-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Police to rethink SWAT and/or military style raids?
- Thread starter VW_Factor
- Start date
OC for ME
Regular Member
A meeting to discuss the obvious.
What about the other 105 deaths? Will a meeting be scheduled and held to address those?
Won't happen....the reduction in SWAT raids and a meeting to discuss the other 105 deaths in 2011.
I'll get the popcorn.
What about the other 105 deaths? Will a meeting be scheduled and held to address those?
Won't happen....the reduction in SWAT raids and a meeting to discuss the other 105 deaths in 2011.
I'll get the popcorn.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
The premise for SWAT raids in the evening hours, basically, no-knock raids, or the equal knock then rush in raid, are dangerous in the act themselves, than the argument that such raids are taking place because the threat in the raid is great. I think that it is dangerous that we permit SWAT to enter the homes of any citizen in the evening hours, basically, breaking in the door, and rushing in. It creates more danger, IMO, than it lessens.
One major issue is, and I don't know about anyone else here is that if my door is kicked it, it is dark, and all I can hear are voices screaming they are the police...how the hell am I supposed to know that? Do I take my chances, and hope they are police, and not thugs raiding my home to tie me, and my family up, rob us then murder us. This is particularly the case in situation where individuals are raided, they are not criminals, and reasonably believe that it could not be the police breaking in their front door...why would they reasonably believe otherwise?--the homeowner is not a criminal, and not breaking the law, they are sitting in their home, minding their own business.
One major issue is, and I don't know about anyone else here is that if my door is kicked it, it is dark, and all I can hear are voices screaming they are the police...how the hell am I supposed to know that? Do I take my chances, and hope they are police, and not thugs raiding my home to tie me, and my family up, rob us then murder us. This is particularly the case in situation where individuals are raided, they are not criminals, and reasonably believe that it could not be the police breaking in their front door...why would they reasonably believe otherwise?--the homeowner is not a criminal, and not breaking the law, they are sitting in their home, minding their own business.
Last edited:
()pen(arry
Regular Member
It's telling that they're only raising this question because of the cops who have died. They don't give two ***** about the innocent people they've killed.
A conclusion not supported by the evidence.
It is good that they are rethinking the procedure for whatever reason.
Dreamer
Regular Member
If DHS had their way, local police would completely abandon military and SWAT-style tactics and simply adopt the policies and tactics of the Khmer Rouge and the Stasi They were originally set up and directed by ex-Stasi and KGB officials, after all...
Last edited:
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Good grief! Can we please put away our tinfoil hats for a couple of minutes?
I do question why the LEO is making this a matter of LEO safety, and not mentioning that this is actually a matter of civilian safety as well.
Dreamer
Regular Member
OC for ME
Regular Member
To my knowledge there is no empirical evidence that refutes his assertion completely. It is obvious that rethinking the question is productive for both LE and the citizenry. What is not obvious is the motivation other than officer safety. If the safety of the citizenry were the top priority does it not follow that any tactics used to ensure a citizens safety would also ensure officer safety?
H
Herr Heckler Koch
Guest
Thanks for the citation to the seer of our doom.
Can we draw a parallel between the paramilitarization of our police and the federalization of our educators?
Last edited:
Deanimator
Regular Member
Actually, I think it's pretty well supported by the evidence.
In the majority of the "mistaken" SWAT raids of which I've heard, the police response was either callous or downright arrogant.
Recall the raid on the home of the mayor of Berwyn Heights, MD. AFTER that raid, the police were publicly COMMENDED.
I recall another raid, where after attacking the wrong home and making it virtually uninhabitable with CS gas, their response was to leave a bucket of cleaning supplies on the porch, as if somehow the victims had gassed THEMSELVES and it was THEIR responsibility to DECONTAMINATE their own home, using Pinesol. It was only after legal proceedings were initiated by the victims, that the city moved to repair and remediate the home themselves, and to move the victims temporarily to inhabitable quarters.
It seems SOP for cops who attack the wrong people to have a cavalier if not outright contemptuous attitude toward their victims.
Last edited:
The comment/reply to which I was responding is bolded above.
When we criticize others for using emotionalism, baseless conclusions, and attack any group based on a personal opinion, we are as guilty as the antis. Deal in facts gentleman - facts. Leave the suppositions and raucous verbiage to those that have nothing else to provide. I fail to understand why this methodology escapes some.
Do I like no-knock warrants? - absolutely not. Do I know of or have evidence that they are conducted by those that would kill innocent people w/o feeling anything? Absolutely not. Have no knock warrants been the subject of serious problems? - You bet.
Deanimator
Regular Member
Again, the evidence points to callousness at best, with some holding their victims in contempt.
OC for ME
Regular Member
I am not sure that what you like or dislike is the point here.
You stated "A conclusion not supported by the evidence." regarding ()pen(arry's post. Do you know that his conclusion is not supported by evidence? I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to provide facts, with cites, to support our statements. ()pen(arry not providing facts (cites) to support his conclusion does not invalidate his conclusion. Unless you have facts (cites) that refute his conclusion, then ()pen(arry's conclusion should not be classified as a baseless conclusion, derived from emotion just because he provides no facts to validate his conclusion. It is clearly his opinion and should be taken as such.
OC for ME
Regular Member
Edit: remove [ (cites) ] from the below post. Not required, sorry.
Originally Posted by Grapeshot
The comment/reply to which I was responding is bolded above.
When we criticize others for using emotionalism, baseless conclusions, and attack any group based on a personal opinion, we are as guilty as the antis. Deal in facts gentleman - facts. Leave the suppositions and raucous verbiage to those that have nothing else to provide. I fail to understand why this methodology escapes some.
Do I like no-knock warrants? - absolutely not. Do I know of or have evidence that they are conducted by those that would kill innocent people w/o feeling anything? Absolutely not. Have no knock warrants been the subject of serious problems? - You bet.
Yes his conclusion is not supported by evidence He didn't provide it here, where it counts. Didn't say "invalidates" - said "not supported". Nevertheless I will take another step - the remark is baseless, inflammatory and not acceptable. It violates the rules, intent, and limitations to which we all agree when posting here.
Not all opinions are simply accepted nor excused on the grounds that they are only opinions.
BTW - notice that I have changed hats? Prefer to moderate with a light hand unless it becomes necessary to do otherwise. It remains in my perview to do so. IMO this has now been been escalated beyond a not well thought out remark which is unfortunate as I never thought that was ()pen(arry's purpose.
DocWalker
Regular Member
Grapeshot are you going SOFT on us?
:lol: Ya think?
Dreamer
Regular Member
Don't even get me started...
[video=youtube;QySuPfK8f7Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QySuPfK8f7Q[/video]
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-18/...ter-s-death-michigan-state-police?_s=PM:CRIME
http://www.copblock.org/1610/parami...children-and-killing-grandpa-for-your-safety/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-belville/columbia-missouri-swat-ki_b_567172.html
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...ot-dog-20110819_1_family-dog-damages-officers
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Cops-Kill-Dog-During-Raid-on-Wrong-House-116789718.html
http://motleynews.net/2011/05/25/swat-team-shoots-kills-passive-dog-during-raid-2/
and on and on and on...
[video=youtube;QySuPfK8f7Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QySuPfK8f7Q[/video]
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-18/...ter-s-death-michigan-state-police?_s=PM:CRIME
http://www.copblock.org/1610/parami...children-and-killing-grandpa-for-your-safety/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-belville/columbia-missouri-swat-ki_b_567172.html
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...ot-dog-20110819_1_family-dog-damages-officers
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Cops-Kill-Dog-During-Raid-on-Wrong-House-116789718.html
http://motleynews.net/2011/05/25/swat-team-shoots-kills-passive-dog-during-raid-2/
and on and on and on...
Deanimator
Regular Member
That's one of the cases to which I referred.
The cops were high-fiving each other for days after that one.