SWAT Team overview.

Status
Not open for further replies.
dave pro 2a wrote:

Having cops think and act like the military IS the problem.
Click to expand...

thanks for taking my statement out of context. :banghead:

the point i was trying to make is that there is no 100% foolproof way to execute a search warrant without any possibility of injury or loss of life, similarly, the US Military cannot invade a country with a foolproof plan.

here are more examples:

1. there is no way you can have a hotel housekeeping employee enter a hotel guest's room and ensure 100% that they will never steal anything from the room.

2. there is no way you can rent a car and be 100% sure it will not suffer a scratch, dent, or any other miniscule damage to it.

3. there is no way you can go into a Las Vegas casino and play blackjack for 3 hours and be 100% sure you will not lose a dime.

i am not inferring the police and the military have the same mentality.

BTW Dave, still waiting for you to provide source cites to your statement that the police act like the Gestapo and the KGB? or do you not have any?
 
Intent of the law versus intent of enforcement of the law versus individual interpretation and intent of the law versus intent of bureaucracy, chain of command, and group/squad mentality equals a risk of mistakes happening.
 
There is literally not a way to justify the mistakes that occur from no-knock warrents.

You're welcome to try, it generally falls under "the principle of double effect."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_double_effect

Just because something is 'legally allowed,' does not mean it is moral. Just because a judge signs the warrent does not mean that the police are absolved of moral responsibility.
 
and you'll in my post #19 of this thread:

the judge has the ultimate say if the warrant can be "no-knock." as such, the supervisory agent must ultimately use that at his discretion. a warrant can be endorsed as "no-knock" but the officers have the discretion to still knock and announce.
Click to expand...

i wouldn't call the unfortunate shooting of the 92 year old in Atlanta by Atlanta PD a "mistake" by the officers that were forced to shoot in self-defense. would you?

the criteria listed in your Wikipedia URL states there are four criteria to the "Principle of Double Effect"

-the act itself must be good or morally neutral
-the good effect must be a result of the act and not of the evil effect
-the evil effect must not be directly willed, but may be foreseen and tolerated
-the good effect outweighs the evil effect, or the two are at least comparable
Click to expand...

i think this certainly passes muster. the evil effect was not directly willed, but possibly forseen and tolerated. and the good outweighs the evil effect.

and im STILL waiting for your source cites.......:rolleyes:
 
if you "no-knock," you obviously run into the scenario where the people inside don't seem to realize the police are there. never mind the fact that they are wearing "POLICE" markings all over their body, are all primarily dressed the same, have a marked police car outside with its lights flashing, are screaming "POLICE - SEARCH WARRANT!" over and over. yes, even for some, despite all of the objective evidence that says the police are there, they end up killed because they take up arms or for some other reason do not know the police are there.
Click to expand...
The old lady in Georgia was shot by plain clothes officers executing the warrant. How much identifying marks do plain clothes officers wear? Do they drive around in marked police cars with lights flashing?

I don't know if no-knock warrants should be made illegal, but there does seem be a need for a higher burden of proof and better investigation.

One thing I would like to see from the original article is the results of the lawsuits filed. Are they on going? Were they dismissed? Did they win?
Can you include the judge who authorized the warrant in a lawsuit?
 
out with no-knock

again, the resistance to no-knock as a common policy of law enforcement must be loud, continuous and firm. no, you can't do that, as you would say to a child who insists upon some behavior which is unacceptable; we don't do such things in this family. armed and armored to the teeth, with the full force of government authority at the ready and i'm hearing concerns that guys might get hurt if we dont' surprise the target regardless of collateral damage possibilities? stay out of it, then; we'll work it out. when you've reached the point where you can ignore the tragedy of innocent life lost (and you are ignoring it when you barge in on an unknown situation{all the firepower would be unneccessary if you had all the facts-other options would be available in most cases}), you're over the line into a martial situation. we don't do that at home; sorry. and no, we don't need a plethora of tricked out ninja cadres to respond to every nut who is mad at his wife or even the uncommon(yes, statistically, that's true) wacko trio or duo, or even the hyper-dreaded lone high school miscreant who goes off on his school community. it costs way too much money, and worse, inculcates a hapless, helpless call someone with many guns to save me mentality in the population. that attitude is as unamerican as the sight of darth vader clones on every street corner would be. no, if you can't do it without killing the innocent, you can't do it is the starting point. we'll work out what is acceptable from there.
 
It was a mistake, grievous error, something-that-shouldn't've-happened, etc. Save your semantics and "quotes" (<-- see what I did there?) for someone else who cares.

Intent of the law versus intent of enforcement of the law versus individual interpretation and intent of the law versus intent of bureaucracy, chain of command, and group/squad mentality equals a risk of mistakes happening.
Click to expand...

Nope. Don't see anything wrong with that. That's all that is. Nothing implied, nothing insinuated. It is what it is. Now if you want to say that those who bear the responsibility of the mistakes, or even letting slip the risks of mistakes happening should be punished, have at it. But I didn't include that in my post. If you want to argue right or wrong, by all means. But that wasn't included in my post, either. I don't really care if they get punished or if they knowingly get away with it. My online rhetoric certainly isn't going to change it, and neither is yours. I was just interjecting with a bit of factualism of how these things happen, not justifying them after the fact.
 
Wow I cant imagine how angered I would be in that situation. If the idiots that got the # wrong were lucky enought to catch me unarmed and no shooting occurs (somebody bust my door in with no warning bullets will fly first questions will come second) they could look forward to lots of time spent in court. I would find a slimey scumbag trial lawyer and make it my lifes mission to be a thorn in that P.D's side. Aside from suing for damages to my door, doorframe, repair cost (while I was at it I would have an engineer out to inspect the integrity of my door frame and surrounding structure), smoke damage to the carpet, furniture, electronics, clothing, every silly little thing I could think of. And naturally the life long emotional distress they caused to me, my family, and my cat :evil: .
 
i'm no cop hater

but being wrongfully arrested can be a big deal. I was surprised. I was arrested quite a bit as a young moron but remarkably enough about the time i quit drinking as much od =f a quart of booze as i could each day it stopped happening. 13 years later i got arrested on a bogus felony that was thrown out by the commonwealth request at the prelim. even so i went through more changes over the one time i was innocent than all the times i was guilty as sin.thankfully my kid was soyoung she didn't realize what the deal was.
 
unfortunately i, as well as many others, don't have a "perfect" way to execute search warrants to ensure the safety of everyone.
Click to expand...

Then dont you think we should err on the side of protecting those that the police have sworn to "protect and serve" rather than benifiting those that are supposed to serve?

I am all for protecting the servants of the people, but am not willing to sacrifice people being secure in their own homes to do so.
 
Last edited:
MechAg94 wrote:

The old lady in Georgia was shot by plain clothes officers executing the warrant. How much identifying marks do plain clothes officers wear? Do they drive around in marked police cars with lights flashing?
Click to expand...

MechAg,

i suggest you read the news article below for clarification. allegedly, the police had a marked police vehicle in front of the house, and, that allegedly, even if the warrant was endorsed as "no-knock", the officers allegedly did at least announce themselves:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/10374909/detail.html

Asst. Chief Dreher said as they were executing the search warrant, the officers announced themselves and then forced open the door. Officials say the warrant was a “No Knock” warrant – meaning that the officers did not knock before forcing open the door, but they did announce themselves.

Dreher said as soon as the officers forced open the door, Johnston shot at the officers and the officers returned fire to protect themselves. One officer was shot 3 times – once in the leg, on the side of the face and once in his bulletproof vest. One officer was hit in the leg and another hit in their arm.
Click to expand...

story continues below:

Dreher said a marked patrol vehicle was parked in front of the residence and the word “Police” was written across the front and back of the narcotics team’s vests. He also said only a matter of minutes passed between when officers arrived on the scene and when they forced open the door.
Click to expand...

cassandrasdaddy wrote:

no knocks are intended to preserve evidence.
Click to expand...

incorrect. they are for safety.

dave_pro2a wrote:

roflmao@Spreadfire Arms
Click to expand...

and i'll take that as you having absolutely zero proof to justify your ridiculous allegations. :confused:

i still dont see how anyone got to interview the DEAD lady to ascertain why she was shooting at the police. everyone ASSUMES she shot at them because she didn't know they were the police. someone please provide evidence that she didn't know that she was shooting at the police, please?
 
"incorrect. they are there for safety"

Don't appear that no-knocks are all that safe for anyone.

Biker
 
"incorrect. they are there for safety"

The safety of the person who is presumed innocent?

The one whose rights are at risk of being violated?

The one who is the most likely to end up dead if something goes wrong?

No, none of the above.
 
Wow I cant imagine how angered I would be in that situation. If the idiots that got the # wrong were lucky enought to catch me unarmed and no shooting occurs (somebody bust my door in with no warning bullets will fly first questions will come second) they could look forward to lots of time spent in court. I would find a slimey scumbag trial lawyer and make it my lifes mission to be a thorn in that P.D's side. Aside from suing for damages to my door, doorframe, repair cost (while I was at it I would have an engineer out to inspect the integrity of my door frame and surrounding structure), smoke damage to the carpet, furniture, electronics, clothing, every silly little thing I could think of. And naturally the life long emotional distress they caused to me, my family, and my cat .
Click to expand...

Not to mention the wear and tear on your firearm and the expenditure of personal protection ammunition
 
SoCalShooter
Quote:
Wow I cant imagine how angered I would be in that situation. If the idiots that got the # wrong were lucky enought to catch me unarmed and no shooting occurs (somebody bust my door in with no warning bullets will fly first questions will come second) they could look forward to lots of time spent in court. I would find a slimey scumbag trial lawyer and make it my lifes mission to be a thorn in that P.D's side. Aside from suing for damages to my door, doorframe, repair cost (while I was at it I would have an engineer out to inspect the integrity of my door frame and surrounding structure), smoke damage to the carpet, furniture, electronics, clothing, every silly little thing I could think of. And naturally the life long emotional distress they caused to me, my family, and my cat .
Not to mention the wear and tear on your firearm and the expenditure of personal protection ammunition
Click to expand...

Provided you survive the encounter.
 
really?

cassandrasdaddy wrote:


Quote:
no knocks are intended to preserve evidence.

incorrect. they are for safety.



if that were the case they could wait grab folks on the street. on the tv swat shows they are always talking about getting in before they can grab arms as well as destroy evidence
 
Not worth it.

The Drug War is never going to be won. No point in SWAT-teaming 92 year olds if we aren't going to close the border. Time for the Drug War to end and this stuff be legalized.
Not worth it. Not worth it at all.
 
Check, check, recheck, quick surveillance. Seriously, I think I'd make extra sure on these things.
 
Spreadfire, you keep insisting that the officers in Atlanta were merely defending themselves, but you gloss over how they got in that situation in the first place. They broke into a woman's home and threatened her at gunpoint. If a mugger shoots a victim who resists, is he merely defending himself as well? If I kick in your door and scream you awake, confused and disoriented, then shoot you at the first sign you *might* be resisting, am I acting in self defense?

I don't care how legal or how effective these no-knock raids are, they are wrong. Police in a free country don't do things like that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Swat raids galore. You might want to think on the following.
2 3
Replies
58
Views
4K
Thin Black Line
T
B
  • Locked
110 SWAT Team raids TODAY
Replies
18
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
A
  • Locked
Anotrer SWAT OP gone astray? How will trhis cookie crumble in federal court?
2
Replies
41
Views
1K
Preacherman
P
B
  • Locked
Lima Ohio Swat team kills mom, shoots infant.
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
F
  • Locked
The dangers of defending your home.
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top