biggest firearm lawforcement would ever use?

The police just can't wait to kick in doors like the marines they see in Afghanistan on Faux News. Some junky tells the cops something he thinks they will like and next thing you know a school teacher is dead and her children have to be raised in foster care.

@#$% these cops.. No knock warrant means I get to shoot first and ask questions later. If I die in the process and I'm certain I will, at least I died in defense of my own liberty. To die for my liberty would not be a wasted life.

Click to expand...

If the police arrested the wrong people, or raided the wrong house, then yes, they deserve to be ridiculed, sued, or have other disciplinary action taken against them, such as an unpaid suspension.

Aside from that, I agree with raids under certain circumstances. There are many instances in which the suspect is simply too armed and/or dangerous for the police to conduct a casual arrest in public.

Click to expand...

What is your opinion on the armed forces killing someone who turned out to be a good guy, or an innocent citizen?

Click to expand...

Nevada carrier wrote:

The police just can't wait to kick in doors like the marines they see in Afghanistan on Faux News. Some junky tells the cops something he thinks they will like and next thing you know a school teacher is dead and her children have to be raised in foster care.

@#$% these cops.. No knock warrant means I get to shoot first and ask questions later. If I die in the process and I'm certain I will, at least I died in defense of my own liberty. To die for my liberty would not be a wasted life.

Click to expand...

Yes, the cops who broke in on the wrong homes were very careless, but there's no need to make a blanket remark on all law enforcement officers who actually do their job right.
What is your opinion on the armed forces killing someone who turned out to be a good guy, or an innocent citizen?

Click to expand...

Aaron1124 wrote:

If the police arrested the wrong people, or raided the wrong house, then yes, they deserve to be ridiculed, sued, or have other disciplinary action taken against them, such as an unpaid suspension.

Aside from that, I agree with raids under certain circumstances. There are many instances in which the suspect is simply too armed and/or dangerous for the police to conduct a casual arrest in public.

Click to expand...

Your logic is flawed.

If a criminal is considered armed and dangerous when out in public where he might have a knife or a handgun tucked into his waistband, then he will be more likely to be even better armed in his own home, where he can store long guns, and have extra ammo at hand. He can also hide behind doors, walls and furniture, and return fire from fortified or defensive positions with much greater ease.

The increasing use of SWAT-style raids to apprehend non-violent criminals is a massive tactical, ethical, legal, and public-relations FAIL...

LAPD does it so often that they have a "Wrong Door Unit", which is a carpenter who is on the city's payroll to repair doors they kick in when they raid the wrong house...

http://reason.com/blog/2008/03/16/lapd-has-a-wrong-door-team-to

Click to expand...

Oh really??? Please tell me where I can legally buy an AA-12, cuz I sure would love an automatic shotgun...

I would also like a full auto FN 2000 and a P90 (I know that tons of LEOs use P90s)... oh wait, I can't get one legally? you just said I could...

Don't tell me you are talking about spending $20,000+ on a 25 year old AR-15, are you? if so, don't make me laugh... That is not "allowing citizens to be as well armed as the government"

Click to expand...

The US Coast Guard (which is NOT under the DOD in peacetime--they are under the DOT) uses .50 BMG weapons for drug interdictions.

The New York City Police Department and the Pittsburgh PA Police have both adopted the Barrett .50 sniper rifles as well for use from helicopters, and in hostage situations.

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Barrett.Rifle.NYPD.2.229649.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09287/1005309-455.stm

It's interesting that .50 cal rifles were made illegal for citizens to own in NY by the General Assembly in 2005...

And Pittsburgh Police are becoming one of the most high-tech LEA's in the country. Not only do they have Barretts, but they have UAVs for surveillance...

The .50 BMG is illegal for private citizen ownership in CA, MA, NY, HI and IL. . However, in all those states, LEA get a pass on the ban, and Barretts are becoming increasingly popular for law enforcement, under the justification of  using them in "hostage situations" and disabling the ever-present threat of some nutcase stealing a bulldozer or Abrams tank and running amok...  :banghead:

I don't know if LEA's own or use anything bigger than a .50 BMG. Somehow, I doubt they could easily justify anything bigger. Even in some of the "sheeple states" it would be hard for LEA's to justify actual artillery, but I'm sure that the police in NY and CA would LOVE to get their hands on some Stingers, LAWs, or AGM-114 Hellfires to hang on their helicopters...

Click to expand...

Don't for a minute think they dont have at least some contingency where they could justify nuking US citizens. If it happens, it probably only hurts for a second so I'm not all that worried about it so long as the initial blast killed me and not the fall-out.

Click to expand...

Erdman Bascomb

February 17, 1988—WA

In February 1988, police in Seattle, Washington conduct a late-night drug raid on the home of 41-year old Erdman Bascomb after an informant tells them there's cocaine inside.
Police knock on Bascomb's door, wait just a few seconds, then force the door open with a battering ram. Officer Bob Lisoski confronts Bascomb in the darkened apartment, mistakenly believes Bascomb to be holding a gun, and shoots him dead. Bascomb was holding only the remote control for his television.
Police found no drugs or weapons in Bascomb's home. In 1995, a federal jury found no wrongdoing on the part of Seattle police, and awarded Bascomb's family no damages.
Police Chief Patrick Fitzsimons, who had retired by the time the case made it to trial, told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that "Police work requires a lot of high-risk situations and split-second decisions. Our officers are well-trained and exercise their best judgment. On a rare occasion, something tragic happens. But there is an awful lot of tragedy in the crack cocaine world."
Sources:
Paul Shukovsky, "Jury Rules in Favor of Police; Man's Shooting Called a 'Tragedy,'" Seattle Post-Intelligencer, November 16, 1995, p. B3.
Peter Lewis, "Police officer and city sued in fatal shooting," Seattle Times, January 11, 1991, p. C5.

Click to expand...

Robin Pratt

March 24, 1992—WA

In March 1992, police in Everett, Washington storm the home of Robin Pratt on a no-knock warrant. They are looking for her husband, who would later be released when the allegations in the warrant turned out to be false.
Though police had a key to the apartment, they instead choose to throw a 50-pound battering ram through the apartment's sliding-glass door. Glass shards land inches away from the couple's six-year-old daughter and five-year-old niece. One officer encounters Robin Pratt on the way to her bedroom. Hearing other SWAT team members yell "Get down!" Pratt falls to her knees. She then raises her head briefly to say, "Please don't hurt my children." At that point, Deputy Anthony Aston fires his weapon, putting a bullet in her neck, killing her.
Officers next entered the bedroom, where Dep. Aston then put the tip of his MP-5 assault submachine gun against Larry Pratt's head. When Pratt asked if he could move, another officer said that if he did, he'd have his head blown off.
Though a subsequent investigation by a civilian inquest jury found the shooting "unjustified," the officer who shot and killed Pratt was never charged.
Sources:
Jolayne Houtz, "Suit filed against city, county in SWAT death -- Officers also named in Everett shooting," Seattle Times, October 16, 1992.
Rick Anderson, "License to Kill," Seattle Weekly, November 3, 1999.

Click to expand...

Our police force has become a para-military organization
and we citizens under a police state. I know not all
LEOs are rogue. Some go into LE with good intentions,
but become brainwashed with a "us against them(public)"
mentality and callused to the abuse of rights many LE
agencies perpetrate upon citizens.An ordered society
needs a police force, but they must understand that
they are public servants not masters over the public.
 Many LEOs are on this type of forums espousing their
conservative views and love for the Constitution , but
everyday enforce laws that, they know in their heart,
are unconstitutional. That is the exact reason I decided
against becoming a state trooper many years ago.
We need a police force more like Bobbies than Stassi

Click to expand...

I don't know if he stuck to what he said back when CA banned private ownership of .50BMG rifles, but I recall that Barrett said he wouldn't service any LE Barret weapons.  Does anyone know if he stuck to that?

Click to expand...