirm such tactics.
-
Criminals should have _NO_ rights?
I know this whole constitution thing keeps getting in the way of orderly police work, tell me more.
-
too true, Chairboy. there's this concept of "innocent until proven guilty" that some people sound like they'd be happy to do away with...
-
yes there are some bleeding heart liberals out there that think when someone is caught red handed.... they may not be guilty.
-
That's always the challenge, how do you arrest someone and do it safely. People are unpredictable.
Couple years ago now we had 4 RCMP walk up on a farm to question a suspect, the guy pulls out a high powered rifle, catches the offices off guard and ends up killing all 4. Then he kills himself.
Who's the victum there right?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
motor oil... seriously... when was the last time a hells angel looked at some cops face and then followed em home and killed em?
lazs
You only need to look at their jacket; an upside down police patch denotes the rape of a female officer, a badge or replica upside down means the officer is dead.
Some "masks", like the one I had, was fire / knife resistant and protected my face & eyes... which was nice to have when we're tossing flash bangs and 40MM stinger grenades, 1 pellet in the face feels like a hammer blow, and blinding yourself with a flash bang is a bad thing.
Cops gear up for their safety and protection, not peanut gallery citizen fashon approval... if citizens got to choose police gear guys would be wearing pink shorts armed with supersoakers and nerf batons.
Besides that most every Dept abides by the methodology of "Sir Robert Peel", AKA the father of modern law enforcement... where an officer can be positively ID'd by badge number, name tag or both.. making a mask just another piece of safety equipment, and irrelevant.
Heres some police trivia:
The term "Cop" is short for "Chief of Police"
"Sheriff" comes from old England, the town was known as a "Shire" and the local cop the "Rieve", AKA "Shire Rieve" which we turned into "Sheriff".
The code of hammurabi is the source of much of our current legal system, except for the tossing people in the river stuff.
-
Originally posted by MotorOil1
That's always the challenge, how do you arrest someone and do it safely. People are unpredictable.
Couple years ago now we had 4 RCMP walk up on a farm to question a suspect, the guy pulls out a high powered rifle, catches the offices off guard and ends up killing all 4. Then he kills himself.
Who's the victum there right?
In the academy we learned of an LA Deputy Sheriff who responded to a "check the welfare" call of en elderly man who had not been herd from, a Korea / Nam war vet. 9 ot of 10 times its dead body retrieval. Upon entering the Apt the old man, suffering from dementia and totally insane, was lying in wait and ambushed the Deputy, shooting him dead.
My 1st shooting resulted from an every day seemingly dull "loud music" call, my 2nd shooting, and the 1960's LA riots, both started with a "routine" traffic stop.
The list goes on and on, and is worse since the three strikes law, desperate people do desperate things and a 2 striker looking at 25 to life for a low weight felony has every reason to put up a furious fight, and they do.
-
Originally posted by Shuffler
yes there are some bleeding heart liberals out there that think when someone is caught red handed.... they may not be guilty.
what conversation are you taking part in? we're talking about no-knock raids, there's no "red handed" anything going on, 'cept mebbe sleeping...
-
You were doing half assed X0847, until you got to this line:
The code of hammurabi is the source of much of our current legal system, except for the tossing people in the river stuff.
And totally made a fool of yourself.
-
Are you saying it's worth more to this thread of discussion to prove him wrong, rather than prove why/how what he suggested is flawed?
Who gives a crap what sort of fool anyone is, so long as they happen to correctly utter the correct answer to a given problem?
-
motor oil... you are not a doctor.. You are not a soldier in a war zone either..
And that is the problem...you think you are. You are not fighting other soldiers you are attacking US citizens... not sadam.
you can't think of a time a cop was followed home and killed because.... because of your masks? LOL... it never happened masks or not. if someone wanted to kill you the masks would not make any difference... you wear the masks for protection and or because you are ashamed of what you do... protection is fine. shame is not...you sound like you need to be a little ashamed... most Americans are ashamed for you.
Don't believe it? the show "swat" had to be pulled... it made people queazy and they tuned out in droves. What you do does and should make any freedom loving American scared.
Look at who you hang out with...look at the paramilitary trainining and mind set.... look at what you are becomeing. you are not soldiers. or... you shouldn't be. we don't need soldier squads in the US raiding homes with military tactics... we don't need isolated elite forces.
xmarine... cops are killed on the job... raped? no men cops were raped I don't believe. We are talking about being followed home for revenge... this, it it happens at all... happens to cops for minor arrests or randomly... would you suggest that all cops wear masks at every arrest?
I think most cops are dedicated and good people. I think they have a tough job and too much regulation and I commend them. I talk and joke with em all the time.. trying to talk to the "elite" storm troopers tho is a waste.. it is something you feel when trying to talk to em... a detachment... like that of every sqaud of storm troopers from the beggining of time.
I have no use for the paramilitary no knock storm troopers who are ashamed to show themselves and their faces in broad daylight even when they have a 40/1 advantage.
And how many of these paramilitary groups do we need? one for each town? and what do they do to justify their existence? one raid a year is hard to justify so... they lower the standard and maybe get 1 a month... still... we all know that they are pretty much a waste of money so... they do things like fight to not allow beat cops to have rifles so that their group has to be called... soon...
The potential for abuse is too high... it was a huge mistake.
Raise the physical and training standards for normal cops and get rid of the paramiliutary ones.
lazs
-
It's really odd. I was watching that show First 48 or some such name last night, where they follow detectives in the first 48 hours of a killing. In one case, an ex boyfirend with a history of violence shoots the woman in the head after a premediated encounter (he said he would do it the day before) and while leaving takes the time to shoot her 2-year-old daughter twice, killing her. About the perfenct definition of armed and dangerous.
Yet, at several points the detectives, with some light backup of uniformed officers, searched suspected houses where he might be hiding. No SWAT, just pistols and shotguns.
Of course, here in Chicago the Gurnee Illinois PD, in what was apparently a SWAT action, just raided the home of a Chicago Bear, Tank Johnson, all to get him on 6 misdemeanor weapons violations (not violations in the other 49 states, btw) and bust a friend who was staying there for felony Marijuana possession (over 2 ounces). Johnson's girlfriend and two infant children were at home.
A big media event for the Gurnee PD. Here's how it went down according to the Tribune:
Gurnee police and officers from the Northern Illinois Police Alarm System descended on the home about 11 a.m. with shields and armored vehicles, alarming neighbors, some of whom police had asked to evacuate the neighborhood.
An explosion was heard, rattling neighbors' homes, which police said was used as a diversionary tactic because of the threat of weapons being used during the raid.
"We knew there were weapons in the house . . . we also knew there were more than likely people in the house so we did not know what we would encounter," Jones said. "The officers took the necessary precautions for their safety and the safety of the neighborhood."
Personally, I call BS on this one. IMO, just an excuse for publicity and to use the toys. Was Tank harboring Tony Montana? Was there really that expectation of possible violence, or just a photo op where the "Alarm Squad" could have created a tragic accident? Couldn't you have just busted the friend on his way to get a burger or some such thing (Isolated, in an aread of your choosing), then entered the house with a warrant and without all the theater? My guess would be yes.
Charon
-
masks make them look like NINJAS.
and ninjas are super bad, they will flip out and cut off peoples heads. or break down your door, throw "flash bangs" and shoot you.
-
exactly charon... real cops don't need to hide behind masks to do their job. they face real danger every time they go to a domestic dispute or pull over a car... should they call swat for all these things?
You are correct that swat is called simply to justify swat. these guys really aren't needed in 99% of the cases and just make the whole situation a lot worse.
neither waco or ruby ridge would have happened without the paramilitary hut hut boys getting involved... any local sherriff would have done a lot better job without killing a bunch of innocent citizens and terrorizing Americans.
lazs
-
Originally posted by MotorOil1
You need to analyse the mistakes and correct them.
Yeah, knock
When you find Osama or the residence you think he's at you should just gather around in a suit and tie, knock and politely ask him to come out, so no one gets hurt. That might work.
Comparing bin laden to a citizen smoking pot, what's next, linking the baseball steroid scandal and terrorism?
-
yep six... these guys don't think they are cops anymore. They think they are some sort of military elite organization who are fighting some sort of evil foriegn country... they think they are soldiers... they will even say so to your face.
there are reasons why we don't let soldiers knock down doors in the middle of the night.
To compare what our brave soldiers in iraq are doing with what these ninja squads are doing is laughable. It takes maybe 40 of these guys to equal one 50 year old Texas ranger in my opinion. To compare the threat of actual combat to breaking into citizens homes with massive forces is an insult to real troops.
lazs
-
Originally posted by bsdaddict
what conversation are you taking part in? we're talking about no-knock raids, there's no "red handed" anything going on, 'cept mebbe sleeping...
Read the previous post on this thread and you'll be enlightened...
-
Do you cut hair or drive taxi Lazs? And do you know me? I'm not ashamed of the children I've saved, the druggies I've saved from themselves or the arresting the guys moving illegal weapons through the ports of the biggest arms dealer on the planet. No one has ever complained to the department about our tactics and no innocent citizen ever had their home raided by us. We have recieved a lot of praise and thanks from concerned residents for removing these guys from the streets.
It's too bad the media doesn't find successful raids where no shots were fired interesting enough to publish. Even if they did publish it you wouldn't find it interesting as there is no controversy in it.
There's no comparison as to what's going on in Iraq and what's happening in the US. Read between the lines Lazs, the incident in this thread as with the whole Iraq thing was sparked by bad intelligence.
And before you reply, lets just assume you and I both disagree with why there are troops in Iraq.
-
Here's another one:
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=81092
While serving a warrant, the police fired a flashbang into their house which started a fire and burned it down. I wonder if this is another artifact of the SWAT mentality discussed earlier in the thread.
There are no saints, and I'm sure that the police execute accurate warrants the vast majority of the time, but treating each incident as a military operation is anathema to the role police have traditionally had in our communities.
-
What kind of people run up their flag after killing their neighboring women and children?
(http://www.getwaco.com/media/flags-lg.jpg)
-
I have to add a comment. When Bush wanted to monitor the overseas phone calls of suspected terrorists it was a serious breach of our liberties. When Clinton's administration sanctioned the assault at Waco it was serving justice to religious fanatics. Some will fail to see the travesty or irony in this.
-
motoroil... no.. I do not know you but if you are breaking into citizens homes in the middle of the night then you are the enemy. I am sure that you have gotten actual crooks and saved actual lives. I am simply saying that it is not worth it.
The cases of your (in the broad sense) killing and destroying the lives of innocent citizens are real and numerous... your (in the broad sense) "war on drugs" or "war on the second amendment" is not worth the missery you are causing. If it weren't for your making drugs illegal you wouldn't even have drug dealers to contend with.... same for silly gun laws.
I am trying to see how you can justify the killing of all those women and poor little kids at Waco or the shooting of the weavers son and wife... all for... for what? How is your sneaky ninja crap justified when you could have resolved these simple little infractions with one local sheriff sans mask and early morning raid?
They say that we have to be very careful when we execute someone... that he needs all those appeals so that an innocent man is not killed.... but... we have you buffoons breaking into houses in the middle of the night and killing and destroying on worthless warrants. Nope.. I don't cut hair...
I don't cowboy out anymore either. I was a criminal many years ago. I know what it is like to be in an armed confrontation. I never thought that I would need 40 guys to take down a grandmas house tho.
You are not soldiers... there is no war here. You are servants of the public.
I know a lot of cops... they risk everything every day when they pull over a drunk or break up a domestic dispute... they don't need to get 40 guys to help em... they don't wear masks..
The beat cop is a brave servant of the people. I don't know what the masked ninjas are but they are in the wrong country.
lazs
-
There has been a status update regarding the incident that started this thread:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070426/ap_on_re_us/elderly_shooting;_ylt=AgSYVupNSp.yr7kBlq.Jk_5H2ocA
Two of the officers involved have plead guilty to manslaughter, perjury, violating oath, and making false statements. Pretty crummy situation, all in all. I hope the practice of no-knock warrant execution is reviewed carefully.
-
These guys give good LEO's a bad name, they really lucked out on the sentences , especially the one who planted the pot, he should be doing life.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Shamus
These guys give good LEO's a bad name, they really lucked out on the sentences , especially the one who planted the pot, he should be doing life.
shamus
I don't want to divert the thread, but....pot should be legal only because it would empty out the jails for more serious offenders of hard stuff like meth, crack, etc.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I don't want to divert the thread, but....pot should be legal only because it would empty out the jails for more serious offenders of hard stuff like meth, crack, etc.
you had me up to "of hard stuff..." how 'bout not jailing people for using recreational substances and only spending taxpayer dollars to jail people who are a threat to society, like robbers, rapists and murderers?
and to stay on topic, those LEOs got off easy. There isn't a punishment severe enough for them, IMHO. Consider this.., they got caught this once, how many lives do you think they've ruined prior to this incident?
-
It's idiots (I have other words but they wouldn't be allowed on the bbs.) like that that give the rest of us a bad name. All it takes is a single instance of something like this and the public forgets all the rest of the decent Police Officers who do the right thing day after day.
-
They got off easy. They deserve MUCH more time.
-
I had a plane captain that accidentally stepped over a "red line" at Nellis AFB
Anytime someone steps over the red line on the flight line of an AFB you can expect that to happen. Accidentally or not. There are specific entry points on any AFB flight line and you better be smart enough to use them if you don't want to end up flat on the ground on your face, cuffed with a loaded M-16 pressed tight to your body.
That Air Force Security Policeman did exactly as he had been instructed to do, there was no lack of judgement in his case.
-
"to protect and serve", is just something that they paint on their cars.
the cops are a brotherhood, if your not a cop you are a civilian and to a cop a civilian is just a perp that hasn't been caught yet.
As a former officer, I can say in all honesty that's the biggest load of crap I've seen in quite a while.
Like it or not, that is how the police are perceived by many people these days, including myself. That is a perception that they have brought upon themselves. When a *brother* is more important to them than the people they are supposed to be protecting, how are we supposed to perceive that?
I'll give an example. A number of years ago a Denver police cruiser was found empty, door open with the lights on top still on. The entire Denver police dept. went on a 3 day search looking for this guy. (Turns out he just walked away from his job that day and turned himself in later). You NEVER see that kind of effort for a missing civilian...just doesn't happen. Police depts. will tell you they don't have the manpower to do that for every missing person. While I can accept that, I can't accept the Denver police dept. doing that for one of their *brothers* and refusing to do it for Joe/Jane citizen.
Their actions in that case tell me that, yes....they are a brotherhood and yes...they do think they are above Joe/Jane citizen in some way.
I've talked to officers that admit to never giving speeding tickets to other officers whether they are on duty or not. They refer to it as *professional courtesy*. I refer to it as *above the law*.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
It's idiots (I have other words but they wouldn't be allowed on the bbs.) like that that give the rest of us a bad name. All it takes is a single instance of something like this and the public forgets all the rest of the decent Police Officers who do the right thing day after day.
as they say, Maverick, one bad apple spoils the bunch. Personally, I try not to forget that there's countless LEOs who believe in the "serve and protect" part, but it's hard when coverups happen, bad cops get off easy, etc... How 'bout policing your own, holding yourselves up to a higher standard. After all, when you guys make mistakes or "go bad", innocents die.
-
those LEOs got off easy. There isn't a punishment severe enough for them, IMHO.
Police officers who break the law should be punished far more severely than Jane/Joe citizen imo simply because they are paid to uphold the law, not break it.
-
well.. I have said over and over that I have nothing but respect for the average beat cop. He goes into danger every day.
He doesn't hide behind a mask and for the most part... he acts like an employee of the people and treats citizens with respect. He doesn't even draw his gun in situations where I would be nervous as a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.
He is to be respected... he solves problems not creates them.
If we had let the old sheriff take care of the "problem" at waco we wouldn't have 80 or so dead citizens.
Once you form a paramilitary elite force who hides in the dead of night behind masks... you start having problems... when the press is kept away from what they are doing.. like at waco...
So far as drugs are concerned... I say there are only so many addicts.. there will be that many no matter what... I say sell heroin on the shelf for $5 a pound or whatever it takes to make it. You and I won't buy it no matter how cheap it is but... we won't get burglarized or mugged to so some addict can buy it anymore and...
We won't need a paramilitary ninja squad in every town to take down the guys making a fortune on the war on drugs. We won't have to pay em either and we won't have to put up with their arrogance and blunders.
We can put real violent criminals in cells vacated by addicts and former drug dealers.
lazs
-
^^ What he said. ^^
-
Yup.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Check out case law \
And its clear you've never once been to a ghetto dope haven apt complex where you find medicine cabinets / posters / framed pictures that are open holes to the apartment next door.. announce "we're here" and in less than a min the bag of dope will be 3 apartments over before some 10 year old kid rides off with it in a backpack waiving "hi po-lice" at the police cars.
Or you might see a dog haul bellybutton out the back window wearing a diggie back pack, trained to run 2 miles through houses, under fences to a safe house. Ever seen the "poof" of dope hitting an industrial fan?... try collecting it after that.
Dope dealers have refined their profession too, they have a dozen ways they are ready to make the evidence vanish in a split second which is why "no knock" warrants exist.
BUT...... Does this give them the reason to kill an 88 year old lady without VERIFYING that the claim that drugs were actually sold at that house was legitimate?
In two words...
HELL NO!
Cops got shot, its what they deserve! The old lady on the other hand didnt deserve to die DEFENDING HER HOME because some numbskull judge issued a warrant on the information given by some crack addict and served by a bunch of GUNG HO COPS in Ninja Suits with itchy trigger fingers that dont know how to KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE!!!
-
Speaking of Highly trained Ninj0rs
TK! (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070427/ap_on_re_us/trooper_shooting)
-
"Felton said Friday that a police tear gas round that landed on a bedspread appears to have started the fire."
impossible, tear gas will not start fires, thats what the FBI said at Waco.
-
Everything in life is a matter of priorities.... what matters more?
In this light, the so called "War on drugs" is a travisty and is largly responsiable for this pathatic degradation of rights and poorly planned and executed police practices.
While some police work has gotten better, other areas have gotten worse....It's not exactly the days of Police Reports that read : S.S.S.S (Saw Suspect Shot Same), but this is very bad... and I have experienced similar frist hand....
One evening in the early 90's when I was like 11 years old or so we got a loud knock on the front door, then another even louder... my dad had his headphones on listening to a Spurs game, and he's kind of hard of hearing anyway... so my sister goes to open the door as my mom and I are coming up the hall to the front of the house to see what all this noise is about. As she opens the door, my sister gets flung back about 8-10 feet to the upright piano and bench and falls onto it and the bench. Some crazy guy with a big white Texas mustache and some piece of paper comes charging into our living room...
By this time my mother and I get to the living room and my dad has noticed what it happening...I notice the 4 or so men behind him on our porch, a couple of them with some rather large guns, ... seemed like an assualt rifle to me, but I didn't know much about such guns at that age, but my memory put's a m-16 or m-4 there. So this 'crazy' guy starts rambling on about two guys he's looking for and waving around what I guess was some kind of wanted poster, or something,... there was a picture of two guys on it that I'd never seen, and of course didn't look like anyone I knew. I notice he has a badge of some sort, but not the shield I was used to seeing on cops (it was the Bexar county sheriff)...
So then my dad, with palms showing, approaches him and asks what this is all about. The sheriff talks about how he has a warrent for an address number that matches ours, but a street I've never heard of before. My dad attempts to explain that he has the wrong street, even though the number is the same.... The sheriff keeps asking about these guys as I notice other men with guns patroling the sides of our home. My dad countinues to explain that he has the wrong house as a couple of more guys enter our house, one with a big gun. They glance around our living room dining room and the hallway.
After another a minute or two, and a bunch of questions I don't recall, a local typical uniformed cop arrives. He makes his way through the men with guns to our living room and his explanation makes it clear to the sheriff that they have the wrong street. (I guess they couldn't even check the street signs, it is the second house from the corner). Anyway , a uniformed officers word seemed to finally convince them and they began to remove themselves from our home. However, on the way out, the sheriff still had the audacity to ask "have you seen these men?".
My sister was left with bruises from the experiance, being thrown back onto the piano and bench. I later discovered they had invaded the nehibors yards as well. Luckily they didn't invade the guest house where my visiting grandfather was. He is a retired bigtime cop for PA, I'm not sure if he would have been as.... understanding as my father (he is my mothers father) We never told my grandfather about it....
The house they had a warrent for we drove by a few months later just to try to understand (my parents proably dove by it before that, but it did help give me some peace of mind to understand...still a stupid mistake they made). The street they were looking for was across a set of railroad tracks, where there is no crossing... very residential. So the streets changes names at the tracks.... and heance there is another house with the same number "down the street" from where I grew up; accross the tracks and few more blocks. So they misread the map, and never even bothered to look at the street signs... like I said, it's the second house from the corner, and it has a sign.
To further explain how stupid it is in a 'class' context, though I try not to be a 'classist' or 'eliteist'.... you never see such things in the type of nehiborhood I grew up in. One of our nehibors yards they invaded was Col. Fuller's house, before he died(look him up with the battle of the bulge). I only barely remember his widow. But the pecan he planted in 1941 is AMAZING! It then belonged to a young couple with two very young daughters. I could proably name some other nehibors and have many texans know thier names.... but I say this to explain, raiding my families home like that was a horrible lapse of common sense and judgement.
This was bad enough as it was, if they had invaded my families home at 3am, I'm not sure my father wouldn't have found his .45 and shot them. It was only a couple of years before that we had been robbed, of family hierlooms from Germany, cameras, guns... and other random things.... we weren't exactly comfortable with people breaking in...and my father is hard of hearing.....
While my experiance was horrible IMHO and even THAT should be improved upon.... what is considered ok in a modren sense is pathetic.... and I fear if such policies had been in place when this happend to my family.... I wouldn't have the wonderful father I do........
You cops can tell me your experiance all you want.... but these methods are VERY, VERY bad.... What I've experianced was bad enough.
-
A magistrate signed that warrant, so someone besides the cops thought it was a good idea.
No knocks are used for violent people 9 to 99 years of age, sounds like the system works to me.
-
Maybe if the magistrate hadn't been lied to in the affidavit he wouldn't have signed the warrant.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Shamus
Maybe if the magistrate hadn't been lied to in the affidavit he wouldn't have signed the warrant.
shamus
How do you know he/she was lied to?
-
Concho,
That was one of the charges that they plead to IIRC from the article. They plead to lying about having a informant for that address.
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
A magistrate signed that warrant, so someone besides the cops thought it was a good idea.
No knocks are used for violent people 9 to 99 years of age, sounds like the system works to me.
Magistrates, or judges will sign almost ANYTHING... especially after hours. If we needed an after hour warrant we had to drive to the on call judges house... maybe his honor was 3 sheets to the wind, busy playing cards, or entertaining a hooker... after a quick review, its raise your right hand and swear the affidavit is "true and correct", and that's it.. we had legal permission to boot down your door. I cant ever remember one being denied.
Its scary easy.
Depts have different standards though, even as lowly patrol slugs we had the 'freedom' to hand write warrants and get them signed at our discretion after running it by a supervisor... at other depts warrants are the domain of detectives only.
-
Sounds like Training Day.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Concho,
That was one of the charges that they plead to IIRC from the article. They plead to lying about having a informant for that address.
Thanks Mav.
It's not that easy around here, to get a no knock you have to prove the subject is violent.
I went with criminal itel to pick up a guy on a warrant last week for ag assault on a police officer, we couldn't even get a no knock for that.
-
Wasn't that easy in my jurisdiction either. Be that as it may, I'm bowing out of the thread, it's not going to be worthwhile to continue it.
-
Magistrates, or judges will sign almost ANYTHING... especially after hours. If we needed an after hour warrant we had to drive to the on call judges house... maybe his honor was 3 sheets to the wind, busy playing cards, or entertaining a hooker... after a quick review, its raise your right hand and swear the affidavit is "true and correct", and that's it.. we had legal permission to boot down your door. I cant ever remember one being denied.
Its scary easy.
Maybe thats as good a reason as any to get rid of *no knock* raids.
-
One year anniversary to this no-knock screw up:
http://tinyurl.com/277lez
Some interesting polling data in the article:Nearly two-thirds -- 65.8% -- said police should not routinely use such tactics. With minor variations, that sentiment held across geographic, demographic, religious, ideological, and partisan lines.
Opposition to the routine use of SWAT tactics for drug law enforcement ranged from 70.7% in the West to 60.5% in the East. Residents of large cities (60.7%), small cities (71.2%), the suburbs (66.7%), and rural areas (65.0%), all opposed the routine use of SWAT tactics.
Among Democrats, 75.1% opposed the raids; among independents the figure was 65.5%. Even in the Republican ranks, a majority -- 56% -- opposed the raids. Across ideological lines, 85.3% of self-identified progressives opposed the raids, as did 80.8% of liberals, 62.9% of moderates, and 68.9% of libertarians. Even people describing themselves as conservative or very conservative narrowly opposed the routine use of SWAT tactics, with 51.5% of the former and 52.5% of the latter saying no. Among African Americans, 83% oppose the practice.
It's not a partisan issue, it looks like there's widescale disapproval of this as a tactic across different political lines,.
I sincerely hope that a national review of this tactic produces a change, and soon. SWAT=Military tactics, and the military has no place in civil law enforcement, it's designed for combating enemies, not keeping law.
EDIT: vBulletin keeps messing up URLs for me, inserting HTML break elements in them. I've replaced the link above w/ a tinyurl link to get around this.
-
You know looking at the source of your information there "StoptheDrugWar.org" I have a real problem with the veracity of the "polling" that they are claiming. What is the definition of "routine" and how were the questions posed? By carefully wording a poll you could very likely have folks voting in favor of hitler or some of his policies. I am very very leery of a biased poll and frankly don't have much confidence in them unless I can see the demographics, the questions used and the analysis of the results.
Frankly your premise that SWAT = the Military is flawed.
-
To be clear, are you stating that you favor no-knock SWAT style raids? You feel they are an effective and properly used tool in crime fighting?
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Frankly your premise that SWAT = the Military is flawed.
that is correct, SWAT is no way as good as the military.
Military=professional soldiers.
SWAT=cops playing army.
-
Well, I guess english grammar is kinda complicated, so I'll clarify what I wrote below.
When I said "SWAT=Military tactics, and the military has no place in civil law enforcement, it's designed for combating enemies, not keeping law", some of the readers in this thread saw "SWAT=Military" and stopped parsing the sentence at that point. Traditionally, you would continue reading the sentence, at least long enough to see that there's another word attached, in this case it's 'tactics'. So, what I was saying was that SWAT teams use "Military tactics", not that they are actually "the military".
I apologize if the advanced language skills required to read and comprehend the sentence created discomfort. Me try talk simpler for better make clear idea.
-
"""""'
Anytime someone steps over the red line on the flight line of an AFB you can expect that to happen. Accidentally or not. There are specific entry points on any AFB flight line and you better be smart enough to use them if you don't want to end up flat on the ground on your face, cuffed with a loaded M-16 pressed tight to your body.
That Air Force Security Policeman did exactly as he had been instructed to do, there was no lack of judgement in his case."""""""
USAF security police dont carry 16s with one loaded in the chamber. Unless you actually saw him jack a round in then odds are there wasnt one chambered. Even still he broke procedure by pointing the weapon at a cuffed suspect prone on the ground. Even worse by touching him with the muzzle he gave away a tactical advantage. SPs are trained to keep a distance from an offender or suspect.
We were once convoying weapons, of a type I cant and wont name, and a truckload of maintenance guys thought they'd mess with the young SP stopping the traffic at the intersection as the convoy was approaching. So they started inching towards me in their truck despite my yelling at them to halt and creeping into the intersection.
Well everyone of them ended up face down on the concrete flex-cuffed with numerous automatic weapons aimed at them, with, rounds actually jacked. The SGT behind the caper found himself a few stripes less too.
Missiles, special weapons, back them Bombers loaded hot, and all kinds of high end weaponry. USAF SPs cant afford to play around.
-
so did your convoy of nukes get through?
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
When I said "SWAT=Military tactics, and the military has no place in civil law enforcement, it's designed for combating enemies, not keeping law".
Well you said it, so I'll ask.
What is your military background, and what SWAT-type LE units have you been a member of and/or trained with.
No need to talk simple with your answer.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Chairboy,
Read what I posted, then if you want to have a discussion with me about it, comment on what I actually posted. Don't read between the lines, don't think I am using the same assumptions you are. Look at the actual words and comment or ask questions about what I said, not what I did not say.
Your assumption that SWAT = military tactics is still flawed. They are quite different. Having been on both sides of that particular fence I have a better understanding that there are significant differances and that the use of similar looking clothing and or equipment does not negate those differences.
Now unless you can discuss things in an adult manner without the personal attacks or innuendo's the discussion, such as it is, is over.
-
Originally posted by john9001
that is correct, SWAT is no way as good as the military.
Military=professional soldiers.
SWAT=cops playing army.
It depends on the department. There are some SWAT-type LE units that are very, very good. The problem is that there are nowhere near enough potential top-tier 'Special' LE Officers (the kind you would ideally man a special unit with) to put a special unit in ever city and county in the USA. When almost every city and county wants a special unit, you are going to come up short in terms of manning and cadre somewhere.
As for 'cops playing army'...not really. LE special unit guys have some radically different ROE which makes their job very, very hard.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Chairboy...
My guess is that Chariboy's personal experience and actual knolwedge of the subject(s) both equal 0 (ZERO).
But he can sure sound like he's trying to be witty. That's gotta be worth something.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by lazs2
not one person has ever been proven to have been executed unfairly and yet we have thousands, maybe millions of people who protest the death penalty on the off chance that even one person may be executed unfairly yet no one seems to care that the police are gunning down citizens in their homes after breaking into them in the middle of the night.
lazs
I agreed with you on most things till this. I care about police gunning down innocent civilians but I do not believe in the Death Penalty.
Here, this guy got accused of arson and put to death. most of the evidence used against has been proven to be wrongly interpreted by many arson experts.
an innocent man put to death.
-
Originally posted by john9001
so did your convoy of nukes get through?
Whats that?
And yeah, the convoys always get thru.
[QOUTE]Originally posted by lazs2
not one person has ever been proven to have been executed unfairly and yet we have thousands, maybe millions of people who protest the death penalty on the off chance that even one person may be executed unfairly yet no one seems to care that the police are gunning down citizens in their homes after breaking into them in the middle of the night. [/B][QOUTE]
Yeah Laz were just gunning em down by the dozens every night.:lol I try and get at least 5 a night.
A P.O I know very, very, very, very, well is currently home injured from smoke inhalation trying to crawl into a fire to get an old lady in a wheelchair out of it. 2nd time this P.O. has almost been fried in a fire. The first time he couldnt get thru the flames were so fierce and we had to stand outside while a 6yo burned to death.
This time we got the old lady out and that P.O. has a little more free time to play AH for awhiles.
None of that is news tho is it? Nor was the thousands of acts of selfless bravery LEOs in the country did today, or will do tomorrow. Not like a tragic mistake that ended with a innocent citizen dieing. Imagine how those coppers feel right now?
I never forgot that little girl. And they are never going to forget this lady. Killing someone is bad enough but doing it by accident is like a nightmare. Ive known a few whov had to live with it and they are never the same.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Chairboy,
Read what I posted, then if you want to have a discussion with me about it, comment on what I actually posted. Don't read between the lines, don't think I am using the same assumptions you are. Look at the actual words and comment or ask questions about what I said, not what I did not say.
Your assumption that SWAT = military tactics is still flawed. They are quite different. Having been on both sides of that particular fence I have a better understanding that there are significant differances and that the use of similar looking clothing and or equipment does not negate those differences.
Now unless you can discuss things in an adult manner without the personal attacks or innuendo's the discussion, such as it is, is over.
Here's a note on logical fallacies describing your tactic:
Argument from authority Stating that a claim is true because a person or group of perceived authority says it is true. Often this argument is implied by emphasizing the many years of experience, or the formal degrees held by the individual making a specific claim. It is reasonable to give more credence to the claims of those with the proper background, education, and credentials, or to be suspicious of the claims of someone making authoritative statements in an area for which they cannot demonstrate expertise. But the truth of a claim should ultimately rest on logic and evidence, not the authority of the person promoting it.
Since I'm expressing an opinion that SWAT tactics go against the stated purpose of law enforcement and serve to widen the gap between civilians and the fellow civilians (police) best equipped to protect them, your appeal to authority seems misplaced.
I don't have to be a cow to have an opinion on hamburgers, I don't have to be a professional football player to have an opinion on football, and I don't have to be a SWAT member or soldier to have an opinion on the gradual disintegration of any semblance of constitutional integrity in our country.
So, can you answer my question I asked above? Or is there a problem?
Additionally, do you approve of the actions and deployment of the SWAT team in this particular instance? A straight answer would be super great, thanks.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
and I don't have to be a SWAT member or soldier to have an opinion
Very true. Your opinion also doesn't have to be considered worthy of discussion by anyone. That is the case here.
"Argument from authority: Stating that a claim is true because a person or group of perceived authority says it is true. Often this argument is implied by emphasizing the many years of experience, or the formal degrees held by the individual making a specific claim. It is reasonable to give more credence to the claims of those with the proper background, education, and credentials, or to be suspicious of the claims of someone making authoritative statements in an area for which they cannot demonstrate expertise. But the truth of a claim should ultimately rest on logic and evidence, not the authority of the person promoting it."
When you're not busy making pizzas, why don't you use logic and evidence to show us all how "SWAT = military tactics" and is used to "combat enemies, not uphold the law".
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Here's a note on logical fallacies describing your tactic:
Since I'm expressing an opinion that SWAT tactics go against the stated purpose of law enforcement and serve to widen the gap between civilians and the fellow civilians (police) best equipped to protect them, your appeal to authority seems misplaced.
I don't have to be a cow to have an opinion on hamburgers, I don't have to be a professional football player to have an opinion on football, and I don't have to be a SWAT member or soldier to have an opinion on the gradual disintegration of any semblance of constitutional integrity in our country.
So, can you answer my question I asked above? Or is there a problem?
Additionally, do you approve of the actions and deployment of the SWAT team in this particular instance? A straight answer would be super great, thanks.
I will grant you this, you did state an opinion. It is so far totally unsubstantiated as to why you have that opinion, but it is still an opinion. Your opinion is not an argument.
Now to the point of the original post, I'll quote my own post for you.
Originally posted by Maverick
You know looking at the source of your information there "StoptheDrugWar.org" I have a real problem with the veracity of the "polling" that they are claiming. What is the definition of "routine" and how were the questions posed? By carefully wording a poll you could very likely have folks voting in favor of hitler or some of his policies. I am very very leery of a biased poll and frankly don't have much confidence in them unless I can see the demographics, the questions used and the analysis of the results.
Frankly your premise that SWAT = the Military is flawed.
You neglected to answer the question I posed, yet you demand I answer a question I was not mentioning. You first.
-
Originally posted by wulfie-away
When you're not busy making pizzas
What does that mean?
-
Maverick, I don't know what the polling question was, so I can't tell if it was leading or not. You're welcome to pursue specifics if it upsets you.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I sincerely hope that a national review of this tactic produces a change, and soon. SWAT=Military tactics, and the military has no place in civil law enforcement, it's designed for combating enemies, not keeping law.
it's a symptom of a larger problem, bandaids won't "fix" it. The WoD must end and civil liberties need to be respected more before the unessecary deaths will end. Be it overzealous use of SWAT teams in a situation where its presence is overkill or the use of a taser to force compliance rather than to prevent harm, there seems to be a growing problem, and it's enabled by bad policy that erodes constitutional protections bit by bit. That's what's gotta be stopped.
-
Well now, you finally have gotten to the subject I was talking about, the poll. Depending on how the question was worded the results can be skewed from the actual truth of the situation.
The key point I saw in the quote you had was this.
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly two-thirds -- 65.8% -- said police should not routinely use such tactics. With minor variations, that sentiment held across geographic, demographic, religious, ideological, and partisan lines."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note the word I bolded. The word "routine" has a coloring effect in the quote. How they defined or used the word "routine" can have a dramatic effect in the answers to the questions.
If the question was worded in this manner for example:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you think that swat should be used routinely in Police activities?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would tend to get a different response than possibly this question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you think that Police should use SWAT in high risk situations such as serving search warrants on known violent felons or drug houses where weapons and threats have been common?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using "loaded" questions makes a poll invalid as a source for determining what people think about the real life situation. Reporting situations in a similar manner tends to skew public responses as well.
-
So, you think SWAT teams are being used only in those situations? You've criticized idealism in another current thread, btw, keep that in mind.
You never _did_ answer my question, why?
-
Why did I ignore your question? Simple, I wasn't discussing that situation, you attempted to imply that I had. It's your particular bug a boo, not mine. I objected to the implication in that "article" you linked that SWAT is a regular procedure in everyday LEO functions, it isn't.
I will answer it however. I do approve of the use of SWAT and their tactics in certain circumstances. They are not a universal tool any more than a hammer is. When the situation calls for it they are a very good solution as they have multiple tools to use in defusing it.
That brings up the other situation. The SWAT=military tactic that you postulated.
The military has a very poor record regarding doing any LEO style function. Why? Because they are not trained for it. Let me be even more specific, the Army. Even the MP's are not really trained for LEO functions, they are trained for more combat oriented functions. They might give out tickets on post but the real LEO work is done by special investigators. Those are Warrant Officers and they are in plain clothes quite a bit of the time. They are called Criminal Investigators and are in the CID.
The military is in the business of breaking things and killing people.
Swat has a far different mission than the military.
Swat and other LEO's are constrained in that their mission is to maintain LIVE prisoners for prosecution, IF possible. The military does not have to do that. If the enemy surrenders, fine, if they don't, fine as graves registration will deal with it and the military moves on.
Now you are welcome to maintain your opinion. It does not define or necessarily relate to reality, but you can keep it if you want.
-
I wonder if her gun was legally owned and registered...
:noid
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
You've criticized idealism in another current thread, btw, keep that in mind.
I did? Please quote my statement specifying "idealism".
-
Here ya go:
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=2654398#post2654398
I guess we'll see if ya post-lawyer this (because you don't use the word idealism, even though you clearly describe the concept).
-
So there is idealism in there because I don't know what the solution is?!?!?!
You really need to stop trying to read something into what I post.
Idealism is the belief that society and the Govt. won't be dealing with the repercussions of drug use. I don't suffer from that.
-
I hate to change the subject but......
Regarding the original post on this thread, it seems that it's really an issue of accountability. Irrespective on my opinions vis-s-vis police departments and the people who staff them, I find it interesting that members of professions that tend to lionize their disciplines seem to get real salamanderly when its suggested that they be held responsible for their job performance.
Despite all the money, all the new tools and data being generated constantly, all of the "talent" working these professions, the answer to "why did it get %$#&'d up?" is a finger pointed at someone else.
What I mean is this. An old lady's home was invaded with overwhelming deadly force by a team of supposed professionals, highly trained to deal with all manner of potential threats. The authority was granted at the request of another supposedly highly trained (presumably college educated) professional. By a presumably even more highly trained and educated professional. These are not volunteers, they get paid well and enjoy for the most part an enviable degree of security and support from their employers.
As justification they relied on hearsay testimony by an un-vetted non-professional.
Speeding tickets require a higher standard of evidence.
So, since this is not an isolated occurrence, and we're not even talking about the deeper issue of how regularly lesser infractions occur, the dialog turns to whether or not it's EVER or NEVER o.k. to execute no-knocks.
Seems to me it's about accountability. As in "you screwed up, you need to pay the price", not "let's find someone to blame". If an individual chooses to assume a sacred responsibility then that same individual must be judged to that standard. I don't like the idea of guys that have the arsenals our "peace officers" posses using the "everybody makes mistakes" defense when someone's life and property are on the line. It doesn't work for a kid at the 7-11, it shouldn't work for a circuit judge. Or anybody in between.
Old lady or not, a pre-dawn un-anounced entry, supported by body armor, nice guns, God knows what else and three officers go down along with the death of the "suspect"? I say fire em all and charge them with a murder conspiracy. That's what would happen if a few of us decided we had good reason to grab some guns, kick down some innocent citizen's door and someone got killed.
I say fire and prosecute the field officers, let the courts sort it out.(without the union's or city's legal team getting involved.) At the very least they should be discharged for poor performance if not for manslaughter.
D/A and Judge, same. Furthermore they should be stripped of any professional credentials they hold in that state. They shouldn't be anywhere near the legal community.
I'm not sure if I have ever heard any member of the LE community express the degree of outrage heard from all other quarters without. All you see are excuses and rationalizations. No defense of individual responsibility. and certainly no substantive opinions about the remedy.
If one aspires to bear the authority to sit in judgment of their fellow citizens, then one must assume both a consummate degree of responsibility, and an ordinate degree of accountability.
As far as the relevance of SW.A.T. or any other specialized unit within the P.D.'s I think we were better off without them. I say get them all in uniform and on the street. That way we'll have a better idea of when their not doing their jobs. Or if we need them we can find them, they won't be off somewhere suiting up to ice granny.
-
I have news for you. Those officers have the same rights as anyone else which means the same standards of evidence would apply to their prosecution.
Fire them for what? A mistake? Prosecute them for what? A mistake? Or because you say so?
We have people here giving their expertise over things they know nothing about. "Seems odd a judge would sign a warrant over information given by an informer"?? They do it all the time. "We" do it all the time. I bet Ive been in on a hundred raids on warrants from informants. Drug dealers dont put neon sings out announcing their stash houses yaknow. I'll bet 95% of drugs raids start off from informants.
So now the informer says he never told the police anything?:lol Why would the police go thru that door for no reason? The old lady was probably dealing drugs too who knows? Maybe she was just an innocent too and was being victimized by drug dealers who just happened to not be home at the time.
I know for us to get a warrant we have to actually bring the informant in front of the judge where he swears the info hes giving is the truth under penalty of purgery if hes lieing. I couldnt believe its any different in Georgia. And its up to the Judge to actually believe him and issue the warrant.
" Fire and prosecute the officers"? On the basis of a newspaper story? Your our of your mind.
-
See what I mean?
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
The old lady was probably dealing drugs too who knows?
Yup, they just miss timed the raid, thats why they had to plant a little pot.
I mean we all know it was a righteous raid and shooting, she was a dope dealer, the CI said so, he was telling the truth then, he is untruthful now.
Rich when you try and defend these guys you are making Thusters point.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Fire them for what? A mistake? Prosecute them for what? A mistake?
opps sorry about the old lady, but it was only a mistake.
yes, people do get fired for mistakes and some even go to jail.
-
Originally posted by Shamus
Yup, they just miss timed the raid, thats why they had to plant a little pot.
I mean we all know it was a righteous raid and shooting, she was a dope dealer, the CI said so, he was telling the truth then, he is untruthful now.
Rich when you try and defend these guys you are making Thusters point.
shamus
FTW! I don't trust many police officers anymore simply because I know a few who have admitted to following the good ole boy system as I like to call it. Get good with someone and they'll watch out for your screwups and get you ahead even if someone else is better qualified. It screwed the current Administration (anouther story) and it's screwing over our "fair" justice system.
-
Originally posted by Shamus
Yup, they just miss timed the raid, thats why they had to plant a little pot.
I mean we all know it was a righteous raid and shooting, she was a dope dealer, the CI said so, he was telling the truth then, he is untruthful now.
Rich when you try and defend these guys you are making Thusters point.
shamus
Im not defending anyone. Im saying these officers shouldnt be fired and prosecuted on the basis of a newspaper story. Thruster doesn't have a point. He doesn't have enough information to make a point.
Let the investigation conclude and then go from there. And while your at it try listening to an officer with 30 years police experience a little instead of telling him whats what with your childish pontification and Internet moralizing.
Boy, the people you meet in the internet with their cop hangups and cop obsessions. And its the big reason I generally avoid these threads.
A newspaper article? If a death wasnt involved I'd break out laughing.
-
It's been a year, Rich46yo, dunno if you caught that.
-
Another one for the Pro-SWAT'ers to chew on:
MINNEAPOLIS -- Two officers who raided the wrong house during an investigation were shot at and returned fire, but no one was injured, a police spokesman said.
Family members said the shooter, the father of six, was frightened by the intruders early Sunday and fired through a closed bedroom door after first firing a warning shot.
The SWAT team's erroneous search was part of an ongoing investigation, the police department said in a news release. Police said they had received bad information before executing the search warrant.
"It was some bad information that was received on the front end and it's unfortunate because we have officers that were hit by gunfire and this truly, truly could have been a much worse situation," said Sgt. Jesse Garcia.
Family members living in the house said they were upstairs when they heard someone bust through their back door. They said Vang Khang grabbed his hunting gun to protect himself, his wife and his six children.
"He thought they were gang members and he was scared," said Vang's brother, Dao Khang. Dao Khang said Vang fired a warning shot, and then two more shots through his closed bedroom door.
The bullets hit two officers, but they weren't injured. Police said bulletproof vests and helmets saved the officers from harm.
Several officers returned fire but no one in the house was injured, the department said. The man suspected of firing the shots was taken into custody, police said. He was later released, and a decision on whether to charge him was pending.
"All these gunshots in the house," Dao Khang said. "They don't know what's going on. Flying bullets in the house and they just cried."
The officers, who weren't identified, were placed on administrative leave while the incident is investigated, which is standard procedure. The officers said they identified themselves as police.
Garcia said a language barrier may have created the misunderstanding. Vang is Hmong and does not speak English, according to Sang Vang, executive director of the Hmong American Mutual Assistance Association, a social services agency.
Vang's family said he and his children, who range in age from 3 to 15, are still shaken.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/12/minn-man-shoots.html
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/0-1&fp=4767951a317d74e5&ei=TB5nR5iQEIiKrQP29-g6&url=http%3A//ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j8GjxkwPTSMKmh7BzC7_Ec3R84mgD8TJD5PO0&cid=1125075918
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/0-2&fp=4767951a317d74e5&ei=TB5nR5iQEIiKrQP29-g6&url=http%3A//www.startribune.com/local/12552126.html&cid=1125075918
-
and a decision on whether to charge him was pending.
thats the part that bothers me.
shamus
-
"Sheriff: SWAT Team Necessary Because Man Is a "Self-Proclaimed Constitutionalist""
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124269.html
Go SWAT Power!
But seriously, SWAT teams are divisive and hurt our nation. They do more harm than good nowadays, the way they're being used.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
"Sheriff: SWAT Team Necessary Because Man Is a "Self-Proclaimed Constitutionalist""
[
damm constitutionalists, always crying about their rights. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
"Sheriff: SWAT Team Necessary Because Man Is a "Self-Proclaimed Constitutionalist""
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124269.html
Go SWAT Power!
But seriously, SWAT teams are divisive and hurt our nation. They do more harm than good nowadays, the way they're being used.
They had some O'club worthy responses' below the posting in that article.
-
That Minnesota one a few weeks back really bothered me too because of that "decision on wether to charge him or not is pending" part in the story.
I live way out in the country. Just me, one neighbor and a bunch of corn fields and woods. If you're planning on kicking in the door at 3am, you better have my front yard lit up like times square with flashing blue lights (the police here don't use red lights)... if the door gets kicked in, and I don't have a front yard full of flashing lights, whoever just came through the door is in trouble.
There is a wall between my room and the front door, a wall with 2x4's sstuds and 2 layers of sheet rock, not really enough to slow down my bullets... and you better believe they'll be flying through that wall. And heaven forbid you come through the back door... with the twists and turns at that side of the house, I'll have plenty of time even in a sleeping stupor to get to the case with the hunting rifles. Never seen the bullet proof vests that stop 30-06 rounds.
You want to arrest me, come get me at work, roll up to church on Sunday, or come by the house on a Saturday afternoon. Hell, just call me up on the phone and I'll turn myself in and save you the gas... but you better not kick in the door at 3am or me, the police, the EMS, adn teh coroner are in for a Looooong night.
-
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle_blog/2008/jan/10/alert_a_swat_team_shot_a_mother_
One would think after Atlanta police killed 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston, that they would get the idea, but they haven't. Last Friday, 1/4/08, a SWAT team, serving an ordinary drug search warrant, invaded the Ohio home of Tarika Wilson -- an innocent woman -- shot and killed her, and shot her one-year-old son. "They went in that home shooting," her mother said at a vigil that night. The boy lost at least one of his fingers. Two dogs were shot too.
SWAT teams were created to deal with extreme situations, not routine ones. Yet police now conduct tens of thousands of SWAT raids every year, mostly in low-level drug enforcement. The result is that people like Wilson and Johnston continue to die in terror, with many thousands more having to go on living with trauma. But it's all for a drug war that has failed and can't be made to work.
So, there are still folks here who think using SWAT teams like this is perfectly acceptable. What the heck are you guys thinking?
SWAT teams are unamerican.
-
Well a war requires military tactics, not policing.
shamus