Looking for reactions - News Story

Looking for reactions - News Story

This is a discussion on Looking for reactions - News Story within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; From the Bradenton Herald on Saturday, July 26: ================================= Man, 76, charged with hitting deputy in face MANATEE --A 76-year-old man has been arrested on ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: Looking for reactions - News Story

  1. #1
    Member Array spensergig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    kennel - FL
    Posts
    76

    Question Looking for reactions - News Story

    From the Bradenton Herald on Saturday, July 26:
    =================================
    Man, 76, charged with hitting deputy in face

    MANATEE --A 76-year-old man has been arrested on a charge he hit a deputy in the face, according to a Manatee County Sheriff's Office report.

    Benjamin C. Daker, 76, of the 3100 block of Cortez Road, was arrested Thursday on a charge of battery on a law enforcement officer.

    According to the report, a deputy went to Daker's mobile home in search of Daker's grandson, who is wanted on a warrant.

    When Daker told the deputy his grandson was not home, the deputy asked to search the premises. Daker refused, demanding a warrant.

    The deputy told Daker he did not need a warrant to search for a wanted man and tried to walk past him. Daker then shoved the deputy in the chest and punched him in the face with his fist, the sheriff's report said.

    Daker continued to resist and after being handcuffed was dragged to the deputy's patrol car. Daker's grandson was not found in the home
    ==========================================
    I'm thinking of writing the Sheriff, who has been in office about a year, and asking when he plans to train his deputies on that nagging thing called a Constitution.
    Then again, it was only a couple of years ago that a deputy shot and killed a homeowner in a similar situation.
    Maybe I'll write the paper instead.


  2. #2
    Member Array FallenPhoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Tx
    Posts
    72
    A perfect example of "two wrongs don't make a right." Regardless of the legality of the deputy's actions, the man still hit a peace officer.

  3. #3
    Member Array Dgydad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    28

    Angry Excuse me? Why NOT resist?

    I see no reason to come down on this man for resisting a "peace officer". If he had the authority to search the premises, so be it. However, if you have the authority & intend to exercise that authority, why would you ask permission?
    If the officer didn't have the authority to enter & search the residence (and I'm betting he didn't), HE is in the wrong, and is violating the law. Resisting in that case, I believe, is fully justified. He was resisting a criminal intrusion into his home. The officer in question should be thankful the gentleman wasn't armed, or the oucome could have been much worse.
    Law enforcement personnel are public servants. The badge does not confer permission to ignore or violate the law as they see fit. If we do not resist them when they do they will never be dissuaded from this behavior. When those who violate the law in it's service are not promptly disciplined, it leads to distrust and comtempt for the law in general.

  4. #4
    Member Array dogrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    E/Cntl Fla.
    Posts
    169
    I'm a retired Fl. LEO & if the story is as relayed then the Deputy was wrong. He does NOT have carte blanche to enter sans warrant unless he's in hot pursuit or exigent circumstances demand immediate entry. I won't condone the old man's actions by striking the LEO but he WAS well within his rights to refuse entry.......It'd appear that even with the battery on the LEO that the old fellow has a valid complaint and just might wind up with a substantial settlement if he's enough sense to hire a good lawyer.

    The bottom line is that you cannot generally enter private premises without a warrant unless granted permission.

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley in Virginia
    Posts
    2,577
    Sounds like the old fellow was well within his rights to defend his home. The deputy did not have a warrant and his order was unlawful. The duputy should be charged with breaking and entering, assault, and a few other charges. Badge or no badge, the law is the law. No one has the right to forcably enter another's home without due process of law.

  6. #6
    Distinguished Member Array Tally XD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    1,830
    This is why the 2nd Amendment is there. Local police are still government agencies and we were warned by our founding fathers that these kinds of invasions could happen.

    Too many policemen think they are the only ones allowed to point a gun at someone and they have the power to tell you what you can and cant do on your property.
    I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.
    - Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004

  7. #7
    Member
    Array kurtiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    62
    In this circumstance, I think the deputy was wrong. Unless there is more to the story, like the deputy suspected that the grandson was in the house. However, the homeowner should not have hit the deputy. He probably should have called 911 on him if he was truly concerned.
    Paracord Survival Bracelets & Lanyards. Help us raise awareness and $'s for our Wounded Warriors! Visit www.SurvivalStraps.com

  8. #8
    Member Array bigiceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    491
    I am of the belief that entry by a peace officer without a warrent constitutes breaking and entering. That is an offense under most castle doctrines that allows the use of force, up to deadly force, to resist. The LEO attempting to disregard the homeowner's refusal to enter and then being forceably prevented from entry is within the rights of the homeowner.

    Those who say that the homeowner should not have struck the LEO have not offered an alternative other than calling 911. In this circumstance calling 911 after the deputy was inside the home is too late. What are the other alternatives? Standing back and allowing illegal search is not on the table. The question is how else do you stop an LEO intent upon blatantly violating your rights, entering your home without a warrent, other than physical intervention?

    I am not trying to be all smug in my rights and militant here either. I really want to know, because unless given another alternative this is what I would do.
    But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...
    "Baa."
    LTC(RET) Dave Grossman

    Revolutionary War Veterans Association Shooter Qualification: Cook

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array Sergeant Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    783
    I'd say that the deputy was WRONG......UNLESS there was FRESH information from a RELIABLE source indicating that the grandson was there AT THE TIME. You can't just go searching the homes of every relative of every fugitive just on the off chance that they might be there. (even though I get the impression that this was where this particular hairball lived)

    I'd also say that the old man was WRONG for using violence against the deputy. I think he blew a nice lawsuit by doing that.

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,511
    I would not push or hit any LEO. I would not let any LEO search my home without a warrant (under most circumstances)...if he/she still searched without permission, I would make my disapproval known through the legal route, not the physical route. Record the intrusion if possible...
    If I had anticipated this approach, I might answer the door, step outside and lock the door behind me...that's the place to make your case in the first place.

    Possibly notify the news media.

    I don't think one would find it difficult for a reputable lawyer to take this case.

    Possibly a recorded call to 911 to voice my disapproval wouldn't hurt.

    Stay armed...get a lawyer...stay safe!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  11. #11
    Member Array bigiceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    491
    These are exerts from the Texas codes given to CHL applicants during their classes and available from the Department of Public Safety (Highway Patrol).

    I am not sure that the Deputy attempting to use ANY force to attempt an illegal search would justify force in response, but here are the laws where I live.

    I have bolded those things I think are particularly relevent.




    46.05.
    (c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
    (1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or
    person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force
    than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
    (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
    force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's
    (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than
    necessary.
    (d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter
    except as provided in Sections 9.32
    , 9.33, and 9.34.

    PC 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
    is justified in using deadly force against another:
    (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
    Section 9.31;
    (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
    retreated; and
    (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
    force is immediately necessary:
    (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use
    of unlawful deadly force; or
    (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
    kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
    robbery, or aggravated robbery.
    (b) The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not apply
    to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time of the
    use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the actor
    But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...
    "Baa."
    LTC(RET) Dave Grossman

    Revolutionary War Veterans Association Shooter Qualification: Cook

  12. #12
    Member Array Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    383
    Based on that deputy's logic, he can enter any premises he wants as long as he's (1) looking for someone for whom he has an arrest warrant and (2) he has any inkling at all that the person might be in the premises. That's a pretty broad brush to be painting with. He could believe himself justified to enter any relatives' home, girlfriend' homes, parents of girlfriend's homes, known acquaintances, etc. Where does that end?

    As for the old man, I think he should have asked the deputy to remain outside and observe the residence and call for a supervisor and allow the old man to contact his attorney. If the deputy says no, then comply in the moment and sue for the violation of your 4th amendment rights later.

    Part of me wants to applaud the man for taking his rights seriously enough to attempt to defend them, but it was a no win for him.
    When in doubt, just ask yourself, "What would Theodore Roosevelt do?"

    Every society is 3 missed meals away from anarchy.

  13. #13
    Member Array bigiceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    491
    Why is it only on a date that people think NO means no? A badge is a mark of LIMITED authority. Greatly limited and restricted authority. We as citizens are not required, compelled or obligated to allow the exercise of authority by any LEO outside of those limits. Don't get me wrong I have great respect for the LEO community, they put their lives on the line for us all every day doing a job that I frankly don't know how they put up with. That does not mean I will allow them to disregard my rights. It that means saying no, I will say no. If I have to say it again, I will. I will suggest they get some supervisional oversight to clarify the question. I will do all in my power to persuade them to comply with my rights and their limitations. If they insist after all that, they are going to have to decide if it is important enough to fight over, and I will resist their illegal efforts to enforce their will upon me outside of their authority up to and including the use of deadly force. An LEO breaking the law is just a criminal in a police officer's clothes and deserves nothing more or less than any other common criminal. They know better, sometimes they just forget in their enthusiasm and frustration, but they know better.
    But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...
    "Baa."
    LTC(RET) Dave Grossman

    Revolutionary War Veterans Association Shooter Qualification: Cook

  14. #14
    Member Array Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by bigiceman View Post
    Why is it only on a date that people think NO means no? A badge is a mark of LIMITED authority. Greatly limited and restricted authority. We as citizens are not required, compelled or obligated to allow the exercise of authority by any LEO outside of those limits. Don't get me wrong I have great respect for the LEO community, they put their lives on the line for us all every day doing a job that I frankly don't know how they put up with. That does not mean I will allow them to disregard my rights. It that means saying no, I will say no. If I have to say it again, I will. I will suggest they get some supervisional oversight to clarify the question. I will do all in my power to persuade them to comply with my rights and their limitations. If they insist after all that, they are going to have to decide if it is important enough to fight over, and I will resist their illegal efforts to enforce their will upon me outside of their authority up to and including the use of deadly force. An LEO breaking the law is just a criminal in a police officer's clothes and deserves nothing more or less than any other common criminal. They know better, sometimes they just forget in their enthusiasm and frustration, but they know better.
    I don't disagree with a single thing you've said. I just acknowledge that our CJ system only knows one way to look at "resisting" an officer or disregarding an officers instructions. They'll probably charge this poor guy with obstruction of justice (along with assault, etc.) despite the deputy's unjust actions.
    When in doubt, just ask yourself, "What would Theodore Roosevelt do?"

    Every society is 3 missed meals away from anarchy.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array Ti Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Under Cover
    Posts
    2,035
    The home owner had every right to defend if it is as stated and I also do not believe he blew any chance of a law suit. He was within his rights.



    Ti
    Train and train hard, you might not get a second chance to make a first impression!

    I vote for Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife for President.....Not!

Page 1 of 2 12 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. NC News Story
    By ncccw01 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 8th, 2008, 01:00 PM
  2. Fox News, Gun Control Story
    By Kid1911 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 31st, 2006, 11:52 PM
  3. Sad Story In The News Today
    By Captain Crunch in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: June 30th, 2006, 01:36 AM
  4. Possible news story?
    By P95Carry in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 21st, 2005, 11:19 AM