I don't even know what to say to this

[SIGguy229]

I guess I missed the point--why did the police use a no-knock warrant to recover a PlayStation? Why not arrest the guy on the street and then search his apt?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Musketeer]

Unfortunately, I would have to agree with OPFOR on this one. While I see your point and it is a very valid one, the ability for an officer to capture a high-risk suspect while in condition white is an overwhelming advantage for them. Knocking at a door might be best for the majority of us, but there are always those few who wont answer their door to a "Mr. Smith, this is the Police."

The criminal never gets in his car and drives to the store? He never goes out? Even David Koresh used to go to town every day to pick up mail and such.

In a small minority of circumstances I can see the no-knock being used. The immediate life of a kidnapped individual is one (and one for which a warrant isn't even needed). I do not see how my life is worth a dime bag of crack that the police think they may find there when executing the entry on the wrong home. It has happenned over and over and over and over. If our troops were dropping airborne ordanance on friendly troops with the smae rgularity you can be certain there would be some change in procedure. Because this incidents happen in different jurisdiction though they are swept uner the rug as isolated incidents.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/07/20/676/15992

"If a widespread pattern of [knock-and-announce] violations were shown . . . there would be reason for grave concern."

—Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Hudson v. Michigan, June 15, 2006.

Here is a handy dandy interactive map showing how many of these raids have resutled in tragedy.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

[OPFOR]

In a no-knock warrant there is a very good chance a case for justificble homicide of a police officer can be made not just by a law abiding citizen who is wrongly targetted but by a real criminal. The bottom line is that when doors are blown off the hinges and huge amounts of violence and frightfullness ensue the identification of a real police officer is not a simple matter. If they choose to dress themselves up in black masks and storm a house like a gang of violent home invaders I can see any citizen responding with force. I know in NY we have had multiple cases of violent home invasions and cop impersonators. The two have also happenned together. The bottom line is if you do not want to be shot then don't blast down my front door.

My job is to defend my family. Asking me to identify that it is a real officer who is proceeding to destroy my house and terrorize my family instead of a violent psycho or group of home invaders preying on my family is a problem created by the police, not me.

At the same time the criminal who responds to an armed storming of their home with force can easily respond that they thought it was an attack by another gang. In such a situation they legally could defend themselves. It might be up to a jury to decide but a case could be made for self defense.

No Knocks, and their cousins the "announced" entry which is immediately followed by rams and destroyed entryways places both the public and officers in danger. There are very few such situations that could not be overcome by using a little bit of brain power but it is easier to resort to the the ESU guys and their over the top tactics.

So, if the police knock and say that they are police, this automatically eliminates any chance that it is, in fact, NOT the police. Your arguments here really hold no weight - if a bunch of badges, uniforms, and "police style" long arms - coupled with your door coming off the hinges and a half-dozen people yelling "POLICE!" - don't convince you that it's the po-po, what is a simple verbal announcement from behind a closed door going to accomplish? If these hypothetical bad guys are so realistically portraying cops that you can't figure it out while looking at them, how are you going to determine the truth as you walk to the door?

As for your "very good chance for a justifiable homicide" in a NKW - do you know how many of these are executed every day? Do you know how many justifiable homicides by residents have resulted. I'd roughly guesstimate that the chances are in the low thousandths of one per cent...not exactly a "very good chance" in my book.

And, of course, the entire concept of the NKW came about to LIMIT the danger to officers and the public...Do you think we look for ways to make our jobs more dangerous? Sometimes they go wrong, but sometimes EVERYTHING goes wrong - that's why there are traffic accidents, accidental shootings, accidental poisonings, and so on ad infinitum. These are simply more "sensational," then "man misjudges speed and crashes into phone pole" deaths, and so we see all this emotion, bias, hypocrisy, and hyperbole. Your arguments are the anti-s arguments, your reasoning is the anti-s reasoning, and your emotion-based crucification of the tool instead of the individual is the same as the anti-s. If you haven't noticed, I strongly disagree with all of them.

Also, nice use of loaded words and phrases - "destroying your house," "terrorizing your family," etc. You'd find a sure home writing for the Brady Bunch....

[Musketeer]

I guess I missed the point--why did the police use a no-knock warrant to recover a PlayStation? Why not arrest the guy on the street and then search his apt?

If you do not use all that fancy SWAT gear then how do you go about justifying it in next year's budget?

[bobernet]

Regardless of whether, in the end, the "raided" person was a GG or BG, it's hard to argue that they didn't have the right to open fire when their home was stormed by people with guns.

Here, I certainly do hope I'm misunderstanding you. Are you saying that criminals have the right to kill police officers coming to arrest them? Because that's what this statement conveys. Even a GG has no RIGHT to shoot at police officers if they are identifiable as such, in almost any circumstance.

You're not misunderstanding me. If a bunch of guys with guns burst through my door, I'm not going to stop and ask them "are you with the police, FBI, ATF, National Guard or any other governmental agency and do you have a legal no-knock warrant to burst into my home?" I'm going to start shooting.

I don't know if they're good guys or bad guys. I don't know why they are there. All I know is that the safety of my family and I are in jeopardy... even if I stole a video game, or jay walked, or sent a nasty note to the President.

[Redneck Repairs]

I guess I missed the point--why did the police use a no-knock warrant to recover a PlayStation? Why not arrest the guy on the street and then search his apt?

Make no mistake that is a set of Questions i have too , but i feel we can not answer them without actual info , rather than a slanted editoral type article in a newspaper ... give us the facts and lets look .. From the article it looks bad for the cops , but the only time i was publicly pilloried for abusive force is when a 6-7 participant in a call started the rodeo by breaking my elbow , a rodeo ensued , and by the time backup arrived he was in cuffs . I got took to task for being " brutal " on that one .

[bobernet]

If its an arrest warrant we make every attempt to arrest away from the home .

If its a search warrant we make every attempt to detain the prime VCA away from the home while we serve..

This addresses OPFOR's point that "That's just not how warrants are served."

Apparently, it is how warrants are served.

I guess the officers in question felt that legally owned guns constitute "an extreme and articulatable[sic] danger to LE personnel serving a warrant" or that they were afraid the video game was the "vital evidence" that would be disposed of "[upon] service of a search warrant."

[OPFOR]

OK, I'm out. It's apparent that there are agendas here that go far beyond the case at hand. We've discussed the "I'm going down shooting" routine enough - and pretty much concluded that it's going to be a lot of "going down" and very little "shooting," so nothing can be gained by rehashing it. Ditto the NKW issue - many anti-cop zealots parrot the same tired arguments (and link the same anti-cop websites), while the facts are that negligent/criminal firearms use by civilians causes far more deaths then "bad" NKWs...

So, carry on with your beliefs, by all means. However, I would urge you to consider why you believe that you are going to be brought down in a hail of police gunfire during a mistaken NKW - as opposed to being hit by a car, which is infinitely more likely. Cheers, and Sua Sponte...

[OPFOR]

This addresses OPFOR's point that "That's just not how warrants are served."

Apparently, it is how warrants are served.

I guess the officers in question felt that legally owned guns constitute "an extreme and articulatable[sic] danger to LE personnel serving a warrant" or that they were afraid the video game was the "vital evidence" that would be disposed of "[upon] service of a search warrant."

Different agency, different guidelines, I suppose. We almost always try to get them at home, unless there are compelling reasons not no. Then again, we don't have any uniformed officers at all, so we are of a different mindset. If that's the way RR's department operated, and the reasoning behind it, far be it from me to second guess. So, to clarify: it's not the way my agency serves warrants.

[Redneck Repairs]

Well i am not out of here , but i will continue to post pablim unless and untill someone posts the affidavit of probable cause for the warrant , and or the after action debreefing ( one or both should be avalable by now ) . So if you hate no knocks , and or resent cops , now is your chance , get the actual files and lets pick this one apart ... i have the rest of my life to discuss all partys involvement , do you ? I belive this is a bad deal , but as to assign blame i wont untill a little thing called FACTS becomes known . One reporters agenda does not work for me .

[Redneck Repairs]

Different agency, different guidelines, I suppose. We almost always try to get them at home, unless there are compelling reasons not no. Then again, we don't have any uniformed officers at all, so we are of a different mindset. If that's the way RR's department operated, and the reasoning behind it, far be it from me to second guess. So, to clarify: it's not the way my agency serves warrants.

Good point OP , most of my service was done on an interagency agreement where we could draw street officers as needed . Its a luxury i know, but then again we are garonteed on going up against a gun owner in this rural area . Its all good bud and i did not mean to imply the way we did things is the only way .

[bobernet]

I don't understand your post, OPFOR.

We've discussed the "I'm going down shooting" routine enough - and pretty much concluded that it's going to be a lot of "going down" and very little "shooting," so nothing can be gained by rehashing it.

Are you saying that if a bunch of people broke into your house, you wouldn't attempt to defend your family? Whether you'd be successful or not, is a different thing altogether. But you would just assume they must be LEO and it must be legit?

Ditto the NKW issue - many anti-cop zealots parrot the same tired arguments (and link the same anti-cop websites), while the facts are that negligent/criminal firearms use by civilians causes far more deaths then "bad" NKWs...

Maybe you're talking about other threads or I missed it here, but who was linking to anti-cop websites?

However, I would urge you to consider why you believe that you are going to be brought down in a hail of police gunfire during a mistaken NKW

I didn't see anyone suggest this. What some people, including myself, said was "this seems like a dangerous way to go about things. If people with guns go breaking into homes, there's a pretty decent chance that someone on one side or the other is going to get shot at."

It seems like a safety issue. I mean, we're not talking about the guy who says "you'll never take me alive!" while shooting out the window at cops here. I think we all agree on how that should be handled, and knocking wouldn't be on the agenda.

[Redneck Repairs]

Bobernet , please see my above post , now that is how WE did things , but not how it has to be done , IMHO it is ideal , but untill the taxpayers fund ideal its rarely avalable to they guy who serves .

[Musketeer]

So, if the police knock and say that they are police, this automatically eliminates any chance that it is, in fact, NOT the police. Your arguments here really hold no weight - if a bunch of badges, uniforms, and "police style" long arms - coupled with your door coming off the hinges and a half-dozen people yelling "POLICE!" - don't convince you that it's the po-po, what is a simple verbal announcement from behind a closed door going to accomplish? If these hypothetical bad guys are so realistically portraying cops that you can't figure it out while looking at them, how are you going to determine the truth as you walk to the door?

The squad cars I should see out front through the window and the call to 911 should help clear this up quickly. Sorry, people around here have already been murderred, kidnapped, robbed and beaten by cop impersonators. Every month or two another one shows up in the paper. I need some reasonable reassurance before I put myself at risk.

As for your "very good chance for a justifiable homicide" in a NKW - do you know how many of these are executed every day? Do you know how many justifiable homicides by residents have resulted. I'd roughly guesstimate that the chances are in the low thousandths of one per cent...not exactly a "very good chance" in my book.

Most do go reasonably well for the officers and the public. Most do not result in unwarranted deaths to innocents or officers. Most officers are also never going to be shot so should they all turn in their vests? Of course not. NKW are bad policy. Most criminals will plea out and not use any type of self defense plea. I do recall it being used by one citizen who fired at officers in his backyard last year. I will search for it.

And, of course, the entire concept of the NKW came about to LIMIT the danger to officers and the public...Do you think we look for ways to make our jobs more dangerous? Sometimes they go wrong, but sometimes EVERYTHING goes wrong - that's why there are traffic accidents, accidental shootings, accidental poisonings, and so on ad infinitum. These are simply more "sensational," then "man misjudges speed and crashes into phone pole" deaths, and so we see all this emotion, bias, hypocrisy, and hyperbole. Your arguments are the anti-s arguments, your reasoning is the anti-s reasoning, and your emotion-based crucification of the tool instead of the individual is the same as the anti-s. If you haven't noticed, I strongly disagree with all of them.

I don't see no-knocks doing anything to protect the public's safety. There is a case to be made that when used in the limited situations where they MAY be justified they would protect the officers's lives. Knock or no-knock the dynamic entry of a criminal's home is dangerous. Not saying you are coming is certainly safer than announcing you are there. Catching them on the street or as they get into their car though would be even safer. It would also ensure positive identification of the person being sought. That is NOT ensured when a door is blasted open in the dark of night.

Things go wrong. There are traffic accidents and other such incidents when "all goes wrong." At the same time we should not perpetuate a system where the consequences of "all going wrong" needlessly put the public and officers at added risk when perfectly acceptabel alternatives are available.

Also, nice use of loaded words and phrases - "destroying your house," "terrorizing your family," etc. You'd find a sure home writing for the Brady Bunch....

Some how the phrase "Protect and Serve" didn't seem to apply when describing a possible forced entry into my home. Breaking through my doors and windows and smashing my furniture counts as destroying my home, not redecorating. If awakenning an innocent family in the middle of the night with automatic weapons pointed in their faces and being physically subdued is not a "terrorizing" experience then perhaps you can provide a better descriptive phrase. Thanks for the Brady Bunch slight.

No officer WANTS to execute a KNW on an innocent citizen but it happens over and over. Those officers executing such warrants are doing a dangerous job because they think it is needed for the public's safety. The policy that guides such actions though is wrong. It puts the officers and the public at risk.

[Redneck Repairs]

I started to edit the last post ( bobernet snuck one inn on me lol ) and decided clearification as i see it deserved a post of its own . If for no other reason so we can argue it lol .

Bob , neither Op nor i are " selling " no knocks , nor will you find anyone here to sell them , What we are saying is that they are vital as a tool to have . Honestly i kinda get a bit testy on anyone who has never served a warrant ( and by that invaded the privacy of a homeowner looking for something that will literaly fit in the seam of your wife's pantys ) to start speaking to how a search should work.
Now not that i dont appreciate all input on the issue , but damm man untill you have done it , please refrain from the " command on high " mindset . The first NO Knock i ever served , I did it with a cut down remmington 1100 12 ga . I was so ampped that when i went thro the door i hung the muzzle on the " over the sink cabnets " , and peeled them off the wall , it rained dishes for months ( or so it seemed ) . I also cut a hitler mustache under the suspects nose with the rib of the shotgun i had while screaming LAY DOWN NOW!! . he did , where he was headed was a S&W mod 29 6.5" .44 mag . I was in uniform , the rest of the team in civvys ... To this day he swears that untill i hit him he thought it was a rippoff , just food for thought ... Oh yea and it was a good raid ... we got 2lbs of coke out of the house and 270 lbs of grass buryed in a big sheep wool carboy for shipping .