One cop killed, others injured serving "no knock" warrant

[The Merg]

Your right, without the gun he would very likely not have been able to kill anyone. Unlawful possession of a fire arm however does not have a death penalty attached to it. If we don't use muder charges against the police when something goes wrong, the intel was bad and they end up breaching a home that they had no business being in and things go wrong, do we not have to extend that same principle to others as well? The whole innocent until proven guilty system does not make life easy for police or society in general, it is after all designed to protect the innocent, not to prosecute the guilty. I still think its better life for everyone to let some criminals get away with things then to put innocents in jail (and we still manage that at times, though thankfully not that often).

I think it can be hard sometimes to put that murder charge on an officer though for truely doing their job with the information they had and the situation in front of them.

For example, say an officer is involved in a search warrant, but not the one that obtained it. The warrant was obtained with some information that was not true or accurate unbeknownst to the obtaining officer, the judge that signed it, or the officers that are involved in the execution of the warrant. The officers execute the warrant and the homeowner starts to shoot at the officers and the officer shoots and kills the homeowner.

Should that officer be charged with murder? Some people would unequivocably say yes, but I don't think it's that easy. The officer was doing everything correctly according to the information that they had. A subject pulled a gun on them and he returns fire. Every officer that is involved in a search warrant cannot read the entire warrant and then independently verify the information that is in that warrant.

You ask if we should extend the principle to others as well about entering a home and something goes wrong. The one major difference, as I see it, is that there is no other situation where a person is going to be entering a home in this kind of fashion except for the police. What other lawful situation would someone be "breaking" into someone's home without the intent of actually hurting someone or committing a crime? In the case of the police, their intent is not to commit a crime and hurt anyone.

- Merg

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Well, according to the article, it was not a no-knock warrant. The original affidavit was for a no-knock, but it was changed to a knock and announce. So, the cops knock on the door and announce and the guy shoots them while they are outside. Most departments even set a time frame that they have to wait after performing the knock before they can force entry.

- Merg

Announce, break down door is the modern "no knock". This is what happens when you hear about "no knock".. They aren't literally no knocking, but they are NOT waiting for someone to answer the door.



The modern thug gangster home invasion process is to claim they're FBI or police while kicking down your door. By the time you know that they're common thugs your wife/daughter is tied up and getting raped.

It happens all the time. It's how home invasions are performed. The media and LE agencies don't want this to be common knowledge so it's not often reported or discussed. If you follow local news you'll read about it often.



If you are a law abiding citizen and someone is beating down your down screaming FBI or police it is unlikely to actually be law enforcement.


http://www.ajc.com/news/news/woman-kidnapped-from-dekalb-and-found-shot-in-nw-a/nhGWc/

"
Brown’s 14-year-old sister was holding his 8-month-old daughter when she saw armed men, dressed in black and claiming to be FBI agents, grab him and Brooks, handcuff them, put them in an an SUV and speed off.
Later a demand for $150,000 ransom was made by someone using Brown’s cell phone.
"

 

[The Merg]

Did the mob control alcohol distribution after the end of prohibition? The market is too big for illegal cartels to control. The profit margin becomes too small for them to justify the costs.

I would think the drug cartels would have some say in it. Whereas alcohol was something that could be produced here and was easily able to be taken out of the hands of the mob, the majority of drugs are produced outside the U.S. While certain drugs are manufactured here, cocaine and marijuana are mostly imported.

What other product is banned and enforced so much as drugs?

Probably none. Let me ask this... We legalize drugs... Does that mean prescriptions are not needed anymore? Since Cocaine is considered to be a Schedule II drug as it has medical purposes, do we not need a prescription anymore? What about those that want to use Oxy? What drugs are legalized and which ones are not? Any drug that is not legalized or requires a prescription is going to have a black market for it, correct?

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

Announce, break down door is the modern "no knock". This is what happens when you hear about "no knock".. They aren't literally no knocking, but they are NOT waiting for someone to answer the door.

The modern thug gangster home invasion process is to claim they're FBI or police while kicking down your door. By the time you know that they're common thugs your wife/daughter is tied up and getting raped.

It happens all the time. It's how home invasions are performed. The media and LE agencies don't want this to be common knowledge so it's not often reported or discussed. If you follow local news you'll read about it often.

If you are a law abiding citizen and someone is beating down your down screaming FBI or police it is unlikely to actually be law enforcement.


http://www.ajc.com/news/news/woman-kidnapped-from-dekalb-and-found-shot-in-nw-a/nhGWc/

"
Brown’s 14-year-old sister was holding his 8-month-old daughter when she saw armed men, dressed in black and claiming to be FBI agents, grab him and Brooks, handcuff them, put them in an an SUV and speed off.
Later a demand for $150,000 ransom was made by someone using Brown’s cell phone.
"

Actually, a no-knock warrant means they do not have to knock at all. They can just hit the door and as they enter the house, they announce police.

For certain warrants, they will knock and announce and then wait for a period of time like 1-2 minutes and if there is no answer, they will then force entry.

So according to your example, if someone forces their way into the house they are criminals breaking into your house, but if they are pounding on your door saying they are the police they are also criminals.

- Merg

 

[theeedude]

I think it can be hard sometimes to put that murder charge on an officer though for truely doing their job with the information they had and the situation in front of them.

For example, say an officer is involved in a search warrant, but not the one that obtained it. The warrant was obtained with some information that was not true or accurate unbeknownst to the obtaining officer, the judge that signed it, or the officers that are involved in the execution of the warrant. The officers execute the warrant and the homeowner starts to shoot at the officers and the officer shoots and kills the homeowner.

Should that officer be charged with murder? Some people would unequivocably say yes, but I don't think it's that easy. The officer was doing everything correctly according to the information that they had. A subject pulled a gun on them and he returns fire. Every officer that is involved in a search warrant cannot read the entire warrant and then independently verify the information that is in that warrant.

You ask if we should extend the principle to others as well about entering a home and something goes wrong. The one major difference, as I see it, is that there is no other situation where a person is going to be entering a home in this kind of fashion except for the police. What other lawful situation would someone be "breaking" into someone's home without the intent of actually hurting someone or committing a crime? In the case of the police, their intent is not to commit a crime and hurt anyone.

- Merg

They seem to have no problem putting a murder charge on the homeowner who had even less information than the cops did and acted on the situation he was facing at the moment, when armed people burst into his house at 5 in the morning. There were a million ways to handle it better. The cops made the decision to go in like they did, but he is now facing the death penalty. If the cop killed him, he would be facing a paid administrative vacation.

 

[Genx87]

I would think the drug cartels would have some say in it. Whereas alcohol was something that could be produced here and was easily able to be taken out of the hands of the mob, the majority of drugs are produced outside the U.S. While certain drugs are manufactured here, cocaine and marijuana are mostly imported.

Are you under some impression drug production wouldn't increase in this country to meet demand if drugs were legalized? The argument you make if it were in the 1920s would be the mob will still control alcohol production coming in from Canada. That proved silly then and would prove silly today. That is what happens when a black market is erroded by a legal regulated market.

Probably none. Let me ask this... We legalize drugs... Does that mean prescriptions are not needed anymore. Since Cocaine is considered to be a Schedule II drug as it has medical purposes, do we not need a prescription anymore? What about those that want to use Oxy? What drugs are legalized and which ones are not? Any drug that is not legalized or requires a prescription is going to have a black market for it, correct?

- Merg

That would all have to be worked out. However it would be legal. The ramifications of legality are immense. Less death, less drug related crime, less burden on law enforcement, increased tax revenue, safer drugs.

You will note prescription drug issues are much less violent than illegal drugs. Even if a substance like cocaine required a prescription. It would have far less violence associated with it.

Personally I wouldn't regulate it like that. It adds a needless layer in the consumption cycle.

 

[The Merg]

They seem to have no problem putting a murder charge on the homeowner who had even less information than the cops did and acted on the situation he was facing at the moment, when armed people burst into his house at 5 in the morning. There were a million ways to handle it better. The cops made the decision to go in like they did, but he is now facing the death penalty. If the cop killed him, he would be facing a paid administrative vacation.

That's why I said I was not sure how I felt about that. I was responding to the idea that others in the same situation as the police have that same principle extended to them.

However, in this case, I don't believe that a convicted felon with a firearm should have that principle extended. If he had the legal right to have that gun, I think it would be more apt to considering a different option than a murder charge.

- Merg

 

[theeedude]

I would think the drug cartels would have some say in it. Whereas alcohol was something that could be produced here and was easily able to be taken out of the hands of the mob, the majority of drugs are produced outside the U.S. While certain drugs are manufactured here, cocaine and marijuana are mostly imported.



Probably none. Let me ask this... We legalize drugs... Does that mean prescriptions are not needed anymore? Since Cocaine is considered to be a Schedule II drug as it has medical purposes, do we not need a prescription anymore? What about those that want to use Oxy? What drugs are legalized and which ones are not? Any drug that is not legalized or requires a prescription is going to have a black market for it, correct?

- Merg

You can legalize drugs and leave them prescription only. Police should not be executing no knock warrants for having drugs without prescription anyways. You don't see cops knocking down old dudes doors because they got some Viagras without a script.

 

[theeedude]

I would not be surprised if the prosecutor now asking for the death penalty is same guy who asked for the no-knock warrant that got this officer killed in the first place.

 

[The Merg]

Are you under some impression drug production wouldn't increase in this country to meet demand if drugs were legalized? The argument you make if it were in the 1920s would be the mob will still control alcohol production coming in from Canada. That proved silly then and would prove silly today. That is what happens when a black market is erroded by a legal regulated market.

I have no doubt that production would increase, but I think that demand would also increase to the extent that supply in the country would not meet demand. Also, it's not like cocaine is something that can really grow in the environment up here. Now, weed on the other hand...

That would all have to be worked out. However it would be legal. The ramifications of legality are immense. Less death, less drug related crime, less burden on law enforcement, increased tax revenue, safer drugs.

You will note prescription drug issues are much less violent than illegal drugs. Even if a substance like cocaine required a prescription. It would have far less violence associated with it.

Personally I wouldn't regulate it like that. It adds a needless layer in the consumption cycle.

How would you do the regulation? With regard to less death, I'm not so sure about that. I could see an issue with allowing a drug addict get as much of the drug that they want for what would be minimal cost now. I can definitely see the number of OD's increasing, which then puts more pressure on the health system.

I will agree there will most likely be less burden on law enformcement and a significant increase in tax revenue. As for safer drugs, I'm not so sure about that. If the Government starts to regulate the content of the drugs to be sure they are "safe", that will increase the cost of the drug. That will then create a black market for cheaper versions of the drugs that are not as "safe". If the Government stays out of regulating the drugs, we'll have what we have now then.

- Merg

 

[ViviTheMage]

We'll agree to disagree.

That being said, as of now, drugs are illegal and law enforcement is supposed to enforce the law. When drugs become legal, that will be one less thing that law enforcement has to deal with.

- Merg

I think this is a point a lot of people excuse or dismiss entirely. The police are enforcing a law that insert government entity voted and passed. The same people the people have elected.

The police aren't the ones who created the law, they're just out to enforce them based on whatever political figure decided to make it a priority of enforcement.

 

[The Merg]

You can legalize drugs and leave them prescription only. Police should not be executing no knock warrants for having drugs without prescription anyways. You don't see cops knocking down old dudes doors because they got some Viagras without a script.

Yes, the police would not be executing no-knock warrants in those cases, most likely. But, if it is prescription only, don't you think that people will steal the drugs in order to sell them at a price cheaper than what the prescription amount is? Also, how is it determined if you get a prescription or not? If you don't have a medical reason for needing the drug, doesn't that once again lead to people having the drugs illegally?

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

I think this is a point a lot of people excuse or dismiss entirely. The police are enforcing a law that insert government entity voted and passed. The same people the people have elected.

The police aren't the ones who created the law, they're just out to enforce them based on whatever political figure decided to make it a priority of enforcement.

:thumbsup:

- Merg

 

[Rebel_L]

I think it can be hard sometimes to put that murder charge on an officer though for truely doing their job with the information they had and the situation in front of them.

For example, say an officer is involved in a search warrant, but not the one that obtained it. The warrant was obtained with some information that was not true or accurate unbeknownst to the obtaining officer, the judge that signed it, or the officers that are involved in the execution of the warrant. The officers execute the warrant and the homeowner starts to shoot at the officers and the officer shoots and kills the homeowner.

Should that officer be charged with murder? Some people would unequivocably say yes, but I don't think it's that easy. The officer was doing everything correctly according to the information that they had. A subject pulled a gun on them and he returns fire. Every officer that is involved in a search warrant cannot read the entire warrant and then independently verify the information that is in that warrant.

You ask if we should extend the principle to others as well about entering a home and something goes wrong. The one major difference, as I see it, is that there is no other situation where a person is going to be entering a home in this kind of fashion except for the police. What other lawful situation would someone be "breaking" into someone's home without the intent of actually hurting someone or committing a crime? In the case of the police, their intent is not to commit a crime and hurt anyone.

- Merg

The parallel that I was trying to make was when things go wrong in a situation you should not be in. With the suspect in this case, illegally having the gun would be along the lines of bad intel and a cop ending up in place where he should not be (I think he should certainly be charged for illegal possession of a firearm), using it to defend himself would be like the police officer in the wrong house shooting someone who is attacking him. He did something wrong, but the killing the officers could very well have been a normal instinctive action that was precipitated by a situation he had no control over. I only have a very cursory understanding of this case, you seem to have done more reading about it than I have so it may not apply in this specific case, the surface reporting makes it seem like an applicable example though.

It is always hard to extend the same courtesy's to criminals that we extend to others. His previous convictions should not make us think less of him when it comes to being protected by the legal system the same as every one else. If we are about equality and justice, it has to apply equally to everyone.

 

[BoberFett]

I think this is a point a lot of people excuse or dismiss entirely. The police are enforcing a law that insert government entity voted and passed. The same people the people have elected.

The police aren't the ones who created the law, they're just out to enforce them based on whatever political figure decided to make it a priority of enforcement.

I was just following orders. So I gassed a few Jews? I didn't pass that law.

 

[shira]

wait castle doctrine apply here?

cops word against his, article states cops announced who they were...doubtful but i wasn't there.

Without police cameras substantiating what the officers are saying, this case should be thrown out of court.

 

[theeedude]

Yes, the police would not be executing no-knock warrants in those cases, most likely. But, if it is prescription only, don't you think that people will steal the drugs in order to sell them at a price cheaper than what the prescription amount is? Also, how is it determined if you get a prescription or not? If you don't have a medical reason for needing the drug, doesn't that once again lead to people having the drugs illegally?

- Merg

Stolen stuff is cheaper than legal stuff. Let's just ban all stuff. Who cares if someone is taking a drug without a prescription? Mind your own business.

 

[Rebel_L]

What other product is banned and enforced so much as drugs?

There are many products that are banned, the list of other poisons that are not allowed to be sold for consumption is pretty large, thankfully the general population helps out with the enforcement side of those things as they tend to not have fun side effects before death.

Saying that enforcing laws causes problems and that we would be better off just legalizing things is an absolutely lame and mentally lazy excuse for trying to get something legalized. I mean people still get murdered all the time even though we have laws against it. Would we be much better off we legalized murder and taxed contract killers instead of wasting our time trying to stop them? Think of it, less people in jail, more money in taxes, life would be improved.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Oh, and while it might be easy to sit on a house in an undercover mode for hours at a time, how easy do you think it would be to have multiple officers in uniform sitting outside a house waiting on hours for someone to come out? Like that wouldn't be noticeable.

- Merg

Get off your soap box, a no knock warrant where drugs are known(cops get out of the doughnut shop and do surveillance) to be in existence and not a random address a stoolie makes up in return for fix money.

 

[CitizenKain]

And he deserved to die because of why? He was executing what was a lawful search warrant, whether you agree or disagree with the idea of a no-knock warrant it was signed and approved by a judge, and a convicted felon shot and killed him.

- Merg

Maybe he shouldn't have signed up to be Rambo then.

At least no innocent people were shot in this, which is surprising that the swat team didn't at least shoot any nearby animals or drop a flashbang on an infant. But I'm sure those people deserved it according to you.

 

[The Merg]

Get off your soap box, a no knock warrant where drugs are known(cops get out of the doughnut shop and do surveillance) to be in existence and not a random address a stoolie makes up in return for fix money.

Read the affidavit then. The cops performed extensive surveillance on the location to corroborate what the informant told them.

- Merg

 

[WHAMPOM]

I think this is a point a lot of people excuse or dismiss entirely. The police are enforcing a law that insert government entity voted and passed. The same people the people have elected.

The police aren't the ones who created the law, they're just out to enforce them based on whatever political figure decided to make it a priority of enforcement.

The politicians elected on the promise to be hard on crime in a time of steadily decreasing crime(last forty years)brings about the need to invent some. You will spend more time in prison for stealing ten dollars then a banker who steals a hundred billion.

 

[The Merg]

Maybe he shouldn't have signed up to be Rambo then.



At least no innocent people were shot in this, which is surprising that the swat team didn't at least shoot any nearby animals or drop a flashbang on an infant. But I'm sure those people deserved it according to you.

So if a cop shoots someone, that person is innocent, but if a cop is shot they are not an innocent person?

Remind me to not have the cops come help you when you are being robbed. I would not want the innocent robber to get hurt.

Do cops have any benefit to you at all?

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

I was just following orders. So I gassed a few Jews? I didn't pass that law.

We're not talking about morality here, which is where that comes into play. I thought we were discussing the straight legality of no knock warrants and drug laws.

- Merg

 

[MrColin]

If I was a robber I would announce that I was police while doing no-knock robberies.

http://youtu.be/1fXmHAEi_5w