What if it was you?


PDA






ProficientRifleman
April 11, 2008, 09:51 PM
http://www.nbc6.net/news/15843682/detail.html


MIAMI --
Officers from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives barged into a South Florida home Wednesday only to discover they had the wrong address.

The ATF agents were supposed to conduct a raid at a home in the 2600 block of Northwest 49th Terrace in northwest Miami-Dade County, but they were off by one block. They entered a house on Northwest 49th Street instead.

Philomaine Silvain and her 3-year-old son were among the innocent people inside the home when the agents came in.

Silvain pointed out damage to her front door.

"The door's right here," Silvain said. "There's a hole right here. It's broken."

Her back window was also broken from where federal agents fired canisters into the apartment at about 11:30 p.m. Wednesday.

The agents left the tear gas cans in the house, and Silvain kicked them out and into the street before dumping them into the garbage.

No one from the ATF would speak to NBC 6 on camera, but a representative said over the phone that it was an innocent mistake, agents apologized on the scene and ATF would repair any damages.

Silvain's door has already been fixed. However, she said she plans on speaking with a lawyer.

The officers did arrest the man they actually were looking for one street away.

If you enjoyed reading about "What if it was you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ursus americanas
April 11, 2008, 10:02 PM
Well, I can certainly think of one way to make things a whole LOT WORSE...

When considering the defense of your home and loved ones, never has there been a better reason to remind yourself that Murphy is a BIT$H! I think a lot of people here would have the same response as me when you hear glass breaking in your home at 2330, but we should all keep in mind that things aren't always what they seem, and misconceptions can cost you dearly.

That said, a good lawyer seems to be in order for that family. If the gov's breakin' in, I'm cashin' in! :neener:

JCMAG
April 11, 2008, 10:28 PM
This is something that has long bothered me...

Why is it necessary to "raid" people's homes? Why can't they just knock? Did they have reason to believe that the people inside the house would fire upon them unprovoked?

If they can't get the address right, I'm thinking they had absolutely no premise to believe that it was necessary to break down doors and tear-gas people.

Someone remind me why the federal government has officers anyway? Shouldn't the state or local enforcement officers be handling this?

I feel bad for the kid... Maybe he will grow up to distrust the government. He will be better for it...

romma
April 11, 2008, 10:50 PM
I can only tell you that the night the car smashed into the house I lived in few years ago,,, my pistol was in my hand in less than a second. Loaded and chambered from the start.

Who knows for sure, I would probably be shot if I popped out the bedroom armed.

Cato the Roman
April 11, 2008, 11:34 PM
The quote concerning 100 million people murdered by their gov't, I have heard before. Does anyone know the source?:)

Larry E
April 11, 2008, 11:36 PM
I've got to agree that if the "agents" who entered this poor woman's home can't even find the correct address maybe they should be doing something where people won't get hurt. Emptying the trash, sweeping the floors, that sort of thing, no slams at janitors attended. I hate to think what would have happened if she'd had a gun and attempted to defend her home. She'd have been killed no doubt, and the agents would have gotten off as well.

In Western WA a few years back a law enforcement agency kicked in the wrong door, the resident was apparently half asleep on the couch. When the tv remote control came up over the back of the couch he was shot dead. "An honest mistake", is how I remember the apology. :cuss:

bensdad
April 11, 2008, 11:48 PM
She'd have been killed no doubt,

Actually, there is some doubt. There have been at least a couple of instances recently where LE have suffered casualties and defensive-minded homeowners have not. There was the one that got all the press... the guy shot through the door as I recall? There was also one in the Twin Cities (Mpls./St. Paul) area. The homeowner killed one cop and tagged another, iirc.

goalie
April 12, 2008, 12:14 AM
Well, I was never that lucky in combat, and I don't think anything has changed in the last 15 years, except I am not as young or well-trained anymore.

I guess I would end up getting shot, because even in my dreams, my brain won't let me take on a SWAT team and win.

:(

guntotinguy
April 12, 2008, 03:11 AM
Silvain's door has already been fixed. However, she said she plans on speaking with a lawyer.

Definitely the smart thing to do,at least what took place was 'documented' and not swept under the rug,so to speak.One needs to exercise their 'rights' if one wishes to keep them in our day and age.

Honu
April 12, 2008, 04:16 AM
I thought I read somewhere that some criminals were dressing up as agents as they bust in the door ?

a door busting in and voices screaming FEDERAL AGENTS !!!
I might pause as I dont want to get myself and family wasted !
but would that pause be bad guys ?


so if you heard that would you pause ?

if the bad guys have the same black outfits and guns would you pause ? if so that alone could cost you dearly


I think with all the technology that agents have there should be no way on earth anymore they mess up and get the wrong house !!!!!!

plexreticle
April 12, 2008, 04:32 AM
The agents should be convicted of breaking and entering.

Do this a couple of times and the number of wrong address no knock warrants will diminish rapidly

mekender
April 12, 2008, 04:51 AM
What if it was you?

id be about 6 months of litigation away from being a multi-millionare

doc2rn
April 12, 2008, 09:32 AM
With all the billions spent on these agencies you would have thought someone could have hopped down to bestbuy for a GPS. I saw on here yesterday someone broke into an FBI cruiser for one.

romma
April 12, 2008, 09:43 AM
The quote concerning 100 million people murdered by their gov't, I have heard before. Does anyone know the source?

Actually Cato, I took the rounded stastic (100 million) and made the rest of the quote myself.

El Tejon
April 12, 2008, 09:52 AM
Cato, The Black Book of Communism (the English title): http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/COUBLA.html

We must ask, "why are tax clerks doing this?"

ATF must be destroyed.

Tribal
April 12, 2008, 01:13 PM
Seriously, though, what's to be done? The odds of a crackdown on this sort of thing occurring short of a horrific tragedy are virtually nothing.

Guitargod1985
April 12, 2008, 01:48 PM
I'd be dead.

When the news story finally came out I'm sure there would be some kind of controlled substance that magically happened to materialize in my residence. Also, one of my shotguns would undoubtedly have a barrel 17 7/8" in length.

Deanimator
April 12, 2008, 02:01 PM
To paraphrase Josef Stalin, "Sue, sue and sue some more."

I don't believe in settling in such cases, since among other things, such settlements usually include non-disclosure clauses. Nothing on earth could prevent me from dragging the participants' professional reputations and personal character through an endless trough of mud. By the time I was done, the agents and their supervisors would be shunned even by NAMBLA members.

There is NO excuse for such stupidity and anyone who gets the wrong house is an ignoramus. Do that to me and it's the law of the vendetta, for as long as it takes and as much as it costs; I'll happily live under a bridge for the rest of my life if I can make you live under the next one down the highway.

Gator
April 12, 2008, 02:15 PM
Lucky they didn't kill the mom and three year old...:fire:

hvengel
April 12, 2008, 02:27 PM
I thought I read somewhere that some criminals were dressing up as agents as they bust in the door ?

This is not at all uncommon and has been happening for may decades. The people who do this normally target individuals that they think are involved in something illegal believing that using this tactic will give them the upper hand. Their goal is to steal the money or drugs from the targets "enterprise". But like these BATF agents they sometimes get the address wrong.

coloradokevin
April 12, 2008, 02:27 PM
Honestly... If this "was me", I doubt I'd have had any time to react anyway.

This was obviously a bad situation, human error. It sounds like the agency is trying to rectify the situation, and it certainly was a big bold mistake.

But, SWAT teams don't come lightly through a door. When they are utilized on warrants it is because of the risks of that warrant (same reason that they use a no-knock, versus the typical knock-and-announce).

When they do come through the door, you'll likely not know what hit you... Flash bangs, gas, and a team of highly trained folks filing in rapidly.

So, if it were me, I'd probably be sitting there blinking when they came in the door!

Why is it necessary to "raid" people's homes? Why can't they just knock? Did they have reason to believe that the people inside the house would fire upon them unprovoked?

Typically, yes (to varying degrees). At least in my department, no-knock warrants are used for those situations where it is considered too dangerous to use knock-and-announce tactics. In short, when our SWAT team bursts through the door, they do so because it is too risky for the uniformed officer to try to knock and say "police, we have a warrant... open the door". Some people really are bad folks, and they are already in a position of advantage by being inside of their house. On occasion we have to level the playing field!

I'm not advocating making a HUGE mistake like these guys did in this story, but it still explains why the so-called "raid" tactics are often appropriate.




When the news story finally came out I'm sure there would be some kind of controlled substance that magically happened to materialize in my residence. Also, one of my shotguns would undoubtedly have a barrel 17 7/8" in length.

Give me a break. Another conspiracy theory! I'm not saying that the situation in this story was at all acceptable, but it doesn't mean that the agents/officers in these cases are malicious criminals. They made a BIG mistake, but that doesn't in any way mean they would plant contraband to make you look bad in the press... Again, this was a huge mistake, but don't try to paint this picture of cops automatically being dirty!

Typical cop bashing.

Kindrox
April 12, 2008, 02:58 PM
Give me a break. Another conspiracy theory! I'm not saying that the situation in this story was at all acceptable, but it doesn't mean that the agents/officers in these cases are malicious criminals. They made a BIG mistake, but that doesn't in any way mean they would plant contraband to make you look bad in the press... Again, this was a huge mistake, but don't try to paint this picture of cops automatically being dirty!


Just like this did not happen in Atlanta :rolleyes:

Calling a spade a spade is not cop bashing it is recognizing our current reality for what it is. I don't think very many people on the forum really think the majority of police are dirty and dishonest. However I bet YOU know an officer who is and are defacto covering for him/her.

I know the bad apples at my job, you don't know the bad apples at yours???

I also there are practical issues with reporting what you know but cannot prove, so I am not on a high horse. Just be carefull about getting up on yours.

Andrewsky
April 12, 2008, 03:09 PM
Cato the Roman said:

The quote concerning 100 million people murdered by their gov't, I have heard before. Does anyone know the source?

Most of those come from the People's Republic of China. In the 1950's and 1960's, it's estimated that over 50 million Chinese starved to death or died because of the government.

The other deaths come from the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, Cambodia, Uganda, and a few other places.

coloradokevin
April 12, 2008, 03:16 PM
Calling a spade a spade is not cop bashing it is recognizing our current reality for what it is. I don't think very many people on the forum really think the majority of police are dirty and dishonest. However I bet YOU know an officer who is and are defacto covering for him/her.

I know the bad apples at my job, you don't know the bad apples at yours???

I also there are practical issues with reporting what you know but cannot prove, so I am not on a high horse. Just be carefull about getting up on yours.

Yes, I know guys on the job who shouldn't be cops (at least in my opinion). I know guys with bad attitudes, and poor work ethics, and an inability to properly conduct an investigation.

I DO NOT know cops commiting felonies on the job. I don't know cops planting evidence, and I wouldn't begin to cover up for one who was... Yes, police officers are known for looking out for their "brother" officers. But, any cop who does these sort of things is no brother of mine.

You mention proof... Certainly something could be happening that I don't know about. That doesn't mean I would tolerate it if I did! In fact, a couple of guys have been fired from my department within the past two years because other officers found out about illegal things they were doing, and turned them in. I knew one of the guys, and would have never begun to expect that he was doing the things he was doing. Can you honestly fault me for the fact that I was unaware of his misdeeds? If I knew, I'd have reported it too.

I have an obligation to my fellow officers, but I also have a moral and ethical obligation to myself. And, despite some of the rhetoric that is heard when a bad cop is exposed, I think that most cops fall on my end of the spectrum.

Vern Humphrey
April 12, 2008, 03:18 PM
No one from the ATF would speak to NBC 6 on camera, but a representative said over the phone that it was an innocent mistake, agents apologized on the scene and ATF would repair any damages.
The people who did this clearly demonstrated they are not to be trusted with guns or badges. When is the drumming-out ceremony?

El Tejon
April 12, 2008, 04:05 PM
Seriously, though, what's to be done? The odds of a crackdown on this sort of thing occurring short of a horrific tragedy are virtually nothing.

Tribal, we fight to destroy the laws that give this agency it's presumed power. We fight the administrative code that they draft to give themselves more power.

We fight until the ATF is destroyed.

yokel
April 12, 2008, 04:29 PM
Washington often serves as a trailing indicator of public sentiment on an issue, following action in state capitals or responding belatedly to a growing public outcry.

xjchief
April 12, 2008, 04:53 PM
Not all of us have jobs where you can make a mistake like that and not suffer SERIOUS consequenses like the loss or suspension of a professional license, suspsension of employment or termination, and personal liabitly.:fire:

Oops we invaded the wrong home and caused property damage and recklessly endangered lives should at minimum result in firing or suspension without pay for all the agents involved.

Until we start holding our government accountable we can only expect more of the same. :banghead:

Vern Humphrey
April 12, 2008, 05:13 PM
Until we start holding our government accountable we can only expect more of the same.
Yeah, like that's gonna happen!

It'll be like the public schools -- the more they fail, the more money we throw at them, but they resist all attempts to hold them accountable.

Deanimator
April 12, 2008, 05:24 PM
Just like this did not happen in Atlanta
Thanks for saving me the trouble of describing that.

EVERY one of the officers materially involved in that case deserves the death penalty, be it the one(s) who lied to obtain the search warrant, the one(s) who shot her, or the one(s) who planted the drugs in her house after the fact. If not otherwise involved, the one(s) who suborned perjury from the informant to cover the whole thing up deserve at least 25 years in the general population. Kathryn Johnston's family needs to utterly destroy those involved financially, so that even if they DO survive prison, people starving in Darfur will send THEM charity.

Subhuman filth like that disgust me.

Gator
April 12, 2008, 05:26 PM
This is a much bigger problem with federal law enforcement. Local police have to answer to the citizens in their jurisdiction, and the local chief can be more easily replaced than the head of the ATF (about a million times easier!). Of course the bigger the department (Atlanta, Chicago, New York, LA, etc. the less accountability there is.)

There is absolutely NO accountability for federal officers that I can see, yes everyone involved in this raid should be fired, but what will actually happen? There will probably not even be a note in their records. I've written my representatives about cases like this before and received "canned" answers in reply: Thank you for expressing your concern about this important issue....blah, blah. :banghead:

TCB in TN
April 12, 2008, 05:49 PM
Honestly... If this "was me", I doubt I'd have had any time to react anyway.

This was obviously a bad situation, human error. It sounds like the agency is trying to rectify the situation, and it certainly was a big bold mistake.

But, SWAT teams don't come lightly through a door. When they are utilized on warrants it is because of the risks of that warrant (same reason that they use a no-knock, versus the typical knock-and-announce).

Risks? How pray tell do they know that the individual who they are serving a warrent ON is so dangerous when they have not even recon'd the home/business? Just a TINY bit of real work prevents this type of mistake from happening! It is on par with a guy going into surgury for a knee and having a different surgeon performing a hear transplant on him!
Heck even UPS tries to verify the address before delivering a package, why should we expect less from our LEO's?

Typically, yes (to varying degrees). At least in my department, no-knock warrants are used for those situations where it is considered too dangerous to use knock-and-announce tactics. In short, when our SWAT team bursts through the door, they do so because it is too risky for the uniformed officer to try to knock and say "police, we have a warrant... open the door". Some people really are bad folks, and they are already in a position of advantage by being inside of their house. On occasion we have to level the playing field!

Has your department ever SWATTED the wrong address, on one of these raids? IMHO unless you have recon'd the location and know who is there then even a SWAT team would be foolish to perform the raid.


I'm not advocating making a HUGE mistake like these guys did in this story, but it still explains why the so-called "raid" tactics are often appropriate.

IF a real, danger does exist then rather than a swat raid, then how about waiting until the subject exits the residence and picking them up then? In most cases a little more Andy Griffith and a little less GI Joe would seem to be in order.

Guitargod1985
April 12, 2008, 06:37 PM
Give me a break. Another conspiracy theory! I'm not saying that the situation in this story was at all acceptable, but it doesn't mean that the agents/officers in these cases are malicious criminals. They made a BIG mistake, but that doesn't in any way mean they would plant contraband to make you look bad in the press... Again, this was a huge mistake, but don't try to paint this picture of cops automatically being dirty!

Typical cop bashing.

I think you misunderstood me there. I was not saying that this event in particular involved malicious law enforcement officers. What I AM saying is that because nobody happened to be killed this time around, there was no need to make a death look justified by planting "evidence."

In other words, because I would not hesitate to defend my home I would in all likelihood be shot. Then we would get to find out whether someone thinks it would be a good idea to cover up there inadequate information gathering with a bag of weed and a weapons violation.

I was not "cop bashing." One of my best friends is a deputy at a local Sheriff's Office and he is a real stand up guy. For the most part I suspect that officers of the law are much like him in that regard. But he happens to know of a few deputies that occasionally engage in unethical practices. I was simply relaying an observation made in several other cases: that when someone dies because of an erroneous no-knock search, sometimes people cover up.

ProficientRifleman
April 12, 2008, 06:45 PM
Coloradokevin:

I doubt I'd have had any time to react anyway.

In your case, and also true for most others, that is probably true. However, "Dynamic Entries" can be fought through and resisted. It takes training and focus to do it. The first thing to be aware of is that it CAN happen.

This was obviously a bad situation, human error.

You are correct, Sir. It wasn't a computer which broke the door and fired tear-gas canisters into a residence wherein was sleeping a three year old child.

It sounds like the agency is trying to rectify the situation, and it certainly was a big bold mistake.

By repairing the door? Are ANY of these individuals going to be held legally accountable for breaking and entering and endangering a small child? Hmmmm...

But, SWAT teams don't come lightly through a door. When they are utilized on warrants it is because of the risks of that warrant (same reason that they use a no-knock, versus the typical knock-and-announce).

I second what TCB said. If the subect is THAT dangerous, why not take him down when he leaves the residence? Why not THEN execute the search warrant on the residence? Makes you think...Hmmmmmmm

In short, when our SWAT team bursts through the door, they do so because it is too risky for the uniformed officer to try to knock and say "police, we have a warrant... open the door". Some people really are bad folks, and they are already in a position of advantage by being inside of their house. On occasion we have to level the playing field!

Maybe YOU and your "brother officers" should consider this...

1. You get paid to do the job, if it is too risky, find another line of work.

2. Knock and announce allows the home owner inside to read the warrant and say something like, "Dear black-clad Gentlemen, this isn't the house you're looking for. So-and-so doesn't live here, he lives the next block over. If you read your warrant there, it says 3806 Main St., not 3606 Main St..

3. Bad folks, huh? You don't say...position of advantage...? Maybe wait until he isn't in a position of advantage and take him then... Hmmm? Then execute the search and gather all the evidence from the target house with NO RESISTANCE. But then there would be no NEED for all that paramilitary SWAT gear and cool guy stuff.

Give me a break. Another conspiracy theory!

NO!!! Nothing like the Atlanta case (previously mentioned) has ever happened before!

And it'll never happen again! :)

but that doesn't in any way mean they would plant contraband to make you look bad in the press...

Read his post again, he was speaking of after the fact, after he had resisted, and after the SWAT team had realized it had made a royal blunder...Do you really think it improbable?

Typical cop bashing.

No, it is not. It is JUSTIFIED criticism.

Crying "Cop Bashing!! Cop Bashing!!" is a broad-brush smear intended to stop a discussion in which you are uncomfortable.

I DO NOT know cops commiting felonies on the job. I don't know cops planting evidence, and I wouldn't begin to cover up for one who was... Yes, police officers are known for looking out for their "brother" officers. But, any cop who does these sort of things is no brother of mine.

KUDOS! Rarely is such a statement made aloud. I pray that you are sincere.

In fact, a couple of guys have been fired from my department within the past two years because other officers found out about illegal things they were doing, and turned them in.

So you know of it happening, but you didn't know THEM personally... I gotcha!

How about this, suppose you know of several Cops who were involved in a bad shoot, you aren't involved in the post-event investigation, but pretty much everyone in your department knows the deal, you become aware of an institutional cover-up. Everyone in your department knows full well it is a white-wash. Would YOU call B.S.? Would YOU resign your position with the department?

If you care to, check out the Congressional hearings in 1995 about the Waco incident . In the hearings, documents were presented in which it was shown that ATF directed it's own agents to STOP the shooting review because they were creating "Brady material". For those unfamiliar with the term, Brady material would tend to exculpate the accused. How many ATF agents resigned in disgust? Just curious.

Wouldn't lie? Wouldn't plant evidence? Never happen, huh....?

Kevin, Don't take this healthy criticism as an indictment of YOU personally, nor of all SWAT team members, nor of Cops generally. This was a royal foul up. You are correct. However, the criticism isn't of all cops and all SWAT team members. The criticism is of the OVER USE of this type of tactic. More importantly, the criticism is of how the screw-ups, in this case ATF agents, never seem to be held accountable for their actions.

You, Kevin, and your fellow Cops can and should help prevent this. Don't cover for them, don't make excuses for them, don't look the other way and whistle when it happens. Advocate for this kind of action to be punished...as it would be for us "mere citizens".

Deanimator
April 12, 2008, 06:57 PM
You, Kevin, and your fellow Cops can and should help prevent this. Don't cover for them, don't make excuses for them, don't look the other way and whistle when it happens. Advocate for this kind of action to be punished...as it would be for us "mere citizens".
You just need to read about the "SOS" scandal in Chicago to see to what extent things are covered up by participants and those with knowledge. A home invasion, burglary and kidnapping ring operated inside the Chicago PD until very recently. In fact, it operated for YEARS. Perjured testimony regarding warrants and searches was offered by multiple officers. Other officers with knowledge kept silent. And strangely, in the midst of literally DOZENS of officers having knowledge of what was going on, Internal Affairs did NOTHING... again for YEARS.

If a particular department doesn't do those things, then I'm very happy. It's simply foolish to claim that it doesn't happen at all, or that those with knowledge act appropriately.

If something of the MASSIVE nature of "SOS" can go on for YEARS, I don't have much confidence in the ability of police departments to monitor themselves.

kentucky bucky
April 12, 2008, 07:42 PM
That is scary because I could see myself shooting an ATF agent due to their mistake. I wonder what would happen then? If I heard someone busting my door down, espesially if awakened in the middle of the night, I would definitely use lethal force against the intruder unless I could ID them in a split second as errant ATF agents, which is highly unlikely.

mccook8
April 12, 2008, 07:43 PM
1. You get paid to do the job, if it is too risky, find another line of work.

Hmmmm.......how much is that WORTH?

How much would YOU insist upon being paid to work as a police officer, and to do the job as YOU believe it should be done, in all aspects?

Sans Authoritas
April 12, 2008, 09:51 PM
Heaven forbid that they just track a (probably statutory) offender and catch him as he's just getting out of his car at work, or heaven forbid that they should set up an expandible stopstick down the street and intercept him when he leaves his home in his vehicle.

To paraphrase a previous poster: if the ATF had captured Koresh on his trips into town, there wouldn't have been such a glorious display of brave men in uniform keeping us safe from such dangerous men, women and children.

-Sans Authoritas

pbearperry
April 12, 2008, 10:04 PM
What,some cops made a mistake? Get a rope !

ConstitutionCowboy
April 12, 2008, 10:09 PM
Someone remind me why the federal government has officers anyway? Shouldn't the state or local enforcement officers be handling this?

Excellent question. Per the Constitution, the only law enforcement option the Union has is to use the militia. There were times when that was exactly what the Union did. However, the first usurpation of this power came in the First Congress in the original act that established the courts. Congress "gave" law enforcement power to the U. S. Marshals equivalent to local sheriffs.

There is no need for these raids. As previously mentioned, there are better and sane ways to apprehend suspects.

Woody

"Charge the Court, Congress, and the several state legislatures with what to do with all the violent criminals who cannot be trusted with arms. We law abiding citizens shouldn't be burdened with having to prove we are not one of the untrustworthy just because those in government don't want to stop crime by keeping violent criminals locked up." B.E. Wood

Sans Authoritas
April 12, 2008, 10:20 PM
One of the main reasons the Founding Fathers wanted the militia to enforce regulations is because the militia did not have anything to gain by enforcing unjust and stupid regulations, while those who actually get paid by the taxpayer 24/7 do have an incentive to perform whatever actions their check-writers tell them to. The citizen-soldier usually suffered economically when he was called (usually coerced) to take up arms, no matter how much he got paid. The citizen-soldiers had lives to lead, and honest business to conduct. In the early days of the doomed republic, the militia system was one of the reasons that stupid regulations did not get passed. Even if they did get passed, they did not get enforced with any enthusiasm.

If a the individuals in government keep a standing army around, they will be tempted to find (or make up reasons) to justify its existence. The same applies to large police departments: especially those that have not yet been privatized.

And all police forces should be privatized.

-Sans Authoritas

pbearperry
April 12, 2008, 10:24 PM
We had a guy on my department that broke into a golf pro shop.He was drunk and in an attempt to get away he charged one of the two cops sent to the silent alarm.The older of the two cops covered him.He covered him with the front sight and shot him.

Cosmoline
April 12, 2008, 10:34 PM
Give them some slack. After all they're only enforcing the all-important crime fighting responsibilities of the Federal Government. Just look what an important place these responsibilities have in the Constitution!

collateral
April 12, 2008, 10:55 PM
On occasion we have to level the playing field!

You should stick to upholding the constitution.

macadore
April 12, 2008, 11:00 PM
The police who do this and those who order it should do prison time. Otherwise, it will just continue.

TexasSkyhawk
April 13, 2008, 12:23 AM
Risks? How pray tell do they know that the individual who they are serving a warrent ON is so dangerous when they have not even recon'd the home/business? Just a TINY bit of real work prevents this type of mistake from happening! It is on par with a guy going into surgury for a knee and having a different surgeon performing a hear transplant on him!

Boy, some of you internet heros and armchair quarterbacks crack me up.

Reminds me of the guys I saw line up for Airborne school, the SWC at Bragg, BUD/s, Idoc/Pipeline and other elite training schools. Lots of "hooyahs" and "all the way" and pushups and posturing and story-swapping . . . right up until they rang the bell or blew the horn.

Fine. No problem. Not everyone is cut out for that line of work and we never thought less of anyone who rang the bell or blew the horn. Hey, at least they gave it a shot, right?

But when those guys took their four or five days or two or three weeks of "experience" and then later on in life proceeded to become "experts" on special operations and how the SEALs and Green Berets and Parajumpers and Rangers should do things and offering a little "criticism" here and there . . .

Wrong address? Zero excuse.

But doing recon right before you raid? Not smart unless you want either A) an empty dwelling or dwelling void of evidence, or B) a real gun fight or resistance waiting on you.

Criminals are not completely stupid. They run entire neighborhoods. They have lookouts and eyes and ears and an intelligence network that the CIA actually studies. 99% of all cops stick out in such such neighborhoods and will be made.

Oh, I know. Some of y'all watch COPS on tv and know how it goes--they always get their man, right?

I especially love the "I'd be dead" responses. Ask anyone who's not only trained in dynamic entry, but who's done it for real just what your chances are. Folks, we did dynamic entry on residences and meeting places for hardcore, battle seasoned terrorists, Sandanistas, and so on. These folks have seen more and done more than you can even dream about and THEY didn't even have the ability or time to hardly even raise a weapon before we were on them and had them face down.

What make you, comfortable and cozy civilians not living in a war-torn land, think that you can and would do better?

I'm not exactly pro-cop, either. I was one, which is probably why. But I also know FIRSTHAND, unlike most of the cop-bashers--what it's like chasing down a bad guy in the bad part of town at the bad part of night and no backup anywhere close.

The vast majority of cops are ouststanding citizens. They put their ass on the line in return for bad hours, bad pay, having a microscope shoved up their butt every time some whiny candyassed citizen even hiccups about them, and finally, for the undying gratitude of a citizenry that is basically too gutless to take on the crime problem themselves. Citizens who bitch and moan about jury duty; citizens who refuse to "get involved" by being a witness or following through on reports/complaints; citizens who wouldn't last two weeks in the academy and/or who would outright refuse to do the job, but are the first to criticize.

Is it ANY WONDER that such a "them against us" attitude exists???

Again, I am NOT excusing the wrong address. I'm not particularly a big fan of "raids" in the first place--but unfortunately, there are instances in which they are needed.

I used to occasionally wonder why so few cops/law enforcement/military types visited this forum . . . Discussions like this one remind me why.

Jeff

Guitargod1985
April 13, 2008, 01:54 AM
And all police forces should be privatized.

Sans, what is your rationale behind this? Just wondering. I happen to agree with much of what you have to say in many threads, but I'm just curious as to why you think this would be a good idea.

mccook8
April 13, 2008, 02:05 AM
ProficientRifleman:

Still waiting on your answer to #37

robertpaulsen
April 13, 2008, 09:10 AM
That is because the right to self-defense with the best means in existence is a right given by God to protect our own lives, which he also gave us.

Certainly God gave every person the right to self-defense. But are you saying God gave the right to self-defense with the best means in existence to every person? Or did God just give that to U.S. Citizens?

yinyangdc
April 13, 2008, 09:34 AM
Everyone has the right to self-defense. Our Constitution merely recognizes that right. Unfortunately, too many in our society do not recognize the Constitution.

FTA84
April 13, 2008, 02:29 PM
Boy, some of you internet heros and armchair quarterbacks crack me up.


I think that they are just giving options they believe to be correct. There is this saying, about how America's justice system (used to) be based on only convicting those you were certain commited a crime. It is better to let a bad guy free than to jail the innocent. This is why trial by jury is supposed to "find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".

Mistakes are made in a finding and capturing criminals. Sometimes the innocent people are captured, the jury trial is supposed to prevent wrongful convictions.

On the other hand, no-knock raids with armed ATF agents completely removes this process. A mistake is made, and an innocent person may (and indeed they have been) condemned to death.

Even a death penalty jury trial has an appeals process, to make sure no mistake is made. With these tactics, when a mistake is made, it can and will eliminate the jury and the appeals process. Something that should be looked upon with much disgust.

TCB in TN
April 13, 2008, 03:20 PM
Boy, some of you internet heros and armchair quarterbacks crack me up.

But doing recon right before you raid? Not smart unless you want either A) an empty dwelling or dwelling void of evidence, or B) a real gun fight or resistance waiting on you.


Boy, some folks either have some reading comprehension problems are are just a little dense! Doing recon to at least make sure you know WHERE you are supposed to be going might outta be part of the process!

xjchief
April 13, 2008, 03:21 PM
Shhhh! Don't ruin it- he's a legend in his own mind. :neener:

Ozarks
April 13, 2008, 04:03 PM
No one from the ATF would speak to NBC 6 on camera, but a representative said over the phone that it was an innocent mistake, agents apologized on the scene and ATF would repair any damages.


Something not answered yet in three pages, so here's a question I've got: Just what are Federal Government ATF agents doing conducting a raid in Florida, or any other state?

slzy
April 13, 2008, 04:05 PM
maybe it would be better to try to interdict drugs by going after dealers on tax evasion

Erik
April 13, 2008, 04:49 PM
So an enforcement operation was executed at the worng address, with the inherant damage and risk associated with such things having occurred?

As already stated, there are no excuses. The remedy is civil and the penalty substantial.

All of which should be able to be agreed upon, or not, in a manner "higher roadish" than what is typically found throughout threads like these.

yinyangdc
April 13, 2008, 04:50 PM
Or better yet, a good percentage of the problems with illegal drugs would go away if they were no longer illegal. Then we could more effectively deal with the remaining problems. D'ya think?

pbearperry
April 13, 2008, 04:59 PM
Hell,lets make everything legal and do away with Police altogether?Survival of the fittest for everyone.Hell let's legalize prostitution everywhere so guys can get all they want.Seems to me tired guys would make no problems?Total anarchy,thats what I say.lol

Erik
April 13, 2008, 05:00 PM
Illegal drugs...

Irrelevant, in that you are assuming it was drug related, and even if it was, there are many other types of investigations that lead down similar paths.

And while we're at assumptions, "we're" assuming it was a "raid," a "no-knock," and that the tactics used were uncalled for had they been at the correct location.

Again, the issue, and about the only thing we can confirm given what little infomration we "know," is the wrong location. And I already said it: there is no excuse for that.

romma
April 13, 2008, 05:20 PM
I especially love the "I'd be dead" responses.

Well, my door comes crashing in, I am certain to have a gun in my hand probably .5 to 1.0 seconds, I would be heavily outnumbered and outgunned...

Ending up dead is at least a very likely possibility don't you think?

I mean, I would like to think I could outgun them all, walk up to the mobile command center, knock on the door and explain to the headphone wearing communications specialist on the other side that there was some sort of mix-up.

Somehow, I don't think I would get quite that far...

MechAg94
April 13, 2008, 05:39 PM
I didn't see anywhere in the article about how long it took them to figure out they were at the wrong address and let the mother and kid go. Was it 15 minutes or a few hours or the next day?

ProficientRifleman
April 13, 2008, 05:51 PM
Hmmmm.......how much is that WORTH?

How much would YOU insist upon being paid to work as a police officer, and to do the job as YOU believe it should be done, in all aspects?

Here is your answer:

I have no desire to be a cop. I never have had the desire to be a cop. I wouldn't take the job.

I have, however, been a soldier. I took on THAT responsibility with my eyes open and fully cognizant of the potential costs to me and those who care about me. Never during my military career did I find myself sniveling about how under paid and under appreciated I was. I never cried about the "risks I have to face day do day...you just don't know..."

I have been a Ranger, a Special Forces soldier, a combat diver, a Drill Sgt., and an instructor at SWC.

I was trained in C/T, room clearing (yes, the strong wall method) and such things as you call Dynamic Entry, more than twenty years ago, when I was a private. I understood then what the risks were. I did that kind of work because I wanted to. NOT because it would garner me a bunch of "respect". I am pretty sure I was ALWAYS paid substantially less than the average street cop.

If you want to be a cop, be one. I don't care. If you want to be on a SWAT team, feel free to do so. BUT when you foul up like these guys did, you SHOULD be held responsible.

When you bust down an innocent citizen's door, launch gas canisters through their windows, and point submachine guns at them...etc., You should be held accountable. When you royally foul up and ruin people's homes and risk their lives, you should be held accountable.

What is happening now, and the trend is, as far as I can tell, the cops get to walk away, toss a "hey, sorry...we'll pay for the damages" over their shoulder as they leave, and the city/county/state/fedgov will send a contractor out to cover their arses.

If you happen to notice this arrogance and Jack-Booted behavior, then you are "cop bashing".

Gunnerpalace
April 13, 2008, 06:01 PM
Hell,lets make everything legal and do away with Police altogether?Survival of the fittest for everyone.Hell let's legalize prostitution everywhere so guys can get all they want.Seems to me tired guys would make no problems?Total anarchy,thats what I say.lol

Exactly, LEO's are human and thus prone to mistakes, so until we have robot police officers, we will continue to have said issues, if we get rid of the police then we WILL need all of our guns.

xjchief
April 13, 2008, 06:51 PM
Exactly, LEO's are human and thus prone to mistakes, so until we have robot police officers, we will continue to have said issues, get rid of the police and we WILL need all of our guns.

Oh please. If I made a mistake like that at work I'd be fired or suspended by my company and my license suspended or revoked.

There is no excuse for that carelessness nor the failure of the agencies involved to punish this type of behavior.

Being held accountable for mistakes isn't abolishing the police, it's making them responsible for their actions.

ProficientRifleman
April 13, 2008, 06:59 PM
That is the whole point of my post to start with.

Now, accountability = cop bashing.

yinyangdc
April 13, 2008, 07:01 PM
lets make everything legalDrugs, prostitution, gambling - YES
Robbery, rape, murder, assault - NO
You seem to be thinking all or nothing. We should have a right to do what we want with our own body, and no right to INFRINGE on someone else.

Think about this for a second. NO, REALLY, I mean it. Engage your brain and THINK about this:
With drug legalization there would be no criminal activity regarding sale and transport of drugs. Our public lands would not be used for growing marijuana, thus not causing environmental problems that are currently being experienced and removing a source of danger to legitimate users of public lands.
A lot of the militarization of our police force has been due to the War on (some) Drugs, which has contributed a good deal to these attacks on homes.

Okay everybody join in a circle, breathe in, breathe out, and chant: Limited Government, Personal Responsibility. Limited Government, Personal Responsibility. ohhhhmmmmmmm

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 07:22 PM
yinyangdc,

There's too much of that "logic" stuff in your post. And in ProficientRifleman's posts. Think inside the box.

-Sans Authoritas

Noxx
April 13, 2008, 07:22 PM
I don't understand why an agency that feels it has to go to such lengths to enter a domicile in an overwhelming fashion can skip out on the fundamental step of reconnaissance.

There's a lot more to say, but it's certainly difficult to say it while keeping to "the high road" and I don't know that I'm up for it at the moment. I'm certainly not happy with the state of law enforcement in this country.

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 07:52 PM
Sans Authoritas wrote:
And all police forces should be privatized.

Guitargod1985 wrote: Sans, what is your rationale behind this? Just wondering. I happen to agree with much of what you have to say in many threads, but I'm just curious as to why you think this would be a good idea.

Guitar, it comes down to a concept known as the "public choice theory." It's essentially a branch of economics, but in relation to governments, in particular. Here's a very brief summary, in my paraphrasing for this particular topic: When a number of people vote for a few people to run parts of their lives, they tip the first power domino in a series of thousands, whose paths will eventually intrude into every conceivable facet of people's lives. Government will continue to grow as long as it has the ability to tax and to force people to fight for its continued existence. While it's easy for a group of people to vote for someone . . . once that person is in office? Well, it's very difficult for them to stem the tide of what they have unleashed.

When you keep as many government operations as you can at a local level, it is less dangerous in the short term. (Note that I did not say "better." Small tax-funded governments turn into big ones.) It is less dangerous because at the local level, your political voice (a vote, perhaps) carries more weight than a vote for someone on the national level. You are nothing to the Federal government. You are worthless to it except as a drone bee that supplies its honey. Similarly, you are nothing to your local government, qua local government. But you are a drone bee that can more easily vote to oust the fat queen that currently rules the hive (in favor of another fat queen.) For this reason, the queen has a more imminent, convincing reason to at least pretend to care what you think.

Accountability. It's not there on the Federal level. There's more at the local level. But when you turn the police into a contracted company that isn't joined to the body politic as a political member, you suddenly have an agency that has a much greater monetary incentive to please its customers. Its customer, in such a case, is still the government, albeit chosen by people whose voices are louder, but still not strong enough to stop the government's growth. Such "privatization" as this has been done with EMS, municipal water supplies and other formerly "public" goods, with excellent results.

A full privatization, however, would mean a police force that is bound to no tax-based government. It would be bound only to laws accepted as sane by the vast majority of people. (Protection against traditionally and universally known violations of life, liberty and property.) Such a business would be not unlike an insurance company: you subscribe to police protection, but you can pay for an emergency use fee, as well.

It seems almost everyone considers a tax-based government to be the watcher of the sheep. Who watches the watcher? The sheep need to be convinced that the only laws they need are laws that prohibit manifest violations of life, liberty and property. They need to scorn laws that exist so other sheep can feel good, or laws that merely serve to make the shepherd stronger, and his staff more burdensome and cruel.

-Sans Authoritas

GRB
April 13, 2008, 08:00 PM
I'd be dead.

When the news story finally came out I'm sure there would be some kind of controlled substance that magically happened to materialize in my residence. Also, one of my shotguns would undoubtedly have a barrel 17 7/8" in length.

So is what you are saying is that you are a criminal and the cops would have come up with this stuff? Magically I suppose because you have it hidden away so well you think no one can find it. Why do I ask this - well because of what you said and because of what the law enforcement officers actually did. No one in the wrong house was arrested subsequent to a seuzure of drugs that magically appeared, no one was accused of having illegal weapons, in fact no one in the house was accused of anything - no one except for the LEOs. They screwed up and made a mistake - and that DOES NOT MEAN IN ANY WAY SHAPE OF FORM THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A WILD IMAGINATION THAT THEY WOULD PLANT SOMETHING THERE AND ARREST AN INNOCENT PERSON. Shame on you if that is what you are suggesting. Of course, maybe you just have that Murphy's law kind of luck and feel that is how it would have been for you due to your own personal black cloud; I can understand that completely because I have the nickname of Jose Negro or Joe Black. In reality though, it is evident from the story that the LEOs were wrong, made a mistake, and were making reparations for that mistake. Happily they did not blast anyone or burn down the house.

Regards,
Glenn B

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 08:03 PM
Yes, they should do reconnaissance to prevent any mistakes while they are enforcing laws. They should follow the example of the FBI: when they were staking out Randy Weaver's property because they entrapped him into sawing a piece of metal too short for the liking of Those Who Know Better, they enlisted the use of redirected DoD spy satellite to track movement around his house. Now that is how you enforce a law.

-Sans Authoritas

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 08:06 PM
I'd be dead.

When the news story finally came out I'm sure there would be some kind of controlled substance that magically happened to materialize in my residence. Also, one of my shotguns would undoubtedly have a barrel 17 7/8" in length.

Glenn Bartley wrote: They screwed up and made a mistake - and that DOES NOT MEAN IN ANY WAY SHAPE OF FORM THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A WILD IMAGINATION THAT THEY WOULD PLANT SOMETHING THERE AND ARREST AN INNOCENT PERSON. Shame on you for suggesting such.

Regards,
Glenn B

Shame? For what?

Except for the shotgun, what he described is precisely what happened in Atlanta, Georgia, not too long ago. And I strongly doubt it is the first or the last time.

-Sans Authoritas

Gunnerpalace
April 13, 2008, 08:12 PM
Being held accountable for mistakes isn't abolishing the police, it's making them responsible for their actions.

Exactly, sorry about my previous post that was the gist I was trying to get out, Accountability is the thing needed, Would a civilian accountability board be a good idea, I think that might be a viable option.

GRB
April 13, 2008, 08:15 PM
We are or were talking about a specific time, place, event, and specific LEOs here. Now suddenly it is elsewhere. Forget it, it is getting absurdly anti-LEO based on conjecture, speculation, and on events other than the specific ones being discussed. Way to stray off topic.

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 08:17 PM
We are or were talking about a specific time, place, event, and specific LEOs here. Now suddenly it is elsewhere. Forget it, it is getting absurdly anti-LEO based on conjecture, speculation, and on events other than the specific ones being discussed. Way to stray off topic.

As I saw it, we were talking about the principle and practical effects of all such raids, and the lack of scruples and accountability during and after their execution. I know that's the context in which the person you were responding to was speaking.

-Sans Authoritas

plexreticle
April 13, 2008, 08:18 PM
I don't understand why criminal charges are not filed in a case like this.
Honest mistake doesn't make up for breaking and entering, aggravated assualt, reckless endangermant.

yinyangdc
April 13, 2008, 08:23 PM
The title of the thread is "What if it was you?", thus thrusting the discussion into the theoretical realm.

Sans Authoritas
April 13, 2008, 08:24 PM
Plex, ask yourself why justice isn't done in such cases. You'll figure out the honest answer. Follow the power and money.

-Sans Authoritas

ProficientRifleman
April 13, 2008, 08:41 PM
Shame on you for suggesting such.


I understood Guitargod1985's post as follows...

He said that first he'd be dead. He'd be dead because he would LAWFULLY resist the breaking and entering of his home with deadly force.

When those breaking and entering, finally killed him, they'd realize they had killed the wrong fellow.

Then, (aww shucks), how to cover their arses? Jeez, it seems to Guitargod that the most likely thing that would happen would be a controlled news item pasted on the front page of the local fish-wrap, saying what a dirt-bag Guitargod was and, you know what? The cops found all sorts of contraband in his possession.

Now, in a perfect world: Is this more likely?

Lets say this is taken from tomorrow's News Today:

Unified Press
April 2009

Federal Agents yesterday executed a "no-knock" search warrant on a Gotham city residence.

Local resident Guitargod was asleep on his couch when he heard banging on the door, shouts from outside and breaking windows. Noxious smoke filled the room as Guitargod grabbed his shotgun and prepared to defend himself and his home.

Within seconds, Federal Agents swarmed into the residence through front and back doors. Local resident Guitargod, knowing only that black-clad strangers were breaking into his home, shouting obscenities and preparing to kill him, fired several rounds from his shotgun, slightly wounding two Federal Agents before being shot and killed himself.

Federal Agents late yesterday admitted that no contraband had been found and that indeed, they had served the warrant on the wrong residence.

"The whole thing seems to just be a major screw-up." said Special Agent Smith of the Federal Internal Bureau. The Special Agents involved, Special Agent Huey of Gotham City, Special Agent Dewey of Metropolis, and Special Agent Louie of BigTown, have surrendered themselves for prosecution and have admitted their culpability in the wrongful death of Gotham City resident Guitargod.

Federal District Court Judge Yogie Berra stated late yesterday that if he had known, "How poorly the warrant was written, I would have read it before I signed it...", and that, "The officers responsible for the death of Mr. Guitargod will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I will make it my mission to see that Mr. Guitargod's family will be fully compensated for their loss and anguish".

The Federal Internal Bureau has said that it will make agents available to take calls from angered residents and that there will be safeguards put in place to ensure this kind of mistake is never made again. In line with current Bureau policy, anytime a wrongful shooting occurs it is fully and publicly investigated. Any agents involved in a wrongful shooting will be publicly prosecuted. The agency's "dynamic entry" protocol will be thoroughly reviewed and revised.


Now, you tell me which scenario is most likely.

Ash
April 13, 2008, 08:50 PM
Well, I have never had the police crash into my house, and as a general rule, the police in my small town are professional and are under the direction of somebody I consider to be a real top-notch guy.

That said, three years ago, a policewoman, doing some pretty high speed driving on a street a mere two blocks long, plowed into my wife's car at 2:00AM. She claimed my wife's car was incorrectly parked.

It was not.

She claimed she was driving slow enough to check each of the businesses on that side of the street.

She was not.

And when, at 2:30AM, my wife arrived with our 3-month old baby, she was ticketed for not having proof of insurance or her driver's liscense. It did not matter that my wife was suddenly awakened in the middle of the night, had to dress and dress our infant, and go down to my office (I was, alas, on a trip) and deal with the paper work (her car was totalled). That she forgot her purse at home was not taken into any kind of consideration.

So, yes, I can see a plant happening. CYA happens, as this officer attempted to pin the whole accident on my wife, WHO WAS NOT EVEN THERE!

Of course, the city dropped the ticket, took care of her car, and fired the police officer. There was justice and the folks in charge did things right.

But, the officer did not. Because of that, I can believe what can be done to cover yourself.

Ash

ProficientRifleman
April 13, 2008, 09:01 PM
The point of my original post was to get people to think.

Before you give the ATF agents (never mind which agency or department) involved in this incident a pass, and say, "They're just good guys, trying to do a tough job. Sure they might have screwed up but they meant well, and hey, they're human too, people make mistakes...." etc.

I was hoping some of you (specifically those inclined to grant them a pass) would think about yourself being on the receiving end of one of these "honest mistakes".

Think of YOUR house being broken into. Think of YOUR family being terrorized. Think of CS cannisters being fired through YOUR window. Think of masked and black-dressed "operators" pointing submachine guns at YOUR wife, son or daughter.

Would you be so generous? Or would you demand accountability?

Mods, feel free to lock it up if you want. The point has been, for the most part, missed. Never mind.

ConstitutionCowboy
April 13, 2008, 11:04 PM
Would you be so generous? Or would you demand accountability?

Neither. I'd most likely be as dead as that 80-or-90-something years old lady who fired on those three plain-clothes officers who broke down her front door on a bogus warrant(I think it was in Atlanta). My wife will not be generous if she survives the incident, but she'll probably be dead, too.

Woody

mccook8
April 13, 2008, 11:19 PM
Here is your answer:

I have no desire to be a cop. I never have had the desire to be a cop. I wouldn't take the job.

That, sir, is merely another way of avoiding a direct answer to the question.

So, I'll turn it around a little.

What do YOU believe would be reasonable compensation for a police officer, who will perform his duties under the conditions and in the manner in which YOU believe they should be performed?

I do not, and have not, "sniveled" about physical danger. Nor, for that matter, about legal liability.

.....EXCEPT where either the danger or the liability, or BOTH, are created by people who know little or nothing about the realities of police work (but believe themselves sufficiently expert to set policy), and they THEN would insist that I bear either or both the risk/danger all by my lonesome.

LAK Supply
April 13, 2008, 11:25 PM
That could have gotten bad at my house.... I probably wouldn't be typing this right now and a couple of others wouldn't be typing anything either. That's what is so dangerous about these raids by paramilitary arms of LE organizations.... many people would have an adverse reaction if people busted down their door and came running in. Somebody kicks my door in and enters my dwelling and I would generally assume that they are there to harm me.

ProficientRifleman
April 13, 2008, 11:48 PM
That, sir, is merely another way of avoiding a direct answer to the question.

No, it was not. It was a direct answer to the question that you asked.

What do YOU believe would be reasonable compensation for a police officer, who will perform his duties under the conditions and in the manner in which YOU believe they should be performed?

I don't have an opinion on pay scales. I cannot speak to anyone else's personal motivation for wanting to be a cop.

As for doing the job the way I think it should be done...

I believe I was seconding an idea presented by another THR member, when he said something like, "If he is so dangerous, why not take him down outside of his residence?" I would agree with that.

I will say this again. This thread is NOT about cop bashing. I posed the question a couple of posts above. Why do you want to give a free pass to egregious conduct? Why?

If it was YOU receiving C/S through your windows and having YOUR door battered down, would you be so generous in hearing, "sorry..it was an honest mistake..."

Would YOU want accountability?

brerrabbit
April 14, 2008, 12:37 AM
based on the original scenario,,,

Accountability is everything.

Otherwise I would be too tempted to do a lower spine shot on at least one as they left my premises as a method of holding the armed homebreakers until lawful authority showed

My two cents.

Show me a warrant and I will be one of the most polite people you will meet that day. I will even brew a new pot of coffee for the officers until we get stuff straightened out.

Bust into my home without a warrant or a wrong warrant, I will do my best to kill every bad person on sight even if they claim that they are police. Hint: a lot of home invaders have learned to yell "police" on entry to stop resistance. The only acceptable way to search my home is to have officer freindly present his credentials and then his warrant and things will procede nicely.

Kill me while I am defending my home and things will only get nastier for the LEO that are left behind while the ATF leaves. I have a lot of kin that will probably feel a bit raw about it.

Guitargod1985
April 14, 2008, 02:40 AM
So is what you are saying is that you are a criminal and the cops would have come up with this stuff? Magically I suppose because you have it hidden away so well you think no one can find it. Why do I ask this - well because of what you said and because of what the law enforcement officers actually did. No one in the wrong house was arrested subsequent to a seuzure of drugs that magically appeared, no one was accused of having illegal weapons, in fact no one in the house was accused of anything - no one except for the LEOs. They screwed up and made a mistake - and that DOES NOT MEAN IN ANY WAY SHAPE OF FORM THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A WILD IMAGINATION THAT THEY WOULD PLANT SOMETHING THERE AND ARREST AN INNOCENT PERSON. Shame on you if that is what you are suggesting. Of course, maybe you just have that Murphy's law kind of luck and feel that is how it would have been for you due to your own personal black cloud; I can understand that completely because I have the nickname of Jose Negro or Joe Black. In reality though, it is evident from the story that the LEOs were wrong, made a mistake, and were making reparations for that mistake. Happily they did not blast anyone or burn down the house.

Ummm... no. I have no illegal firearms and I do not indulge in illegal drug use. Perhaps I should break it down for you so that you can understand.

First of all, the OP's original question was "what is it was you?" Well, if it were me, and I awoke to several unknown individuals breaking into my apartment, I would defend myself with lethal force. As a result I would likely be killed.

Since the above action is the answer to "what if it was you," the outcome varies quite a bit from the article quoted. That homeowner did not use lethal force, and as a result was not killed. Therefore there was no reason to plant evidence.

That's about as simple as I can make it for you.

ConstitutionCowboy
April 14, 2008, 10:12 AM
Just to add something to the mix, I don't believe police officers should be put in such risky situations. There are much safer ways to apprehend people. Take, for example, how Bonny and Clyde were "apprehended". Ambush tactics are not only for bandits robbing stage coaches. There are many "narrow passes" where such people can be taken that are much better than their well-armed castles.

Woody

Ithaca37
April 14, 2008, 10:27 AM
But doing recon right before you raid? Not smart unless you want either A) an empty dwelling or dwelling void of evidence, or B) a real gun fight or resistance waiting on you.

Right, that is why the military NEVER preforms reconnaissance of targets before attacking. If recon can be done on MILITARY targets, it sure as hell can be performed on the local cannabis dealer.

If a doctor performs an operation on the wrong leg, he is held accountable. If a manufacturer sells a batch of faulty merchandise, he is held responsible. Why are the police not held responsible for their mistakes? That is all everyone here is asking for. Nothing more. Just some god damn personal responsibility for when YOU screw up. The rest of us deal with consequences for our actions every day, when did a badge and a suit make you immune for accountability?

Bubbles
April 14, 2008, 10:46 AM
In response to the OP's question, there would be:

- two dead GSD's,
- two dead homeowners,
- an unknown number of dead cops, and
- one very wealthy toddler after the estate is probated and the civil suits settled.

XDKingslayer
April 14, 2008, 11:00 AM
What if it was me?

I'd be dead and the wife would be independantly wealthy. Let me apologize now to the families of the ATF agents I took with me.

TexasSkyhawk
April 14, 2008, 01:25 PM
Right, that is why the military NEVER preforms reconnaissance of targets before attacking. If recon can be done on MILITARY targets, it sure as hell can be performed on the local cannabis dealer.

Apples to oranges. If you'd done both, you'd already know that and know why.

Also, if you'd done EITHER (actual combat operations with small unit cqc or LE sog/swat, etc type work), you'd know that in the military, most operations depend on intelligence rather than unit/scout/point reconnaissance.

Most law enforcement warrants come from similar type intelligence from CI's, testimony, or undercover observations. Drug and weapons dealers are extraordinarily paranoid and have lookouts and intel systems that are as good as any I ever saw in Bosnia, Iraq, Cambodia or Central America. Only better I have ever seen have been in Hong Kong (Triads) and South America (cartels).

Mind you, I am NOT excusing their mistake. An address is black & white. You check, double check and triple check the details before you go playing Rambo-Ninja.

Just pointing out the difference in how we did things in the military versus how we did things in civilian situations.

Besides, I don't think you or anyone else really wants our cops getting any more mlitary like, do you? I sure as hell don't.

If a doctor performs an operation on the wrong leg, he is held accountable. If a manufacturer sells a batch of faulty merchandise, he is held responsible. Why are the police not held responsible for their mistakes? That is all everyone here is asking for. Nothing more. Just some god damn personal responsibility for when YOU screw up. The rest of us deal with consequences for our actions every day, when did a badge and a suit make you immune for accountability?

What sources do you have that are telling you that the cops in question didn't get in some sort of trouble?

Guess what? My badge had an eagle on it which meant we worked with a lot of local task forces. When they screwed up, I made sure it was noted in MY reports. Didn't always make me real popular with some of the local agencies, but guess what else? I didn't really give a damn.

Whoever lead that raid got an ass-chewing for the wrong address, and I'll almost guarantee that a LOR was placed in his file.

You also assume that a "badge and a suit" make you immune for (sic) accountability.

You assume wrong, sir. I do not know of one single group in this country today that airs every single piece of its dirty laundry every time a piece gets soiled. Do you?

Jeff

Ithaca37
April 14, 2008, 01:55 PM
Besides, I don't think you or anyone else really wants our cops getting any more military like, do you? I sure as hell don't.
Agreed.

What sources do you have that are telling you that the cops in question didn't get in some sort of trouble?
Try kicking in a door without your uniform on and see what happens. That is exactly what happened here. The warrant gave them permission to kick in the door of another house, not the one that they hit. They are at the very least guilt of breaking and entering. They had no permission to enter that home.

Whoever lead that raid got an ass-chewing for the wrong address, and I'll almost guarantee that a LOR was placed in his file.
If I kicked in your door in the dead of night, a warning would be sufficient justice for you?

Guess what? My badge had an eagle on it which meant we worked with a lot of local task forces. When they screwed up, I made sure it was noted in MY reports. Didn't always make me real popular with some of the local agencies, but guess what else? I didn't really give a damn.
I am glad that you do your job, thanks. I never said all cops, just these ones.

You also assume that a "badge and a suit" make you immune for (sic) accountability.
Thanks for correcting my grammar mistake.

Maybe one day I can be elevated to your high and mighty status where I can brag about doing my job like I am supposed to and belittling others.

coloradokevin
April 14, 2008, 02:12 PM
What sources do you have that are telling you that the cops in question didn't get in some sort of trouble?

I agree. I know of one incident where something similar to this happened where I work (years ago, before I was working here). The SWAT team went into the wrong address, because they were given the wrong address by the detective (in other words, the blunder was on the detective, not the SWAT team, and the warrant indicated that wrong address). Anyway, that detective was taken off of the street, given a ten month administrative suspension, and ultimately fired as a result of that case.

So, just because the media doesn't know about it, doesn't mean that justice isn't being handed out.


They are at the very least guilt of breaking and entering. They had no permission to enter that home.

Actually, based on the definition of the laws, I would argue not.

The mens rea ('criminal intent') for 1st degree Criminal Trespass is "knowingly". The mens rea for 2nd degree Burglary is also "knowingly", with the addition of a requirement of an "intent" to commit another crime. I should note that we have no B&E statute in CO.

These folks were acting in a manner that they believed to be lawful, and made a huge blunder. A reasonable person could easily conclude that they had a reason to believe what they were doing was lawful (despite the fact that they made a huge error in calculation).

But, by statutory definition, they were not commiting a criminal act!

TexasSkyhawk
April 14, 2008, 02:17 PM
You're already belittling others and yelling and chest-pounding for "accountability for mistakes."

I call you out on one little grammatical mistake, and get the exact response I fully expected. After all, aren't these your words? Just some god damn personal responsibility for when YOU screw up. The rest of us deal with consequences for our actions every day, when did a badge and a suit make you immune for accountability?

I just pointed out a little, almost inconsequential mistake you made and you responded by calling me a "prick."

In other words, you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

'Nuff said. Point made.

Ain't easy living in a glass house, is it?

That's the house our cops and military live and work in every single day of their lives. I don't like seeing them make such mistakes and I believe in accountability.

But I also don't like seeing them painted with the same brush. We, as gun owners, don't like that much either, remember?

Jeff

ProficientRifleman
April 14, 2008, 02:24 PM
The police and military shouldn't be grouped together.

pbearperry
April 14, 2008, 02:24 PM
What if,Bla bla bla.ATF hits wrong house.Nobody injured,nobody killed,but what if,Bla Bla Bla.Boy do I miss talking about guns and the enjoyment of owning them and shooting them.

nothinspecial
April 14, 2008, 02:28 PM
plexreticle you apparently know absolutely nothing about law, other than a few nifty terms.
and the rest of you naysayers, give it a damn rest. They fixed the house, appologized, and went on their way. But, now days we live in a world of law suits and money fixes all.

TexasSkyhawk
April 14, 2008, 02:29 PM
Please don't group them together.

Spent a lot of years in both. Got wounded in both. Won medals in both. Got praised in both. Got spit on and cussed in both.

I think I've earned the right to group them together in my way of thinking given today's views and attitudes.

Jeff

ProficientRifleman
April 14, 2008, 02:40 PM
Mods, please lock it up.

I tried to get people to think about this objectively. Some people responded with worst case scenario, some with humor, some with satire.

I don't believe I have seen one post, by someone who has identified himself as a police officer, which responded to the question.

Honest mistake or not....What if it was YOU, YOUR house, YOUR family?

OK, enough.

Seems as though when you happen to notice an incident like the one in the original story, and you bring it to light, you're cop-bashing.

Jeez, never mind.

Submit, comply, be passive... The cops are always right.

Why don't all you mere citizens be good and go play with your guns.

roo_ster
April 14, 2008, 02:58 PM
Hmm, what if it was me?

===========

Well, I have two dogs that are inside the house. The female is quite sensitive, I call her my Early Warning System. She'll call out at night or day if someone is on the sidewalk across the street.

The male is more circumspect and will wait until the person is on our sidewalk.

What usually happens is the female wakes me up. I then put on my Rx glasses and pick up my flashlight. How fast I hurry depends if the male sings out. If he doesn't, I open the quick-access safe and extract my HD pistol & then mosey through the house, checking the windows for what it was that alerted the pooch(es).

If the male does sing out, I do it more quickly and move much faster.

When folks come inside the front or back yard fence lines, the dogs get quite agitated. The few times this has happened at night, I have had the old adrenaline dump and wife & I both moved: me to check things out, wife to collect kiddos & bring back to MBR.

===============

So, "what if it was me" depends on how fast the SWATties move before they kick down the door. If they wait more than a few seconds to bust in after coming down the street or approaching the fence line, the pooches will have given enough warning so that me & my wife are awake and that I am armed.

Once they get close to the house, the dogs are going to go bonkers and wife & I will likely be in the middle of our respective duties.

When they try to remove the secured screen door, it will create quite a ruckus and I expect doggies to be jumping through their 4th point of contact.

===============

Given my experience & training with Uncle Sam, my poochies would definitely have me awake & alert before door-kicking began. I have these dogs partly for their heightened senses & sensitivities and I do not admonish them when they sign out at folks.

Now, if the dogs were somehow out of the picture, the first inkling that something was going down would be the SWATties trying to break the screen door, which opens OUT and is secured. It will make a ruckus.

mbt2001
April 14, 2008, 02:59 PM
:fire:

What makes me mad is that my dog would most likely have been shot by the police.

The other thing that makes me mad is they do not have the right to storm into your house. That is a violation of the 4th ammendment. All of the officers should be fired and the agency sued. This isn't a joke. Someone could have gotten killed or their loved ones could have.

"honest mistake"... If I made an honest mistake like that I would be fired, I would be thrown in jail. The Police should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. If I bust into my neighbors house on suspicion of anything I would right then be in massive violation of the law.


So, "what if it was me" depends on how fast the SWATties move before they kick down the door. If they wait more than a few seconds to bust in after coming down the street or approaching the fence line, the pooches will have given enough warning so that me & my wife are awake and that I am armed.

Your dogs would only bark a few times before a sniper (with a suppressed weapon most likely) removed them from the realm of the living.

roo_ster
April 14, 2008, 03:18 PM
To add on to what I previously wrote...

Given:
1. I don't have a long arm, just a 1911 in hand*
2. SWATties have done no recon of Casa jfruser

1. I would likely have to be very good or very lucky to cause damage to a fully-armored SWATtie, what with K-pot, vest w/ plate & such.
2. I would have time, given the SWATties' ignorance of my house's layout, doors, and dogs. Most likely the first shot would be mine to take, if I chose to do so.

If my wife has not finished collecting the kiddos in the MBR (and arm herself) , I would be more inclined to buy time for her and let fly.

Me & dogs wold likely become past-tense, right quick, as the SWATties do their best to make it back to their homes that night.

============

All in all, it would be better just to knock and show me the warrant. much less drama, adrenaline, and risk for all involved.



* Kiddos are still toddlers. We have not found a good way to keep a long arm at the ready as well as secured form their little fingers. Thus, I make do with a 1911 when I would rather have a 12 ga Rem 1100 with 7+1 slugs or a rifle-cartridge carbine at hand for HD.

roo_ster
April 14, 2008, 03:32 PM
Your dogs would only bark a few times before a sniper (with a suppressed weapon most likely) removed them from the realm of the living.

Unlikely. My dogs are inside & curtains/blinds are drawn. They would have no LOS.

They always sleep inside and usually sleep in the front room, facing the foyer & front window. If they move forward to the front window and stick their snouts through the blinds to get their bark on, I could see a SWATtie shooting them in the face through the window, as he is waiting to get through the front door.

All this assumes a night door-kicking.

These aren't guard dogs, BTW. Just bird dogs, German Shorthaired Pointers. Very alert & work-oriented. Kinda like Jack Russel Terriers with a work ethic. But, neither one has ever bit a human and I would not expect them to do anything other than bark like heck. Most likely would end up dead, after the SWATties got inside.

coloradokevin
April 14, 2008, 03:46 PM
I don't believe I have seen one post, by someone who has identified himself as a police officer, which responded to the question.

Sir, I believe I did respond to your question regarding what I would do. I re-quoted portions of my original answer to this question below... That is honestly how I think it would go down if the SWAT team accidentally performed a no-knock warrant on my house. Simply put, most folks don't sit around at home all day waiting for these things to happen. I am prepared for a burglar, but not a SWAT team!


Honestly... If this "was me", I doubt I'd have had any time to react anyway.

...

But, SWAT teams don't come lightly through a door.
...
When they do come through the door, you'll likely not know what hit you... Flash bangs, gas, and a team of highly trained folks filing in rapidly.

So, if it were me, I'd probably be sitting there blinking when they came in the door!

coloradokevin
April 14, 2008, 03:53 PM
Your dogs would only bark a few times before a sniper (with a suppressed weapon most likely) removed them from the realm of the living.

Whatever. You say this due to your infinite wisdom regarding SWAT tactics?

I'm not about to start revealing how these operations are planned, coordinated, and executed... Some of you other LEO types already know, and the rest of you are certainly free to make some educated guesses...

But, suffice it to say, I've never once seen a sniper take out a dog in my entire career.

With all due respect, you are trying to sell your fantasy as a reality on the internet, in what I believe is another transparent attempt to further discredit law enforcement agencies.

ProficientRifleman
April 14, 2008, 04:08 PM
I stand corrected. You did indeed reply.

mbt2001
April 14, 2008, 04:15 PM
Whatever. You say this due to your infinite wisdom regarding SWAT tactics?

I'm not about to start revealing how these operations are planned, coordinated, and executed... Some of you other LEO types already know, and the rest of you are certainly free to make some educated guesses...

But, suffice it to say, I've never once seen a sniper take out a dog in my entire career.

With all due respect, you are trying to sell your fantasy as a reality on the internet, in what I believe is another transparent attempt to further discredit law enforcement agencies.

Dude.... Google it. It happens. In fact, I can't even blame them for doing it as the dog does pose a danger in a dynamic entry, but when you combine that with getting the wrong house.... It just gets ugly.

I get weary of people saying "what they have seen" as the definition of reality. I have never SEEN CHINA, but I can be more than reasonably sure it is there! Google it. SEE. Then tell me if they entered my house my Boxer would be OK.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/33289.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=dogs+shot+by+police&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIH

http://www.google.com/search?q=dogs+shot+by+swat&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIH

Edit: I am asking for some FORETHOUGHT and ACCOUNTABILITY, not apologies. The same standard I am held to when I break the law.

Ithaca37
April 14, 2008, 04:50 PM
I just pointed out a little, almost inconsequential mistake you made and you responded by calling me a "prick."

In other words, you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

First and Foremost, my comments directed at you were childish and I am sorry. That said, you didn't point out my error to make a point, you did it for the reasons I previously stated.

Grammar mistakes and kicking in someone's door in the dead of night are hardly on the same level. I think we agree that is this is somehting that somebody will be/should be punished for, so perhaps we should just let it alone. All I will say is that the government regularly doesn't pay for its mistakes as mere citizens do for errors of the same magnitude. Look at budget management for starters. Here in my state health and human services "lost" $20 Million. If you or I were running a business and just told the IRS we lost $20 Mil, we wouldn't get a pass.

Edit: I am asking for some FORETHOUGHT and ACCOUNTABILITY, not apologies. The same standard I am held to when I break the law.

Same here.

blackcash88
April 14, 2008, 05:12 PM
With all the billions spent on these agencies you would have thought someone could have hopped down to bestbuy for a GPS. I saw on here yesterday someone broke into an FBI cruiser for one.

Because then you'd have to train the goons on how to use it and they are absolutely NOT 100% accurate.

Sindawe
April 14, 2008, 11:46 PM
I agree. I know of one incident where something similar to this happened where I work (years ago, before I was working here). The SWAT team went into the wrong address, because they were given the wrong address by the detective (in other words, the blunder was on the detective, not the SWAT team, and the warrant indicated that wrong address). Anyway, that detective was taken off of the street, given a ten month administrative suspension, and ultimately fired as a result of that case.

Citation for this? I've lived in Colorado the entirety of my adolescent & adult life, and off hand the only thing this sound like is the murder of Ismael Mena by Denver PD.

Were it my home?

BOOM!!! BOOM!! BOOM!!!

"Uh, the door won't open..." 1.

"Take out the window"

CRASH!!! tinkle tinkle...

At which point Mr. ATF Agent and his buddies get to take plunging fire from the balcony overlooking my main level where the front door is. I'll 'prolly get a quick exit from this incarnation as a result, but I've been dead before and know it will happen again one way or another. May as well take some of those fools with me.

1. The door frame and door are steel reinforced to the point that nothing short of an armored car will get it. The windows are next on the list for upgrades.

zxcvbob
April 15, 2008, 12:20 AM
1. The door frame and door are steel reinforced to the point that nothing short of an armored car will get it. The windows are next on the list for upgrades.

They'll pry the frame open with a hydraulic jack. Nothing stands up to that. Sorry.

R127
April 15, 2008, 12:28 AM
As long as the police insist on acting like criminals they will be identified as criminals during their actions. That means they will continue to occasionally choose the wrong house for their hillarity and hijinx and they will get hurt for it. Any law enforcement officers reading this thread ought to take that to heart and bring about change in their department.

It is a very good idea to harden your home against this sort of stuff. The last thing anybody needs is to be blown away by some jumpy swat cop with an itchy trigger finger just because you were lucky enough to win the wrong house lottery. Shouting through a megaphone to a bunch of would-be housebreakers stuck outside has a much better probability of everybody coming out of the situation alive than if they get inside.

TexasSkyhawk
April 15, 2008, 12:30 AM
First and Foremost, my comments directed at you were childish and I am sorry. That said, you didn't point out my error to make a point, you did it for the reasons I previously stated.

No need to apologize, but apology accepted.

Probably wasn't the best analogy or method to point out how all of us are never infallible, especially when a little stress is thrown into the mix.

For the record, comparing a grammatical slip with kicking in the wrong door is comparing apples to onions. BUT mistakes happen, and then they take on a life of their own, unfortunately.

If the warrant in the situation we're discussing had the wrong address on it, then that can hardly be blamed on the team serving the warrant. Whoever typed or otherwise is responsible for the wrong address should definitely have to answer for it.

Likewise, if the team leader misread the address, or otherwise screwed up, he/she should definitely have to answer for it.

Now, I've been out of the business for a long time, but while in it, I honestly did not ever see a raid happen on a wrong addess--at least not in my agency. I did know of two that occurred, on opposite ends of the country--by a sister agency in which a headquarters agent-weenie was responsible for the wrong address and info being on the warrant.

I also know that the agent-weenie was investigated by OPR (our version of Internal Affairs), fired, indicted and convicted. Just wasn't a whole lot of stink made over it publicly.

Also know, for a fact, that the two home-owners were VERY well compensated for their trauma.

But in this age of cop-bashing, those little details are ignored or forgotten in favor of the more sensational.

And, speaking of mistakes and being held accountable . . .

Fifteen years ago, another of my cousins was killed by a motorist who lost control of her car. My cousin was assisting a stranded motorist who had a sick child and was trying to get to a hospital. This occurred during our once-a-year ice/snow storm.

The motorist saw her red & blues, and as any cop will tell you, those red & blues attract motorists like a moth to flame. The passing motorist lost control of her car and ran over my cousin, who later died at the hospital. She left behind a husband and toddler.

The motorist made a mistake that cost my cousin her life. But that's what it was--a mistake. To this day, our family still sends this woman a Christmas card. She was a wreck for weeks and months afterwards, even though we assured her of our forgiveness.

Point is, you also don't know the aftermath of such mistakes on the part of the offending party's role.

I knew both team leaders in the botched federal raids. One of them resigned from the special response teams and went back to being a normal street agent. While no shots were fire in either raid, this one guy simply couldn't get it out of his mind what could've happened. The other agent resigned completely.

Also not saying that's what all cops do who screw up--but good cops have a conscience, along with an inheritent desire to do good. Mistakes hurt, both personally and professionally.

It's the jerkoff power-rangers you have to worry about.

Jeff

Noxx
April 15, 2008, 12:32 AM
My dogs operate in the same manner as JFR's. Little girl barks, I might stir a little and give a listen, but if Jimmy sounds off, I'm out of bed in a hurry.

I understand the premise of this thread, but I don't really think we can get much of value here. I mean, we're a community of well armed people who have given, as a rule, a lot of thought to our personal security around the house.

"What if it was me?"

What if it was any of us? You could probably expect a firefight and an unhappy conclusion for all involved, short story.

I personally find this story just one more example of how these types of raids are just a terrible idea as a whole. "Dynamic entry" my a**. Pick up your suspect in a vehicle, turn off the water and power and wait em out, whatever. But this tactic, seeing it go wrong once should be enough to rethink it, and we've seen it go wrong many, many times.

More importantly in the instance of these BS raids where drugs are the incentive, the math just doesn't add up. You have a person or persons suspected of a crime that has no possibility of a capital sentence, and in order to apprehend them with the evidence, both the accused, the LEO's, and quite possibly the innocent are thrust into a life and death situation. That's just bad asset management right there, doesn't add up.

coloradokevin
April 15, 2008, 03:57 AM
Dude.... Google it. It happens. In fact, I can't even blame them for doing it as the dog does pose a danger in a dynamic entry, but when you combine that with getting the wrong house.... It just gets ugly.

I get weary of people saying "what they have seen" as the definition of reality. I have never SEEN CHINA, but I can be more than reasonably sure it is there! Google it. SEE. Then tell me if they entered my house my Boxer would be OK.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/33289.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=dogs+...e7&rlz=1I7GGIH

http://www.google.com/search?q=dogs+...e7&rlz=1I7GGIH

Edit: I am asking for some FORETHOUGHT and ACCOUNTABILITY, not apologies. The same standard I am held to when I break the law.

Sir,

I never claimed that dogs have not been killed in the line of duty. But, that does not mean that dogs are being shot by police snipers using suppressed weapons, as you allege.

I am aware of instances where dogs have been shot, but I am aware of no instance where a police sniper has shot a dog with a suppressed weapon (not saying it has never happened, but you seemed to indicate that it is the norm). Also, none of the links you've provided mention instances of snipers shooting dogs during police engagements!

Also, when I speak of "what I've seen" in this context, I am refering to my on the job experiences in law enforcement.

Personally, I like dogs. I've always had dogs, and I feel compassion towards these animals in a way I don't towards their owners. As such, I've even deployed Tasers against dogs in the past that I've been more than justified in shooting, just because I don't want to kill a dog... I'm also not saying I wouldn't ever kill a dog, I just generally like the dogs better than their owners!

One of my partners was bitten a couple of years ago, and another officer shot that dog. It does happen, but I argue that it does not happen in the planned black-ops style manner in which you suggested!

mbt2001
April 15, 2008, 01:32 PM
Colorado Kevin...

:neener:

romma
April 15, 2008, 01:58 PM
Seems to me, the reason most of these no-knock raids are done is to preserve evidence, not because life and death deems it necessary...

ProficientRifleman
April 15, 2008, 02:34 PM
I also know that the agent-weenie was investigated by OPR (our version of Internal Affairs), fired, indicted and convicted. Just wasn't a whole lot of stink made over it publicly.

That is exactly what they should do, though, make the correction public. This would go a long way toward changing the public perception of teflon coating.

Ash
April 15, 2008, 04:54 PM
Had some sheriffs show up to our camp-site once while we were backpacking in the mountains of North Alabama (Morgan Lake to be exact). We were dead tired and were in our tents and asleep by 9:00PM. Nobody had come up to the site since 4:00PM when we got there (in other words, there was no chance anybody had seen us).

At around 10:00PM two sheriffs cars showed up and turned on their lights, demanding us to come out. We had collies with us, one in each tent, and they were trying to get out of the tents to see what the lights were about. I called out that I was getting out of my sleeping bag and pulling back the dog. I poked my head out, and was met with the cruiser's search-light in the face. Of course, I covered my eyes. The deputy asked what I was doing, and I told him I was trying to sleep. He asked where we came from and I told him where we had parked the Jeep and started our hike and then told him where we were heading over the next two days.

The deputy then told us that some witnesses reported we were doing drugs. I told him that was impossible because nobody had been there since we set up camp, and that we were not doing drugs on a back-packing trip. My friend, a member of the Wandering Men, yelled out from his tent that if they arrested us, we would get to sleep in a bed and at least would get a warm meal. I knew that would get us in trouble, but they turned out the lights and drove off.

There was no need for them to lie to us about the drug thing, and as we were doing nothing wrong and only trying to get some sleep (didn't eve build a fire that night), what they were doing was harassing us (perhaps not legally, but in reality). We were camping near a lake along the Pinhoti Trail, a well-established back-packing trail that runs for more than 100 miles. There were no cars parked at this location and it was blatantly obvious what we were doing there (with backpacking tents, no less). Screwing with some hikers was not very professional.

Ash

Ash

Art Eatman
April 15, 2008, 05:36 PM
Not much discusion of legal issues, here...

If you enjoyed reading about "What if it was you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!