Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot? - Page 11

Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot?

This is a discussion on Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I'd light 'em up and identify the intruder(s) and by God if they don't look like cops, act like cops or talk like cops they're ...

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 78910111213 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 191
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot?

  1. #151
    VIP Member
    Array Thumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,345
    I'd light 'em up and identify the intruder(s) and by God if they don't look like cops, act like cops or talk like cops they're in very deep trouble, a fact they'll soon recognize as I open fire with my Benelli M-4 !

    ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!

    "A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
    judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
    superior skills."


  2. #152
    Member Array tflhndn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    I count 33 incidents of "death of an innocent" on the map.

    I count 65 raids on innocents on the map.

    I count 16 officers killed.

    I count 15 deaths of a non violent offender

    The source of the information is the Cato Institute. It's non-profit, made 22.4 million and had 95 full time employees, 70 adjunct instructors and 20 "fellows" [ whatever that means ].

    As a professed quasi libertarian organization, one would expect anti-government reporting.

    What we don't have is the total number of raids made throughout the country for a percentage to be formulated. My guess is though 33 "innocents" have died, that statistical number is so low as to be "insignificant". Now before anyone wants to hollar about no life is insignificant, consider the insurance companies who hire people to calculate probabilities and make policy that hurts/kills millions of people yearly by denying them health benefits or services.

    Like I've stated, life isn't fair. 33 people or more will die on the roads this week in the US. We don't take cars off the roads.

    Brownie
    The difference is that our government is not driving the car. It is a fundamental premise of our legal system that it is better to let a 100 guilty men go free than to convict an innocent man.

    The question (which we do not have a statistical answer to) is whether no-knock raids are over-used.

    Anytime an innocent is killed by police, the tactics that led to it need to be re-evaluated. (i didn't say dumped, I said re-evaluated).

    My concern is that too often, the death of an innocent is not the direct result of the no-knock raid, but of stupid mistakes in the preperation of it.

  3. #153
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    "Anytime an innocent is killed by police, the tactics that led to it need to be re-evaluated. (i didn't say dumped, I said re-evaluated)."

    That seems prudent and reasonable. Something that's been done all along, resulting in the present SOP's they operate from. The "system" will always be tweaked and never be perfect however.

    "My concern is that too often, the death of an innocent is not the direct result of the no-knock raid, but of stupid mistakes in the preperation of it."

    Perhaps the pre-assault intel as you suggest, in fact in some cases quite likely, but just as often innocents are placed in jeopardy by the suspect in trying to avoid capture through their choice of where they are hiding out to avoid capture, using those "innocents" as cover.

    "It is a fundamental premise of our legal system that it is better to let a 100 guilty men go free than to convict an innocent man."

    Of course, and I couldn't agree more with that premise. My own experience is that it is very difficult to get one who is a criminal into the justice system, there's too many checks and balances that favor the criminal-------therefore, if a warrant has been issued, there's usually more than enough probable cause to issue it. Those checks and balances to protect peoples constitutional rights are well honed from years of trial and error through the federal justices decisions in this area.

    Constitutional law was 2 full weeks at the academy. The states want you to fully understand the peoples rights and precedent cases of law so that you aren't violating them. It's been my experience that if you do violate the rights of the people, you are in deep doo doo with the bosses [ your job is on the line ] and more importantly are subject to charges by the courts as well.

    Thumper, nice piece-----

    "I'd light 'em up and identify the intruder(s) and by God if they don't look like cops, act like cops or talk like cops they're in very deep trouble, a fact they'll soon recognize as I open fire with my Benelli M-4"

    A much preferred response to those who've stated otherwise.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  4. #154
    Senior Member Array Chevy-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    ...The alternative of no raids on suspected drug dens/dealers or terrorists, etc is unacceptable and would put millions more innocent people in jeopardy of injury or death. ..

    Brownie

    C'mon man, we're talking about middle-of-the-night, kick-in-the-door "no knock" raids here, NOT just any raids in general.

    Yeah, it's great that LE chases down BG's, but do they REALLY need to conduct middle-of-the-night, kick-in-the-door "no knock" raids??? I think not. These types of raids are total BS IMO, and the American public should not be subjected to this form of legalized terrorism.

    -
    'Be careful, even in small matters' - Miyamoto Musashi

  5. #155
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,118

    Right here is the big problem

    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post

    It's quite clear by your, "perhaps", "I doubt it's" and innuendos of wrong doing on the part of the agents without benefit of the facts, that you are clearly anti-LE to an extent which jades your judgment in this matter.
    Brownie
    Right here in the remark above is the core of the big problem. Instead of focusing on the issue, it is turned into a we v them or me v them anti-LE conversation.

    No, I'm not anti- LE. I'm pro-civil liberties and pro-safety for everyone; and that certainly includes LE. The famous case out of Georgia a year or two back, where a 90+ y.o. shot LEs who went to the wrong house on bad information proves the point that better controls need to be put in place on the process.

    Frankly, if I were to assign blame, it would be more on the judges who issue the warrants than on the LEs. Probing and thoughtful questioning of the seeker of the warrant --instead of the rubber stamp-- would go a long way to stop these things.

    A legislative mandate that these not be done when young children and innocent adults can reasonably be expected to be present would also be beneficial for society.

    As for folks with crappy credentials posing as cops, it happens. And they don't always look like a SWAT team in gear.

    I had a guy in plain clothes, a nice suit, and a portfolio of "credentials" at my door one time. He would have had me think he was FBI. I think he was casing the neighborhood. I ran him off because I didn't think he was legit.

    It could have turned ugly fast if he was legit and I was wrong; it could have turned ugly fast if he tried a forced entry. Even good behavior, good polite manners, and papers don't prove someone is legit. There are plenty of smooth cons who know how to play the game to make it look real.

    (And BTW, even a "real appearing" marked car can be a ruse; we had a roadside rape done like that a few years back.)

    There aren't easy answers, but turning legitimate concerns into a we v them (anyone who isn't LE) mentality isn't going to move the discussion forward.

  6. #156
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    "Right here in the remark above is the core of the big problem. Instead of focusing on the issue, it is turned into a we v them or me v them anti-LE conversation."

    Incorrect, you have been the one who used the words "perhaps" and "I doubt it" comments questioning the actions of the officers without any facts pointing to any culpability on their part that got this thread into the mentality of "us vs them". You've shown NO objectivity in those statements and in fact insinuated you sided with the homeowner not doing anything wrong and that the LE's MUST have been negligent in their actions.

    "No, I'm not anti- LE. I'm pro-civil liberties and pro-safety for everyone; and that certainly includes LE. The famous case out of Georgia a year or two back, where a 90+ y.o. shot LEs who went to the wrong house on bad information proves the point that better controls need to be put in place on the process."

    There is no "pro safety" for everyone. There never will be either, it's not the way the world turns and as a scientist, you should certainly understand that there are no absolutes in the world. Your comment of "pro safety" for everyone informs that you are unrealistic in your thinking on this issue.

    "Frankly, if I were to assign blame, it would be more on the judges who issue the warrants than on the LEs. Probing and thoughtful questioning of the seeker of the warrant --instead of the rubber stamp-- would go a long way to stop these things."

    Again, you demonstrate your lack of understanding relative exactly what it takes to get a felony warrant issued by the courts by this statement.

    "A legislative mandate that these not be done when young children and innocent adults can reasonably be expected to be present would also be beneficial for society."

    That would require the BG's to cooperate and not live with woman and children. Thats not a viable option as that will not be happening any time soon either and is just more unrealistic optimism on your part.

    "I had a guy in plain clothes, a nice suit, and a portfolio of "credentials" at my door one time. He would have had me think he was FBI."

    Feds don't carry a portfolio of creds. Nuff said.

    "There aren't easy answers, but turning legitimate concerns into a we v them (anyone who isn't LE) mentality isn't going to move the discussion forward"

    Nor did I turn anything in this thread into such, I just pointed out your subjective statements as a clear indication you'd trust the homeowner before the LE's by your statements without having substantiated facts in evidence. Those subjective comments questioning the LE's culpability or negligence in some way as things went south in the OP's reported scenario was the first overtly stated us v them mentality in this thread.

    Chevy-SS,

    "Yeah, it's great that LE chases down BG's, but do they REALLY need to conduct middle-of-the-night, kick-in-the-door "no knock" raids??? I think not"

    You'd be wrong in that thinking. I understand that many are not going to know the workings of the courts and LE in these matters or for that matter the reason behind middle of the night no knocks. I also understand the general public's questioning the reason behind such actions by LE's. The fact remains the courts have clearly put the peoples constitutional rights first in this country, and there are those criminals who understand how to use that system that's in place.

    "These types of raids are total BS IMO, and the American public should not be subjected to this form of legalized terrorism."

    You have a right to your opinion, but that opinion apparently is not based on full knowledge of how the system works nor what is necessary to keep the general populace safe. The opinion by some seems to be based on the end results of actions taken by LE, which of course is not close to half the information available to the courts when they issued the warrant.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  7. #157
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,118
    My last word on this:

    Denying that there is a problem won't lead to a solution.
    With the focus of the discussion being misdirected into an LE v civilians, there is no point to continue the discussion.

    An analogy-- fireman falls through burning roof and dies fighting a fire. If someone suggests that perhaps they shouldn't have gone onto the roof and let the damn thing burn, it doesn't mean they are anti-firefighters.

    There is almost always more than one way to proceed and there is no substitute for sound judgment--- which isn't what is being used when raids are conducted at wrong addresses, when children are present, and when innocent elderly or others are present.

  8. #158
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    "An analogy-- fireman falls through burning roof and dies fighting a fire. If someone suggests that perhaps they shouldn't have gone onto the roof and let the damn thing burn, it doesn't mean they are anti-firefighters."

    No it doesn't mean they are anti-firefighters, it only means they don't understand how firefighting tactics have evolved in fighting fires and don't have the benefit of understanding the "why" behind the actions.

    The analogy is a perfect example,

    thank you for making my point.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  9. #159
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    "An analogy-- fireman falls through burning roof and dies fighting a fire. If someone suggests that perhaps they shouldn't have gone onto the roof and let the damn thing burn, it doesn't mean they are anti-firefighters."

    No it doesn't mean they are anti-firefighters, it only means they don't understand how firefighting tactics have evolved in fighting fires and don't have the benefit of understanding the "why" behind the actions.

    The analogy is a perfect example,

    thank you for making my point.

    Brownie
    Things going wrong such as falling through a roof are the reason tactics have changed. Misshaps were evaluated and different tactics were put in place.
    Changes don't come about because things were already working well and getting the results we set out for. We do understand why the actions were taken. We just need to find a way to do it without any harm coming to innocents on all sides.

    Michael

  10. #160
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    mlr1m,

    Do you believe any govt can legislate any and all risk to everyone with 100% certainty out of any situation that involves living and breathing people interacting with each other?

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-64102935.html

    The above link states there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of FELONY warrants in the United States at this time. FELONY warrants.

    San Diego county has over 18,000 outstanding felony warrants, NYC has over 26,000 outstanding felony warrants alone.

    Clearly the LE community is taxed for resources to apprehend these people nationwide.

    Think the hundreds of thousands of felons on the streets that haven't been captured nationwide have put more than 33 people at risk [ unlike the 33 innocents who have been killed in raids nationwide ] who would be considered "innocents" and daily victimized by these felons in some way as innocents?

    33 innocents is a small number in the overall picture of the numbers out there being killed and victimized by the felons who haven't been taken down yet.

    From court documents on the OP's post:

    "Korbe, 39, has a criminal record. In 1993, he pleaded guilty to several drug charges and a firearms count and was given probation, according to online court records.

    In May, he was arrested on charges of aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, resisting arrest and drug counts, according to online court documents"

    Want to legislate the problem of innocents being killed? Don't let men like this out of jail on probation to begin with. If he hadn't been released by the courts, he would not have had to be apprehended in this case which led to the death of an agent.

    That legislation will save lives by taking then human element out of the equation, he's locked up and we know where he is.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  11. #161
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    mlr1m,

    Do you believe any govt can legislate any and all risk to everyone with 100% certainty out of any situation that involves living and breathing people interacting with each other?

    Brownie
    100%? ALL? Is this a trick question?
    If they can't does this mean they should't try? Does it mean they should not be held responsible for the results when their actions cause a loss of life?
    I don't understand the idea of putting the responsibility on the homeowner when his house is broken into. Under Okla law it says you may defend yourself UNLESS you are involved in a criminal act.
    So if i'm not dealing dope, cookin meth or any other ilegal act im free to protect myself.

    Michael

  12. #162
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    100%? ALL? Is this a trick question?
    If they can't does this mean they should't try? Does it mean they should not be held responsible for the results when their actions cause a loss of life?
    I don't understand the idea of putting the responsibility on the homeowner when his house is broken into. Under Okla law it says you may defend yourself UNLESS you are involved in a criminal act.
    So if i'm not dealing dope, cookin meth or any other ilegal act im free to protect myself.

    Michael
    No it's not a trick question, but instead of answering a question with a question, please answer the question---do you think legislation can take the risk of injury to innocents out of the equation 100% of the time?

    If you answer no, then how do you or anyone else know whether the current legislation relative issuance of felony warrants is not the best we have through the trials and errors [ checks and balances ] already or that newer more restrictive legislation would diminish the risk of innocents further?

    Please keep in mind as you answer the question, that LE's are innocents as well who serve these warrants, their families are innocents, their friends are innocents who would be affected by the officers death as well.

    "they" have tried through legislation, to the point the criminals have more rights than innocents they victimize.

    Korbes home wan't broken into.

    Oklahoma doesn't authorize you to shoot an agent who knocks on your door with a warrant though, and there is the difference between this case and no-knocks in the middle of the night.

    The number of officers killed in the US for the last 10 years alone is 2,001. Think they are innocents, their families are innocents affected?

    33 for all time records have been kept vs 2,001 officers killed in the line of duty just in the last 10 years, add the agent to this list. Yes, 33 innocents is a very small number who've suffered by others mistakes. The checks and balances are in place and working presently. There will never be 100% utopian results through legislation to protect innocents.

    That extrapolates to .016% all time innocents vs the police who have died, also innocents. I'd still think 1.6% of the LE killed in the last 10 years is so miniscule as to be well within the limits of probability if checks and balances were not in place to reduce risk to innocents.

    I'm not sure further legislation to protect those in the home that are raided would not cause more officers deaths. As their numbers are 98.4% higher in the last decade than homeowners since records have been kept who've been killed, I don't see how it can get much better statistically when events that are dynamic and dangerous and involving two diametrically opposed entities can get any better on one end of he scale without making it worse on the other end of the scale at the same time.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  13. #163
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    No it's not a trick question, but instead of answering a question with a question, please answer the question---do you think legislation can take the risk of injury to innocents out 100% of the time?

    "they" have tried through legislation, to the point the criminals have more rights than innocents they victimize.

    Korbes home wan't broken into.

    Oklahoma doesn't authorize you to shoot an agent who knocks on your door with a warrant though, and there is the difference between this case and no-knocks in the middle of the night.

    Brownie
    Sorry I thought I did answer. No disrespect intended, I tend to wander. No , they cannot make anything 100% risk free.

    You are correct I am not allowed to shoot at anyone who comes knocking at my door. Why would I want to? Well maybe an insurance salesman but thats a whole other subject.

    What I was referring to was the original question posted.
    "Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot?"

    Like I said I'm not doing anything ilegal in my home. I am within my right to use deadly force to protect myself from forced entry in my state. Would I knowenly shoot a police officer? NO atleast not under any circumstance I can think of.
    Anyone kicking my door in is presumed to be attempting to do harm to me or my family. I will act accordingly.

    Michael

  14. #164
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    4,984
    "You are correct I am not allowed to shoot at anyone who comes knocking at my door. Why would I want to?"

    Then we should ask the same thing of the woman who answered her door and shot the agent shouldn't we? We should hold her culpable for her actions as they were illegal. Why would she want to shoot the agent? My best guess is she was also involved in the drug activities of her husband and panicked when confronted.

    "I am within my right to use deadly force to protect myself from forced entry in my state"

    I agree wholeheartedly with that premise sir.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  15. #165
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,118

    Best Guess?

    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Why would she want to shoot the agent? My best guess is she was also involved in the drug activities of her husband and panicked when confronted.

    Brownie
    My recollection of the op might be faulty but I thought they were there to arrest a son who was into drugs activity. The arrested woman thought she was dealing with a home invasion.

    In any case, the key word here is the one you used above "guess." You are guessing as to why she acted. Those who arrested are guessing as to why she acted. Only she knows why she did what she did, and she made a statement--which could well be lie-- that she thought she was dealing with a home invasion. What if that is the truth?

    Actually, none of this counts in a meaningful way toward resolving the question this thread really raises. Which is, with present tactics, how in the world is a homeowner supposed to actually know what is going down. And given the uncertainty, and the number of bad incidents, why not find a different way to do things.

    Problems don't go away when they are denied.

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 78910111213 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. A Minneapolis police SWAT team kicked in the wrong door....
    By DIXIETWISTER in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 9th, 2010, 11:15 AM
  2. Replies: 56
    Last Post: March 21st, 2009, 06:02 PM
  3. Middle of the night.
    By Pure Kustom in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: January 30th, 2009, 12:19 AM
  4. Its the middle of the night, and someone starts banging on your front door...
    By frankinstine in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: December 1st, 2008, 05:31 PM

Search tags for this page

arizona castle docterine

,

benelli 121

,

carry wife middle of night

,

door kicked in without no knock warrant in ga

,

fbi kicked in door in midland tx

,

no knock raid

,

where to shoot in the middle of the night

Click on a term to search for related topics.