Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Critics of police no-knock

  1. #1
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217

    Critics of police no-knock

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ock14_ST_N.htm

    OK, who believes this guy who says "I thought he had a sword", though the guy held it like a one-handed grip on a GOLF CLUB, and who thinks this was a 'righteous shoot'.

    To begin with, who enters a dwelling with the intent to shoot the first person they see, just to deliver a warrant on (probably) a victimless crime, such as drug possession?

    And what moron in charge of this Sgt says it's a good shoot? If a civilian shot a guy standing in his OWN living room with a golf club he'd be indicted for second degree MURDER.

    Sorry but this burns my butt to read about.

    In addition the cops have to know that 1 out of 10 times (or thereabouts) they have the WRONG ADDRESS!!!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    744
    I couldn't find the video at the link provided, but if this is the same incident I have seen before, at the end of the clip, you can hear one officer say, "Did someone get the warrant off my desk?"

    Seems like an overzealous point man IMO.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    I don't know about the 10% error rate mentioned by the OP*, but this is a subject related to home defense. What do you do when armed men crash your front door in the middle of the night, and you don't know whether it is SWAT?

    For anyone interested in finding out more about the extent, errors, and dangers associated with this subject, here are some references:

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476 Scroll down for the free on-line version. Something like 40 innocent people have been killed in no-knock raids.

    http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/22/cop-vs-dog No-knock raiders too often shoot the family dog at the mistakenly raided home.

    http://www.theagitator.com/ Today (2-14-11) see the blog entry Another Isolated Incident. Also, you can just search the blog. Tons of info here.

    *If anyone has a cite for the 10% error rate, please post it. I would be genuinely interested.
    Last edited by Citizen; 02-14-2011 at 08:58 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    When these police forces militarize, they feel the need to use these resources. If they have a large SWAT budget, they have to use it or lose it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I don't know about the 10% error rate mentioned by the OP*
    Sorry, I just pulled a number out of my posterior, lol. I did read that 40 innocent people have been killed by no-knock raids in another post on this site.

    I sometimes wonder if they even care if they have the right house. I mean if it's in a 'bad neighborhood' maybe they just figure they'll play the odds. (/snark).

    I do know that they won't pay for damages or replace the door if they get the wrong address. I recall reading about a citizens group taking up a collection to replace doors they bash down in error.

    To me, they should triple check this AND try to figure out a way to serve the warrant in a peaceful fashion. I bet they could catch the person(s) out and/or at work and do it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    I sometimes wonder if they even care if they have the right house. I mean if it's in a 'bad neighborhood' maybe they just figure they'll play the odds. (/snark).
    It's how the Atlanta PD does it. You could ask Kathryn Johnston about that... if they hadn't murdered her.

    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    I do know that they won't pay for damages or replace the door if they get the wrong address. I recall reading about a citizens group taking up a collection to replace doors they bash down in error.
    Get a good lawyer (or in many instances THREATEN to) and they'll pay for that and more. They raided the wrong house in one place and made it uninhabitable with CS gas. Their response was to leave a bucket of cleaning supplies on the porch. The family lawyered up, and as I recall the city quickly payed for temporary housing for the family (including small children) and a total cleanup and repair of the house.

    It certainly is typical for police who raid the wrong house to treat the victims like garbage. But when the lawyers get involved, you can certainly jerk a knot in their behinds in civil court. Juries tend not to like it when little kids get tear gassed.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    It's how the Atlanta PD does it. You could ask Kathryn Johnston about that... if they hadn't murdered her.


    Get a good lawyer (or in many instances THREATEN to) and they'll pay for that and more. They raided the wrong house in one place and made it uninhabitable with CS gas. Their response was to leave a bucket of cleaning supplies on the porch. The family lawyered up, and as I recall the city quickly payed for temporary housing for the family (including small children) and a total cleanup and repair of the house.

    It certainly is typical for police who raid the wrong house to treat the victims like garbage. But when the lawyers get involved, you can certainly jerk a knot in their behinds in civil court. Juries tend not to like it when little kids get tear gassed.
    Concur. They will pay for all damages--and more with a good attorney. Qualified immunity may prevent exemplary damages--assuming they obeyed the law and simply made a mistake, but the press and public pressure will get the city attorney to find some 'extra' money to make it go away. The SS mentality isn't well received in a jury civil trial.

    Of course, this was murder by some trigger happy pos in his NKVD "swat" clown costume. That's another story.
    Last edited by Gunslinger; 02-15-2011 at 02:46 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I don't know about the 10% error rate mentioned by the OP*, but this is a subject related to home defense. What do you do when armed men crash your front door in the middle of the night, and you don't know whether it is SWAT?

    For anyone interested in finding out more about the extent, errors, and dangers associated with this subject, here are some references:

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476 Scroll down for the free on-line version. Something like 40 innocent people have been killed in no-knock raids.

    http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/22/cop-vs-dog No-knock raiders too often shoot the family dog at the mistakenly raided home.

    http://www.theagitator.com/ Today (2-14-11) see the blog entry Another Isolated Incident. Also, you can just search the blog. Tons of info here.

    *If anyone has a cite for the 10% error rate, please post it. I would be genuinely interested.
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: LEO Bashing

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: LEO Bashing
    Evidently if you're not prepared to kiss every cop's ass--even the murderous ones, that's "bashing." I may have mentioned before, if it flies and it quacks, it's a duck. The "Administrator" apparently feels it must be an eagle.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Pointing out documented LEO when their behavior runs counter to the law IS LEO bashing to some. APD, SPD, HPD, PPD, NOPD, ect. are examples of the slippery slope LE has put themselves on.
    We should and do criticize specific, documented instances of criminal behavior by LEOs. The post that was removed made a general comment about LEOs. The comment prior to it was left intact. That the admins deleted one post and not the other demonstrates that there is a distinction made between legitimate criticism and wanton bashing.

  12. #12
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Evidently if you're not prepared to kiss every cop's ass--even the murderous ones, that's "bashing." I may have mentioned before, if it flies and it quacks, it's a duck. The "Administrator" apparently feels it must be an eagle.
    Comments directed against a particular officer in a particular situation are fine. But I think you will admit that your comments were more general in nature.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Administrator View Post
    Comments directed against a particular officer in a particular situation are fine. But I think you will admit that your comments were more general in nature.
    Negative. I always point my responses to the "instant case," which I did in this thread. My comments were referenced to the specific cops involved and antecedents, historically, applied. I have never generalized 'all' cops are thugs, born again SS, disturbed compensatory complexed, or anything else negative. Quite the contrary. That applies to this thread, as well. In fact, I have posted several "pro" police comments of late. I will concede the cop who killed an unarmed man in his home is not a murderer. He should be charged with voluntary manslaughter for acting with reckless abandon and gross disregard for life. That he is not charged doesn't mean he isn't guilty of it. That 'swat' wear badges, doesn't give them license to act like they are stormtroopers and above the law. Those who do, as in this case, should be severally and jointly taken to task. That is precisely what I did.
    Last edited by Gunslinger; 02-16-2011 at 09:53 AM.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I read the comment before it was deleted. It in no way referenced the current instance but did make a comment regarding officers in general. Your intent may have been to make a comment about a specific instance, but that is not what happened when the words hit the screen.

    Again, I would point out how the previous comment was left intact. The admins here have been quite consistent about allowing criticism of specific LEO actions but disallowing comments that broadly criticize officers.

    IMO, they nailed that distinction in the case of these two posts.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I read the comment before it was deleted. It in no way referenced the current instance but did make a comment regarding officers in general. Your intent may have been to make a comment about a specific instance, but that is not what happened when the words hit the screen.

    Again, I would point out how the previous comment was left intact. The admins here have been quite consistent about allowing criticism of specific LEO actions but disallowing comments that broadly criticize officers.

    IMO, they nailed that distinction in the case of these two posts.
    You may have read, but clearly did not comprehend the comments I posted. Contextually, I don't go off on tangents on any thread. My response, as stated and as clearly shown in my 2000 posts, is to the "instant" case. If I'm on a thread about the most gun friendly places to eat in Falcon, CO I don't throw in "and the cops are all thugs!" (which in the case of El Paso County clearly is far from correct. The Sheriff's department is top notch.) When I criticize 'swat' tyranny, it is precipitated on the thread's content and directed at 'those' individuals. This is clear to most who read my posts and completely consistent with my philosophy on this forum. There, unfortunately, is not need to editorialize in general terms against "all" cops when specific instances of abuse are so common. You need to take off your rose colored glasses for all cops who can do no wrong in your eyes. While I admit I would tend to err on the negative side in many instances of cop misconduct, I don't blanket them all as bad. You blanket them all as good. While I can pull up many comments favorable to LE, such as the one I noted, supra, I challenge you to pull up one critical. That's your problem in a nutshell. The Administrators walk a fine line. I respect, even if I don't always agree, with that. You have no line. If it's a question of us or them, you are them. On another thread, I spoke well of you. I still feel that way, but you have a blind spot that you need to work on. Admittedly, I am on the other side often, but in this case I am being objective as to your proclivity.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    You will find no comments of mine critical of police in general. However, if you look through my posts from yesterday, you will find narrowly focused comments critical of an officer who lied on a report and probably (we can't know, since there is no audio and some of the encounter occurred off-camera) unlawfully assaulted her.

    This is one among many of my comments regarding specific instances of illicit police use of "authority." Those comments are likely not noticeable because I write objectively about the incidents, sans the hyperbole that makes one feel superior but rarely adds to rational perspective.

    I don't use individual occurrences of police misconduct or criminality to castigate all officers, just as I hope no one makes assumptions about carry in general based on the singular event involving a congressman in Nevada. Folks do though. That is unfortunate.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    With all the bad actions by various 'Organizations' I think it's understandable, particularly the one where the pack of LEOs invaded this guy's house and opened his gunsafe and stole his rifle(s).

    They were clearly evidencing pack behavior, and I think it's pretty darn ubiquitous. Get three or more LEOs together and see what they discuss and how they refer to people they're charged with "protecting and serving".

    But, it does us no good, except to provide a venue for 'venting'. Maybe that's a good thing.

    I'd be in favor of leaving 'alleged' LEO bashing threads but label them as such. What's the point in deleting them?

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    With all the bad actions by various 'Organizations' I think it's understandable, particularly the one where the pack of LEOs invaded this guy's house and opened his gunsafe and stole his rifle(s).

    They were clearly evidencing pack behavior, and I think it's pretty darn ubiquitous. Get three or more LEOs together and see what they discuss and how they refer to people they're charged with "protecting and serving".

    But, it does us no good, except to provide a venue for 'venting'. Maybe that's a good thing.

    I'd be in favor of leaving 'alleged' LEO bashing threads but label them as such. What's the point in deleting them?
    Just to help illustrate the point, I highlighted in green that which, IMO, is criticism of specific actions and in red that which, IMO, is generalized bashing.

    Again, JMO. No personal insult is intended. Your post merely presented the contrast of which I wrote in a single post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •