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 look at it this way. I'm a good guy. No reason for SWAT to come a knockin' in the middle of the night but ...

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 181 to 191 of 191
Like Tree1Likes

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

  1. #181
    Member Array tabraha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    S.C.
    Posts
    222
    I look at it this way. I'm a good guy. No reason for SWAT to come a knockin' in the middle of the night but of course we know that has happened. Odds of it being impersonators are MUCH higher than it being SWAT. If it is a real team then I'll be zip-cuffed before I can get my eye-boogers out. NOW If I make it out of the bed and I'm not blind and deaf from a flash bang or choking on gas then I'm not up against a "real" team worth a **** and I'll continue to take my chances for my family against what I can only assume are home invaders. I'll be loaded up, loading my wife up and then doing what I have to do to get to my daughter's BR.
    ______________________
    Tad A.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #182
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    3,640
    "First, I take it as truth that you worked the streets for 28 years and certainly appreciate that effort on behalf of us all."

    9 in LE, 5 assigned to the atty generals office criminal division as an investigator, 28 as an private detective.

    "But, I think you are not seeing yourself in our shoes either"

    Only 9 years in LE out of 28 in a professional career gives me insight into both sides of the equation, something many others don't have the luxury of. I'm walking in your shoes, have been since 2001 and will be until they plant me at this point.

    "However, that does not mean LE can be reckless or careless or negligent, or act without adequate consideration of consequences."

    Of course not, in fact I've written here that LE are mandated to uphold the constitution of the US and all the rights and protections afforded one as a US resident [ I say resident because even non-citizens and illegals here have protection under the constitution ].

    "What folks are writing here in this thread is the idea that no-knocks are inherently too dangerous, and therefore when they go bad, there has been negligence, by definition"

    This is where we disagree in our positions. It's not my position that there has been negligence simply because someone got hurt. The human factor can not be taken from the equation, and therefore situations can't inherently be made 100% safe for everyone [ certainly not LE who execute the courts warrants on those who would kill the courts agents at times if given the opportunity ]. That "work" is dangerous by it's very nature, and the danger can not be taken from these equations ].

    "Suicide by cop"------ trained to see the signs of this event at the academy and in-service yearly as it's a real situation that presents to LE all too often in this country, the LEO has been left no choice at times. No one was negligent but someone dies. Thats just one example of not being able to take out the human equation on the street and one that can't be legislated away.

    "And also, don't blame the catastrophe on the innocent home owner."

    If LE executes a warrant on the wrong address, we're talking innocent homeowner. If, as in this case, the house was correct, the wife who shot the agent is not an innocent in the strictest sense as she is living with a convicted felon who's record dates back 17 years and includes aggravated assault, and injury to an officer previously. She's quite aware of his record and who she is living with.

    "In a world where anyone can buy real looking gear and yell "police, warrant," while charging through a residence, there is no way for the innocent home owner to know how to react to such an event."

    If it's the wrong house, I agree. If, on the other hand it's the right house as in the OP's post, I'm going to consider the facts in evidence of her prior knowledge of her husbands convictions convictions and propensity for violence among other crimes. It is going to be a hard stretch for her defense atty's to prove she was unaware of his background. Also that a reasonable person who is married to such a person and had that knowledge as a reasonable person would, could then use the defense that she thought it was a home invasion instead of LE at the door or entering the home to arrest lawfully.

    "In a world where anyone can buy real looking gear and yell "police, warrant," while charging through a residence, there is no way for the innocent home owner to know how to react to such an event"

    I agree, but in this case, she is not strictly an innocent living with a convicted felon.

    "If you see nothing wrong with defending inherently questionable practices, that is your choice. I don't see it as a sound position."

    As an investigator, I've questioned others actions and sought to understand motives of peoples actions more than most. I don't find a warrant to arrest a questionable practice because I understand the volumes of specific information through documentable investigative work that have to be presented to the courts to gets issuance of warrants to arrest to begin with.

    Have mistakes been made in the issuance of warrants to arrest and innocents injured? Of course. Does that mean we question the act of issuing warrants to search or arrest? No, it doesn't.

    Does it mean we don't tweek the system to potential human error out of the equation as much as possible? No it doesn't, and in fact over the years the courts have been more restrictive in the types of information available to make their decisions to issue warrants.

    It's been tweaked so well in the favor of the criminal as to seriously endanger LE in the furtherance of their jobs [ which the courts order through their warrants ]. The courts are that strict in their positions to ensure citizens rights are not violated.

    I know you can't take the human element out of the equation 100%, no matter how much you regulate and restrict because I've worked in that arena and understand that no matter how careful you are in your actions to protect yourself and others, old Mr. Murphy rears his ugly head and throws curve balls at you which could not have been considered.

    It's my hope that you and others never have to live the real ugliness that occurs on the streets, or runs up on someone who doesn't care if they live or die and whose actions leave you no choice. Reading about some event that has occurred and living it leads to entirely different perspectives. It's one of the inherent flaws that legislators aren't made to work the streets for awhile, for they would surely change their utopic view of the world very quickly and likely have a more balanced view, almost certainly a more realistic view.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  4. #183
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    3,640
    tabraha,

    Great post, and absolutely correct. I'm not predisposed to elaborate on your observations, but you are correct sir.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  5. #184
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570

    Ok, rest of the story, nightmare

    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    "First, I take it as truth that you worked the streets for 28 years and certainly appreciate that effort on behalf of us all."

    9 in LE, 5 assigned to the atty generals office criminal division as an investigator, 28 as an private detective.

    "But, I think you are not seeing yourself in our shoes either"
    Brownie
    OK then, I'll look at the story from the shoes of my LE friend. If you paid attention to my "footnote" in my previous post I wrote that ----well.

    He patrolled a rural county, several actually, and being a friendly guy got to know people, the homeowners, ranchers, where he worked. He was befriended by a fellow who would let him use the restroom at his home, let him get some water, tell him about poachers, tell him about suspicious stuff, let him know about the neighbors feuding over a fence line, the kids racing dirt bikes, and so on.

    He didn't know the guy who befriended him was in "the business," and had told other thugs he would kill that damn cop if he got curious. He didn't know the Feds were keeping an eye on his "friend," and him too--'cause they weren't sure if he was corrupt or not.

    So the big day comes, the game is on, and suddenly he finds himself in the front yard being rushed by "who?" "what" etc. Split second to decide whether they were good guys or bad guys, and he had no reason to think they were good guys because SOP would have had him notified of the activity in advance. But this wasn't SOP.

    Things that might have happened, and here is where there is the parallel with the innocent party at a home situation we have been talking about:

    1) he might have fired on the good guys thinking they weren't what they appeared to be

    2) he might have been shot by the bad guy, who figured he'd brought the cavalry, and who bragged he would kill him

    3) he could have killed a good guy, and the DA would have claimed he was a corrupt cop; it beats the county having to pay for the damages

    4) he could have figured out who the bg was and taken his "friend"

    All the decision making had to happen in split seconds, and the outcome and issues would be exactly as the two types of cases we have talked about.

    I don't know the details of what then happened. He never said. I do know he was really pi.ss.d. The real bg was arrested, and everyone went home safe somehow.

    What I am suggesting is that you should put yourself in his shoes at that instant. That is what the homeowner, or perhaps that woman who was arrested for shooting the FBI agent , may have faced. The need for an instantaneous decision with insufficient (or confusing) information.

    No one should be put in that position.

  6. #185
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570
    Jang posted this elsewhere: "Fake Police Rob Woman
    Men posing as law enforcement entered her home and ran off with loads of loot [including husbands rifle]."

    Stories like this reinforce the difficult circumstance folks have with discerning who is real and who isn't.

  7. #186
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    3,640
    Hopyard,

    It's safe to assume from the recounting of your friends incident as you related it, he didn't

    "shoot first and ask questions later"

    The events that occurred reinforce the premise I've put forth more than once, that being, whenever the human equation is entered into the scenario, there isn't anything that can make the situation 100% safe for innocents as there are just too many variables.

    What also strikes me immediately, is that the two who approached were well aware he was LE and gave him every opportunity as a trained professional to not "shoot first and ask questions later". I wouldn't be surprised if there was a long range officer backing up the two he knew about in the event he was a dirty cop connected with the BG and got froggy on them.

    Your LE friend was prudent, and waited some period of time judging from your recanting the scenario, as was suggested might be prudent in posts here by others including myself in similar circumstances.

    In the case of the OP's story of the Korbe warrant by the feds, if she had also waited just a second or two, she may have perhaps not shot the agent which brings up something I've been meaning to mention here as well--------

    The more training and experience you have, the longer you can take before you have to react. It's been my experience that those that have little or minimal physical and tools skills are prone to react earlier than the more experienced, and may go to guns sooner than would be necessary.

    Few agencies SOP is to share information with other LE agencies unless its a multi-jurisdictional unit to begin with. All bets are off they would inform him of their activities if there were a possibility of his being involved with their BG in any way as well.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  8. #187
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    3,640
    "Stories like this reinforce the difficult circumstance folks have with discerning who is real and who isn't."

    They entered the home, but were they invited in or did they break into the home? It sounds as though they used a ruse to gain entry. If that is the case, they played on most peoples wanting to cooperate with police when asked without questioning their authority to be there, and isn't the same discussion as this thread.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  9. #188
    Senior Member Array Chevy-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    ......As an LE, the oath I took and consequently the job description was to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

    The US Supreme Court has ruled that police do NOT have an obligation to protect the citizens of the US.
    ...............
    Brownie

    I think most of us are aware of that ruling. It's reasonable to expect that LE cannot be everywhere at once, protecting everyone all the time. Therefore, self-defense typically falls on the shoulders of the individual. LE comes in later to do forensics, and maybe even catch the BG.

    If LE does NOT have to protect me, then it should (at the very least) be required of them that they NOT bash my door down in the middle of the night. Even if I am a "horrible drug dealer" or whatever, it's no reason to expose my wife, kids and dog to imminent death from a bunch of jumpy part-time SWAT guys with machine guns in hand.

    If the citizenry has to live with "no-knock" raids, then the BG's are winning and it's time for LE to re-invent itself.

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

  10. #189
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    3,640
    "Even if I am a "horrible drug dealer" or whatever, it's no reason to expose my wife, kids and dog to imminent death from a bunch of jumpy part-time SWAT guys with machine guns in hand."

    Who's exposing the wife, kids and dog to the threat of being arrested in the middle of the night? The drug dealer,-------- of course.

    Imminent death?---that suggests intent on the officers part when they make entry, and that's certainly not their intent, it is a possibility if you become a threat to the officers while carrying out the orders of the court.

    Imminent death is not a given under any circumstances as the Korbe case shows even when the agent was shot, she was arrested and not killed for her efforts. Much credit goes to the other officers for their restraint in that matter, so no, the suggestion of "imminent death" here is uncalled for and incorrect.

    Going quietly in the night would be safer for everyone involved.

    "If the citizenry has to live with "no-knock" raids, then the BG's are winning and it's time for LE to re-invent itself."

    LE works strictly within the confines of SCOTUS rulings and the US Constitution. LEO's can't re-invent anything as they didn't invent the statutes they work within now.

    Brownie
    The mind is the limiting factor

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  11. #190
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570

    More training, and taking time

    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Hopyard,

    It's safe to assume from the recounting of your friends incident as you related it, he didn't

    The more training and experience you have, the longer you can take before you have to react. It's been my experience that those that have little or minimal physical and tools skills are prone to react earlier than the more experienced, and may go to guns sooner than would be necessary.

    Brownie
    On this point we agree, and my friend had tremendous physical skills (martial arts skills) as well as an unusually cool temperament. He is the sort of guy who gets amused by human behavior instead of angered by it. And consequently, he is the kind of guy people instantly like.

    I learned a lot from him. And not just sd.

    Still, that one could've gone real bad real fast.

  12. #191
    Member Array KCe39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    33
    I dont think the average street thug posing as the police would be able to kick in my unusually thick door (actually one of my favorite features of my place). On that note, there have been forceable entry home invasions by subhuman criminals posing as LE in my mother's neighborhood in South Tucson. I guess anything is possible. I know for my situation, it would be pretty difficult to knock down the door so they had better bring the door breach equipment.

    If LE decides to raid my place accidently, which I would imagine would include the cover of all entry points, I would probably believe they were legit. It would probably happen much faster than I could react to in the first place. I really dont think your poser street punk would orchestrate something of such professional caliber especially for little ole me unless I did something to really upset someone. It would also be very difficult to fake the weapony. Im also not going to try to rashly engage multiple intruders as much as Id like to think my fiancee and I are Mr and Mrs Smith.

    What I will do is most likely freak out at the noise go to Plan A with the Fiancee and take cover with weapons and if we feel they are for real, we will toss the guns, hands behind the head and attempt to sue the crap out of the people who made the mistake. If they are posers, we would cross that bridge when it came.

    This is a good one to think about because my area is frequented by the police often but they usually knock and let their presence be known.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213

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, 10:15 AM
  2. Replies: 56
    Last Post: March 21st, 2009, 05:02 PM
  3. Middle of the night.
    By Pure Kustom in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: January 29th, 2009, 11:19 PM
  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, 04:31 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.