He means my post #32.
This is a discussion on I don't even know what to say to this within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by bobernet Maybe you're talking about other threads or I missed it here, but who was linking to anti-cop websites? He means my ...
He means my post #32.
So, if he had been a tad quicker, and you a tad slower, you could easily have had .44 lead coming toward you at a high rate of speed.
Is some marijuana worth your life?
What if he got to the gun, but you were quick enough to shoot him before he started shooting you? Was the marijuana worth his life?
That's all I'm saying.
There is some percentage of bad guys who will shoot cops to avoid going to prison during a normal warrant service. There is some percentage of cops that will accidentally shoot somebody during a normal warrant service.
But... as soon as you introduce the surprise, fear, adrenaline and speed that a NKW involves, you've just added a whole bunch of people to both percentages above. The LEO sees anyone reaching for a gun as a BG then, whether they are or not. The person on the receiving end sees guys breaking in with guns.
It's a lot of escalation. I'm not saying NKWs have no place whatsoever, but at least based on what's been posted in *this* case (which is admittedly probably not all the facts) a NKW seems the primary cause of this mistake.
Sorry but I do not see the justification for most no-knocks. The only time I could accept one being done for something non-life threatenning is if positive identification of the occupants was made immediately prior to the execution of the warrant. Without that we are just begging for errors to be made that will result in the deaths of both innocent civilians and officers.
I would appreciate someone explaining why a no-knock is even needed for anything but the "War on Drugs." I consider that to be a farce, no I do not use any, and one of the greatest wastes of government money in history. That is another topic but can at least give some who consider KNW needed some insight into why I fail to see their purpose.
The anti-gun non-logic is not defined solely by blaming the tool rather than the user. In fact, one thing they are right about is that guns make the act of killing a person much easier. That's why firearms are the prevalent individual weapon in the world today. They're the best at what they're designed to do. Yes, they're a tool, but a dangerous tool that must be treated with respect.
The fallacy that anti-gunners slip into is that legally banning a tool from the general public will reduce its use by criminals, who, as we all know, ignore laws by definition. This single fact is what destroys the logic of gun control.
Now, no-knock warrant service is also a tool, one that is also dangerous, also demands respect and care in its use, and also is very effective. The difference is that police departments tend to follow the laws. If a tool is banned, it doesn't get used.
Because of this, the no-knock debate is radically different than the gun control debate. Where-as gun control arguments revolve around whether laws would have any effect at all (and constitutionality), the no-knock debate must justify one successful tool over another.
Simply saying that no-knocks are a tool and should be given "the benefit of the doubt" (essentially) until they are mis-used ignores this completely. Not to mention that one side of this comparison is a god-given right, and the other side is the forcible removal of god-given rights. IMO, that alone merits stronger scrutiny for no-knock warrants than for armed citizens.
To throw in my other two cents, I have no doubt that there are situations where overwhelming and sudden application of force is needed. Hostage or barricade situations come to mind. But this should be the absolute last resort, used when lives are in imminent danger, much as our CCW's are not our first option for defense. What's that saying? "If your favorite tool is a hammer, every problem starts looking like a nail." This should apply doubly to police raids.
Well time to throw in my two cents.
For the case in general... all I can vouch for is the asinine quality of the N&O here....lots of people just call it the Gruesome Disturber.
They do tend to have a very very large anti-gun slant, and also are not keen on police officers in general.
As for the NKW issue. Well not been in one personally but my father/brother have.
But first some history the officers would of known about.
See my brother has this habit of getting into "some" trouble from time to time. Then his favorite kind of trouble was Crack/Cocaine/Meth and Illegally modified weapons. (Full auto, sawed off and the like).
My father has a long history of violence, and assult charges, mostly in self defense but still in the memory of the area Police. (no convictions however)
Step Mother has a few Arson charges (she burned down my father's home once) and paid a man to break my father's legs (when he came home to find his house burned down)
Due to all this fun filled history the police decided to issue a NKW in order to nab my brother for all his charges.
Well they bust in nab my brother and all is well. This is a case where it was used correctly. However the only reason it went well was due to the fact that my father was passed out stoned and never even woke up until the police were over his bed. Had that not been the case plain and simple it would of been a bloodbath. All he would of seen is someone breaking into his home (most likely someone my brother had ticked off) and like anyone else would of attempted to defend himself.
NKW are an ugly business. I believe they do have their place, and in the story I posted that was one of them. But mistakes do happen, and when they do most often the Good Guys die be they Police or Citizens.
Where should the limits be then....Honestly I do not know, and I hope to never have any personal involvement of the entire matter.
Just my $.02
Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.
Good God. I can't think of anything to say. These cops seem to have been out of control.
My question is why you would have someone on a "No-Knock" breach team not be able to tell the differance between a ram and a gunshot. If he was inside the house why were they using the ram? if he was outside why shoot through a door when you know your buddies are inside?
This cop should not be given a gun if he doens't know when to properly utilize it.
To those that paid for my freedom,
I WILL NEVER FORGET.
As with all statements I've made and All that I will make, please check your local laws to verify accuracy. (and if i'm wrong let me know as I like to be right in the future) After all I'm just some goofball posting on an internet forum.
Once again it goes back to him having his finger on the trigger before they breached the doorway and he was on target. When you hear sudden loud noises, your instinct is to flinch, when he flinched his finger was on the trigger.......bang.......