CCW Holder Killed In Warrant Raid

[Jeff White]

Beerslurpy said;

Though having a rifle instead of a small pistol probably helps. Better to take a few down with you than to end up as some forgotten paperwork in a police station. If cops start dying as a result of their blatantly tyranical actions, maybe it will give them pause.

And then he said;

The only way it will stop is if lots of cops start dying and lots of other cops start demanding that their superiors not make them carry out these raids.

Just so we understand each other, you're openly, on a public forum, advocating the shooting of police officers as a way of changing policy?

The Real Hawkeye said;

Those with licenses to do so are far less likely to be criminals than any Joe picked at random.

You need to get over the fallacy that the issuance of a concealed carry permit by some entity of government is equivalent to sainthood. It's not. All kinds of people who have been vetted by all kinds of different processes have committed crime and violent acts. Police officers, Judges, people who hold Top Secret SCI clearances, even a sitting president have all committed crimes. People who at other times would be very calm and mild mannered have been known to lose it and do strange things over minor traffic violations. So yes I have separated people from their lawfully possessed firearms while I've written them a ticket or warning in the past and I will continue to do so. I also don't hesitate to have other traffic violators exit their vehicle if I think I need to keep a better eye on them for some reason.

Or are you arguing that a hunter or CCW license holder who carries his gun in accordance with law is MORE likely a criminal than the average traffic stop?

No, I'm saying it would be foolish not to separate someone who you knew had a weapon, from that weapon while you are taking enforcement action. Especially if you are working alone.

No one is handcuffed, they are just moved to a position where they couldn't readily access the weapon while I'm writing the citation or warning.

Many people who weren't criminals before they got into the altercation have assaulted officers over some kind of enforcement action. Heck we had a State Supreme Court Justice get in a physical altercation with an officer in Northern Illinois over a traffic stop some years ago. I don't take anyones credentials, no matter who they were issued by as proof positive that that person is not a threat to me.

People who hold CCW permits have for years been able to hold themselves up as the most law abiding in society. There is one thing you have to face though. As CCW becomes more prevalent, people who really shouldn't have them, will get them, and they will misuse them. And those of you who are willing to read an article about a bad cop and paint all of us with the same broad brush, had better be prepared for the same kind of public scrutiny. Because the media will certainly enjoy making CCW holders look bad as much as they enjoy making the police look bad. Welcome to the club .

Jeff

 

[Coronach]

We really need to divorce ourself of the notion that just because someone has a CCW permit, they must be a good guy. Yes, it makes it overwhelmingly likely that he is, but nothing is 100%. I have personally witnessed the arrest of a CCW permit holder for DUI, and the gun he was (legally, but for the intoxication part) CCWing was stolen, from a burglary that (oh hey, guess what?) he committed.

How do I know this? Finger print evidence is a stone wench.

Yeah, yeah, I know. We're just targeting the gunowners.

Now, that is all one massive aside, so let's not hijack the thread with it. My point is and remains simply that possession of a CCW license, like any other license (or a badge, for that matter), is not always indicative that the person holding it is a good guy. It makes it quite likely that one is on the up and up, but it also does not prevent one from being a drug dealer who is willing to kill a cop.


This remains, as almost-always, unable to be called, lacking a thorough investigation.

Mike

 

[TallPine]

Just so we understand each other, you're openly, on a public forum, advocating the shooting of police officers as a way of changing policy?

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!" —Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (Chapter 1 "Arrest")

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

A number of the police officers on the forum had something to say similar to the following.

Two things are potentially wrong here. First and as I noted earlier, there are those that manage to have a long history of criminal activity, but manage to remain under the radar. Getting a permit means they can carry legally. In other words, they won't get in trouble for carrying a gun illegally if they have a permit for it.

The second is that while the guy may have gotten his CCW and was not a criminal at the time does not mean his situation has not changed. There are all sorts of first time offenders that have a lifelong history of no legal problems until they do something and get caught.

The CCW and background check only means that at the time it was issued, there was no record of serious criminal activity, and apparently the dope conviction at a teenager wasn't an issue for the CCW.

Now, the point never was that a CCW license made it impossible that the person in question might be a homicidal maniac. We are talking the odds here, nothing else. Reasonable people shape their behavior based on known odds. That is to say, as between some random Joe and a CCW license holder, which is MORE LIKELY to go homicidal? The answer to THAT question should inform and shape the reaction of a reasonable person to the traffic stop or warrant service in question. It is an incontrovertible fact that anyone with a CCW license is many times LESS likely to be a homicidal maniac than the average Joe picked at random, therefore logic should dictate that your precaution level should be less, not more, with a CCW license holder, and more, not less, with someone who is not a CCW license holder. If you do just the reverse of this, the only possible reasonable explanation is a desire to discourage CCW licenses. The only alternative possible explanation is that you are not very bright and don't realize that non-CCW license holders can also carry concealed deadly weapons (handguns) readily available on their persons. Which is it? I have thus far not heard any evidence of any logical third alternative explanation.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Score one for TALLPINE. Nice use of a salient quote, there.

 

[F4GIB]

The police claim that they were looking for drugs but after several days they haven't said that they found anything. If they HAD, you know they would be telling everyone about it at every opportunity.
http://cbs4.com/floridanews/FL--PoliceShooting-dn/resources_news_html

 

[DMF]

F4GIB, but you know very well the presence or absence of the evidence is not really relevant. If the warrant was properly obtained, then police had a valid reason to be there to search. If the occupant presented a threat of serious bodily injury or death, they were justified in using lethal force. You know very well that the standard for warrants is PROBABLE cause, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore it is possible for a search to turn up no evidence, and still be a completely valid search.

If you want to attack the search then attack the way in which the police established PC. However, since no info is available right now on how they establsihed PC, any attack or defense on that issue would be pure speculation.

BTW, "several days?" It's been two days.

 

[DMF]

Reasonable people shape their behavior based on known odds.

Known odds? Odds as in probabilities? Sort of like the probabilities used when establishing "PROBABLE cause?" Hawkeye please keep your own words in mind during future discussions about LEO actions based on probabilities, especially when the probability of things has been previously established to a magistrate judge.

 

[Coronach]

Score one for TALLPINE. Nice use of a salient quote, there.

If we are comparing a legally obtained warrant, issued by a magistrate, in a manner prescribed by the Constitution of the United States of America, with Stalin's rounding up and subsequent mass executions of the 'dissidents' in the Soviet Union, we have truly divirced ourselves from reality and plunged throught the looking glass into the land of rhetoric.

The fact of the matter is that things like this have happened since, oh, say, 1780 something. Cops back in the 'good ole days' would execute warrant service any old way they pleased and if they shot the guy inside, hey. They had a warrant. He must have been a bad guy, they shot him. The standards for such things are higher now than they ever have been in the past, and I firmly agree that this is a good thing. However, we are mistaking increased media scrutiny and crtiticism of these events for an indication that the cops are running amok and shooting citizens willy nilly.

Mike

 

[beerslurpy]

Wow TallPine, that was a very good save. Thanks. +1

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?

If the choice is between shooting police officers and being shot myself, then the answer is one only a graduate of law school could possibly get wrong. But the choice isnt really that complicated.

Since the choice is really between shooting no police officers and shooting a few police officers before I am murdered by them, then I think even a lawyer could get that one right. I would do so not out of concern for my own life, but out of concern for the rest of society, should such tyranny go unopposed.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Known odds? Odds as in probabilities? Sort of like the probabilities used when establishing "PROBABLE cause?" Hawkeye please keep your own words in mind during future discussions about LEO actions based on probabilities, especially when the probability of things has been previously established to a magistrate judge.

Huh? What does one thing have to do with the other? Probable cause means more likely than not, by an objective reasonableness standard, the guy in question is a crook, or the place in question has evidence of a crime. The word probable, however, can be applied to other things as well, such as my point about the known probability of criminality as between CCW license holders vs the general public. That information is available and scientifically verifiable. Not sure what you're complaining about.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

I would do so not out of concern for my own life, but out of concern for the rest of society, should such tyranny go unopposed.

Those are some beautiful words, BeerSlurpy.

 

[beerslurpy]

If we are comparing a legally obtained warrant, issued by a magistrate, in a manner prescribed by the Constitution of the United States of America, with Stalin's rounding up and subsequent mass executions of the 'dissidents' in the Soviet Union, we have truly divirced ourselves from reality and plunged throught the looking glass into the land of rhetoric.

If everything was kosher, how come there were no drugs? Someone lied under oath. Want to make a wager that person will ever be punished?

If this guy was guilty of no crime except defending his house with a gun (against an armed raid at 6am!) then someone should be charged with murder. Will you at least admit that?

If the War on Drugs isnt a political war, then I dont know what qualifies. We have 2 million political prisoners in jail right now because of this, and countless others murdered.

The question is not one of fundamental difference, but one of degree.

 

[Kamicosmos]

We really need to divorce ourself of the notion that just because someone has a CCW permit, they must be a good guy. Yes, it makes it overwhelmingly likely that he is, but nothing is 100%.

And the exact same statement can be applied to LEOs. Replace CCW permit with State Issued Badge, hence this discussion.

 

[Elmer]

Alcoa Aluminum NYSE symbol AA

Updated: 01:11 PM EDT
Alcoa shares may climb 25 percent - Barron's


NEW YORK, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Shares of Alcoa may be poised to rise 25 percent over the next 12 months if demand for its products picks up and improvements in the aluminum producer's operations continue, Barron's newspaper said in its latest edition.

But the aluminum market may be poised for recovery, as customers' inventories fall and pricing firms. And Alcoa is in a prime position to take advantage, having pursued global growth initiatives and cut costs, Barron's said.

Also, Alcoa shares looks cheap, trading at about 16 times estimated earnings for 2005, below the Standard & Poor's 500 index's multiple of 17 and far below the company's own average of 28 over the past five years, the newspaper said.

And Alcoa is seeing growing demand in markets including the United States, China, Brazil, South Korea, Russia and India, Barron's reported.



I'm Buying!

 

[beerslurpy]

The delicious taste of spam. Did someone hijack his account or is he itching for a ban?

 

[DMF]

If everything was kosher, how come there were no drugs?

What part of PROBABLE in probable cause do you not understand?

 

[DigitalWarrior]

Someone has some AA that they want to unload

Wow. I think posting a stock tip here makes even bit less sense than 20 fat white guys guessing what took place between people they do not know, in a place they have never been to, under circumstances unknown to them.

DW
cranky fat white guy

 

[DMF]

What does one thing have to do with the other?

Well Hawkeye, in this thread you said:
". . . the cop should breath a sigh of relief when he sees that this guy has a CCW license, because, unlike the general public, he knows for a fact that this guy is very likely an upstanding non-criminal type who respects the law."

Which ignores that while most CCW holders are law abiding citizens, in this case it was determined by a magistrate that there was probably evidence of a crime in Diotaiuto's residence, and if in fact it was there then Diotaiuto probably put it there, and therefore Diotaiuto probably was NOT "an non-criminal type who respects the law."

Your line of logic on this thread is the cops should ignore the probabilities related to the specific facts of a case, in favor of the probabilities about the general population. Under that same twisted logic one could say most parents are not child molestors, or most homeowners are not murders, and are very likely "upstanding non-criminal types who resect the law," so we should just ignore the probabilities about a particular suspect, and base all actions on the probabilities of some larger demographic. That logic is beyond stupid, but it's what you're pushing with the statements about "cops breathing a sigh of relief" merely because someone has a CCW.

 

[Elmer]

The delicious taste of spam. Did someone hijack his account or is he itching for a ban?

Wow. I think posting a stock tip here makes even bit less sense

I was just trying to be helpful. After reading some of these posts, it occurred to me, that with this many tin foil hats being worn, perhaps Alcoa stock would be a good investment. Apparently Barron's agrees. Perhaps they're reading some of these threads.....

 

[Elmer]

People who hold CCW permits have for years been able to hold themselves up as the most law abiding in society. There is one thing you have to face though. As CCW becomes more prevalent, people who really shouldn't have them, will get them, and they will misuse them. And those of you who are willing to read an article about a bad cop and paint all of us with the same broad brush, had better be prepared for the same kind of public scrutiny. Because the media will certainly enjoy making CCW holders look bad as much as they enjoy making the police look bad. Welcome to the club

Wow, Jeff! Good analogy! I may steal it for use in some other threads.

 

[carebear]

What was the greatest realistic penalty the crime, for which the evidence that was warranted to search for, would have warranted?

Misdemeanor possession?

A couple years for possession with intent to distribute?

I can't think of any simple possession charges that hold a capital penalty.

Ergo, perhaps in such cases it would not be unreasonable to try avoid using enforcement techniques which make it MORE "probable" that somebody might DIE in the service of the warrant.

He was not known to be violent.

He was not suspected of a violent crime.

The warrant was looking, in the end, for evidence of mere possession.

And yet we use the same technique the US Marshall's service uses for high-risk warrant service against known violent armed convicted felons, escapees and repeat offenders?

All I'm asking for is to apply the continuum of force to warrant service before the actual interaction takes place.

Yep, that might make it riskier for the police, but, again, they signed up for the job and the rights and safety of the innocent (even the "suspicious innocent"), in our system, trump the rights of the state or its agents.

Pre-trial, that dude was innocent as a lamb, probable cause to suspect non-violent possession or not. Setting him up to be gunned down by overly aggressive tactics was an immoral farce.

 

[DMF]

I can't think of any simple possession charges that hold a capital penalty.

He did not face a capital penalty based on a possession charge, he faced lethal force to stop the threat of serious bodily injury or death he presented when the cops arrived to do their jobs, serving the warrant. As I said earlier, "let's quit mixing up the reason for doing the search with the reason for shooting."

 

[Jeff White]

Beerslurpy said;

If everything was kosher, how come there were no drugs? Someone lied under oath. Want to make a wager that person will ever be punished?

This doesn't look like no evidence of a crime was found. In fact it's starting to look pretty kosher.

http://cbs4.com/floridanews/FL--PoliceShooting-dn/resources_news_html

Warrant shows Sunrise police were looking for drugs in shooting
Sunday August 07, 2005

SUNRISE, Fla. (AP) Police officers who shot and killed a man in his house had a search warrant and were looking for drugs, a newspaper report Sunday said.

Anthony Andrew Diotaiuto, 23, of Sunrise, was pronounced dead on the scene of his home Friday.

Police spokesman Lt. Robert Voss said Diotaiuto was armed and possibly pointed his gun at police when two SWAT team officers shot him.

Police thought there was drug dealing going on in the home, and that there might be violence because Diotaiuto had a valid concealed weapons permit, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported Sunday.

According to the search warrant, the police were looking for money, bookkeeping records, firearms and other evidence that Diotaiuto was a drug dealer. The warrant was provided to the newspaper by Diotaiuto's family.

Cannabis and drug paraphernalia, along with firearms and a BB gun, were listed as items seized, but the warrant did not specify the amount of drugs or what type of paraphernalia was confiscated.

Sunrise Detective Michael Calise signed the search warrant, the newspaper reported.

Phone calls to the Sunrise police department spokespeople were not returned on Sunday.

``I'm borderline insane because of all I've had to deal with,'' Marlene Diotaiuto, Anthony's mother said. ``I can't believe that they have denied this society and his family and his friends all the beauty that he brought us every day.''

Friends said Diotaiuto was not a drug dealer and described him a hardworking and caring person. Outside his home on Saturday, a poster apparently addressed to police read: ``Did you find what you were looking for?''

Flowers, stuffed animals and candles were part of a memorial erected on the sidewalk by mourners.

``That was a waste of a life,'' said neighbor Merissa Keefe.

Police have said Diotaiuto had one previous arrest in 1998 for marijuana possession in Cooper City.

Information from: South Florida Sun-Sentinel, http://www.sun-sentinel.com

Aren't cannibis and drug paraphenalia evidence that illegal activity was occuring on the property? Wouldn't that suggest that perhaps whatever probable cause that Detective Calise presented to the magistrate may have had some truth to it? It's not unheard of for the information that led to the warrant being applied for to be overtaken by events and the mother lode of contraband to be gone by the time the officers get a warrant and organize the raid.

If this guy was guilty of no crime except defending his house with a gun (against an armed raid at 6am!) then someone should be charged with murder. Will you at least admit that?

It looks like Diotaiuto was guilty of possession of cannabis and drug paraphenalia at the least.

If the War on Drugs isnt a political war, then I dont know what qualifies. We have 2 million political prisoners in jail right now because of this, and countless others murdered.

This isn't about the war on drugs. It's about if the police were right to come with enough force to accomplish the mission and if it was reasonable for them to shoot Diotaiuto in the course of conducting their lawful business. It makes no difference if Diotaiuto was suspected of dealing drugs or being a child molester. Both are violations of the law and the police and courts are charged by the public with enforcing those laws. If you don't like the drug laws, then the way to get them changed is to elect representatives who will repeal them.

The Real Hawkeye said;

The word probable, however, can be applied to other things as well, such as my point about the known probability of criminality as between CCW license holders vs the general public. That information is available and scientifically verifiable. Not sure what you're complaining about.

We're not discussing criminality here. We're discussing officer safety. I know that every encounter I have with a citizen is an armed encounter. There are always at least two firearms present (the ones I carry). There have been been many instances where officers have been assaulted, injured and killed by people who had no prior criminal record but who for whatever reason snapped. The fact that someone has been issued a CCW, a badge and police credentials, a priests vestments, has been elected or appointed to the bench, has no immediate bearing on how they may react to contact from the police. Only a fool would tell himself that person has a CCW, so there is no way he'd ever be a threat to me. It's much more prudent to make note that that person is more likely to be armed then someone else you may encounter and take whatever action you feel appropriate based on your gut feeling after making contact.

In this case, Diotaiuto was suspected of being a drug dealer. Was he, we don't know yet. But we do know that he had firearms and could reasonably assume that he carried one based on the fact he had a CCW. We could also reasonably assume that since he was suspected of being involved in the drug trade, and the drug trade is often violent, that he was capable of using his weapons to defend his drugs and cash. I'd say based on that, the use of the SWAT team to serve the warrant was most likely appropriate. Rival drug dealers may run down down to the local police supply house and buy raid jackets or POLICE marked T-shirts in order to make ripping off their rival a bit easier, but I don't know of any instances where they've disguised themselves as a SWAT team with level IV armor, kevlar helmets and other turn out gear. Diotaiuto was more likely to recognize a SWAT officer in his turn out kit as a legitimate police officer then a scruffy looking narcotics detective wearing a raid jacket over his street clothes

Kamicosmos said;

And the exact same statement can be applied to LEOs. Replace CCW permit with State Issued Badge, hence this discussion.

No one is denying that. In fact, in an earlier post I said that possession of a CCW, a badge and police credentials or a clerical collar was no guarantee that someone was a good guy.

Jeff

 

[Molon Labe]

If someone breaks down our door at 6 in the morning, it matters not who it is, what they're yelling, or why they're doing it.

In the interest of defending myself and my family, I will shoot first and ask questions later.