Man defending home charged with murder
- Thread starter Guitargod1985
- Start date
- Status
Dumpster Baby
Member
My AR15's, AK clone, carbines, and M1A are indistinguishable from the real (military) thing at a short distance. For that reason I'm always aware when I take them out that I may be subject to an inspection of them. I might not like it but I recognize the concerns of the inspectors, if any. I'm certainly not going to self destruct over it. It also helps not to go to the range in camo and battle gear, and wearing skull and cross bones shirts saying "Kill Em All ....(insert bad guy/JBT/FEDGOV here.... ".
How you conduct yourself in life helps determine how much "negative feedback" you might get from folks who can totally ruin your day without half trying.
IMO, I think it is going to come down to the extent to which the police identified themselves and the extent to which the police were breaking through or into the house. The article is somewhat conflicting as it suggests they were entering or trying to enter through a lower panel of the door, but also says the defendant shot through the door.
In my world, the police own the night and they are in charge. I do what they say. I hope they appreciate that I own my home and will protect my family. If they don't ID themselves and are entering or in a home at night and the homeowner can not tell who they are, there is going to be a conflict, meaning most people will defend theirselves and family against an unknown agressor.
In my world, the police own the night and they are in charge. I do what they say. I hope they appreciate that I own my home and will protect my family. If they don't ID themselves and are entering or in a home at night and the homeowner can not tell who they are, there is going to be a conflict, meaning most people will defend theirselves and family against an unknown agressor.
Guitargod1985
Member
Let me first of all clarify that I had not intended for this to turn into a cop bashing thread. I don't think that LEOs are all evil or out to violate my civil liberties. Nor do I think that they are beyond reproach or across the board the most trustworthy individuals. They are flesh and blood just like anyone else.
But...
You mean like those cops in Atlanta made up that crap story about the ninety year old lady emptying a revolver at them because they executed a no knock raid on the wrong house? As it turns out, didn't they plant a bag of weed in the lady's house? Sounds familiar.
Let me refresh your memory: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=273096
But...
You mean like those cops in Atlanta made up that crap story about the ninety year old lady emptying a revolver at them because they executed a no knock raid on the wrong house? As it turns out, didn't they plant a bag of weed in the lady's house? Sounds familiar.
Let me refresh your memory: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=273096
MASTEROFMALICE
member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2007
- Messages
- 711
I'm not speaking for all cops, only this case.
I'll not say anymore before I say something I shouldn't.
I'll not say anymore before I say something I shouldn't.
romma
Member
Sorry, zero justification for a no-knock warrant for marijuana in my Book.
yongxingfreesty
Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,396
makes no sense at all.
I'll say this....
I have a gut feeling that there is more to this story than we know. I'm going to wait and see where this plays out.
I see some things I don't like in the homeowner, and I have questions regarding the LEO actions.
All LEO's are not angels, and all homeowners are not angels, either. I'm not going to draw an opinion until we can sort this out.
But lets not blindly defend or blindly condemn at this point.
-- John
I have a gut feeling that there is more to this story than we know. I'm going to wait and see where this plays out.
I see some things I don't like in the homeowner, and I have questions regarding the LEO actions.
All LEO's are not angels, and all homeowners are not angels, either. I'm not going to draw an opinion until we can sort this out.
But lets not blindly defend or blindly condemn at this point.
-- John
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
...
Really?
So just by owning military-ish looking firearms you would have no problem giving up your 4th Amendment rights, or being subjected to a "knock and announce" police raid at a time when you're in bed?
FWIW, I wear neither skulls nor camouflage, but even if I did, I hardly understand how one's mode of dress should in any way be construed as the basis for issuing a warrant to raid one's home.
scalper
Member
Sounds like a whole series of blunders by all parties involved.
First, I definitely wouldn't shoot through a door at a undetermined target. It kind of goes against all that I have been taught. Granted I might stand back from the door with the firearm and would yell "who is it?" and would certainly wait till the culprit came rushing in with no response.
On the other hand, it sounds like the officers might have used better judgement as well. I mean the guy had no history or priors and the alleged crime was not exactly in my opinion all that serious. Coming from a family of law enforcement, I like to think my kin would cordially knock on the door and just ask some polite questions before assuming the guy is a criminal.
All in all, I would think murder is a bit stiff. And I think those who made the decision to just barge in should hold some of the responsibility as well.
Just my 2 cents!
First, I definitely wouldn't shoot through a door at a undetermined target. It kind of goes against all that I have been taught. Granted I might stand back from the door with the firearm and would yell "who is it?" and would certainly wait till the culprit came rushing in with no response.
On the other hand, it sounds like the officers might have used better judgement as well. I mean the guy had no history or priors and the alleged crime was not exactly in my opinion all that serious. Coming from a family of law enforcement, I like to think my kin would cordially knock on the door and just ask some polite questions before assuming the guy is a criminal.
All in all, I would think murder is a bit stiff. And I think those who made the decision to just barge in should hold some of the responsibility as well.
Just my 2 cents!
My first reaction to the way the story was written was "Whoa-boy, another 'put yourself in his position' deal, instead of 'here are the facts as we know them at this time' deal."
But seriously, no-knock warrants for a suspect that has not been vetted by investigators just seems like bad policy to me. I get nervous about the attitude of "well, let's go in with as much as we got, just in case he's <fill in the blank>." Police are supposed to meet resistance with the next level, not roll over people who are unknown quantities.
At the least, they could have done some investigating with neighborhood cooperation. If the guy looked out the front window at 8 p.m. in January, it would have been dark, and if the officer attempting to break down the door was not obviously identifiable, it's entirely conceivable that the suspect was reasonably afraid for his life.
Here's how I look at it:
1. Dangerous game to play (the police dept.'s fault)
2. If they identified themselves properly, this guy is gonna get jailtime for murder
3. If they can't prove that they identified themselves properly, then there's a reasonable doubt that this man's story is true, and he'll probably walk.
Let's face it, though, like someone else already said, this was a situation that never needed to happen.
But seriously, no-knock warrants for a suspect that has not been vetted by investigators just seems like bad policy to me. I get nervous about the attitude of "well, let's go in with as much as we got, just in case he's <fill in the blank>." Police are supposed to meet resistance with the next level, not roll over people who are unknown quantities.
At the least, they could have done some investigating with neighborhood cooperation. If the guy looked out the front window at 8 p.m. in January, it would have been dark, and if the officer attempting to break down the door was not obviously identifiable, it's entirely conceivable that the suspect was reasonably afraid for his life.
Here's how I look at it:
1. Dangerous game to play (the police dept.'s fault)
2. If they identified themselves properly, this guy is gonna get jailtime for murder
3. If they can't prove that they identified themselves properly, then there's a reasonable doubt that this man's story is true, and he'll probably walk.
Let's face it, though, like someone else already said, this was a situation that never needed to happen.
DigitalWarrior
Member
I think waiting for the case to be decided is to wait until it is too late to help. Just as we make value judgments before Heller is decided, so should make judgments before this case (and the case of the broken semi-automatic) before it is decided. I am also sure that sometimes Juries and Courts make the wrong decision (Kelo vs New London, O.J.). No other persons judgment absolves me from the responsibility of deciding for myself.
I am pro police, in so far as I do not wish to have them charged with enforcing unjust laws in unjust ways, placing themselves and others in unnecessary danger.
This could have been me (minus the drugs of course)
DW
I am pro police, in so far as I do not wish to have them charged with enforcing unjust laws in unjust ways, placing themselves and others in unnecessary danger.
This could have been me (minus the drugs of course)
DW
See SWAT shooting incident in Ohio.
During the raid, officers shot two pit bulls (voice boxes removed).
Unfortunately, a woman was killed in the process. It is very difficult to determine culpability.
Still, it calls into question the appropriateness of SWAT teams serving warrants.
Maybe it was justified, but the whole thing seems risky....sad anyway.
During the raid, officers shot two pit bulls (voice boxes removed).
Unfortunately, a woman was killed in the process. It is very difficult to determine culpability.
Still, it calls into question the appropriateness of SWAT teams serving warrants.
Maybe it was justified, but the whole thing seems risky....sad anyway.
If police want to behave like criminals, they shouldn't be surprised when they are dealt with as such.
If someone is trying to kick in my door, and it is apparent that that is indeed what is happening, I shouldn't have to wait for them to get through the door to shoot them. But with police behaving like militants these days, now I'm supposed to sit around and wait to make sure it's not a police officer, so they don't ruin my life if I kill one by accident. Their misbehavior places unrealistic and unacceptable responsibilities on the home owner. God forbid you are hard of hearing, don't speak English, or can't see 20/20 as soon as you get out of bed because if you fail to identify one in your hazy split-second decision to defend yourself, you are either dead or going to prison. Same goes if you can't understand muffled voices through the door.
These actions help to protect no one.
If someone is trying to kick in my door, and it is apparent that that is indeed what is happening, I shouldn't have to wait for them to get through the door to shoot them. But with police behaving like militants these days, now I'm supposed to sit around and wait to make sure it's not a police officer, so they don't ruin my life if I kill one by accident. Their misbehavior places unrealistic and unacceptable responsibilities on the home owner. God forbid you are hard of hearing, don't speak English, or can't see 20/20 as soon as you get out of bed because if you fail to identify one in your hazy split-second decision to defend yourself, you are either dead or going to prison. Same goes if you can't understand muffled voices through the door.
These actions help to protect no one.
moe.ron
Member
I am not anti cop
RNB65
Member
The CPD is going to take it up the arse on this one. I've read quite a bit about this case and there's absolutely no way that the CPD can justify their actions in how they executed the search warrant. None.
Did Frederick commit a crime when he shot someone thru a door without knowing if the person was a deadly threat? Probably, but I'll leave that up to a jury to decide. Regardless, he certainly should be granted bail and not be kept in jail.
-
Did Frederick commit a crime when he shot someone thru a door without knowing if the person was a deadly threat? Probably, but I'll leave that up to a jury to decide. Regardless, he certainly should be granted bail and not be kept in jail.
-
Dumpster Baby
Member
Yes, I would have a serious problem giving up my 4th Amendment rights and being subjected to a midnight raid. By publicly displaying such weapons I am forced by circumstances to accepting the risk of it happening, though. By driving a car down the street I have to accept the possibility of a (controversial) random stop, or being mistaken for a be-on-the-lookout-for. I wish life was perfect, but it's not, and I deeply resent folks who make it worse. Just sayin' - act right, look right, and you should be good to go.
On the other hand, looking and acting like a gang banger, doper, klansman, white separatist, religious fanatic, political fanatic, etc, etc, sets you apart, makes you stand out, makes you a target for ...... somebody, somewhere.
The most dangerous people in the world are those that don't look or act dangerous, but truly are. I think I've seen a few of those, and they weren't good guys. Some people just have a bad, bad aura that most people don't notice.
The rest of us have to get through it the best we can and being a loudmouth hothead, a fool, a jerk, a walking warning sign, is not going to help. As shooters in public places we automatically accept an exposure to various risks, and one of those risks is being checked out by someone with a lot more juice than we do. No one likes it, certainly not me, but self destructing over it is ......... self destructive.
We all have to bend some kind of way with all the other nuisance beaurocracy in life - registrations, licenses, fees, taxes, permits, inspections, restrictions, zones, etc. If someone can't stand it, leave. The Unabomber Ted Kaczynski comes to mind. He couldn't stand it, self destructed, and took a bunch of innocent people with him.
One thing I see constantly on most gun boards is
every time a citizen is subjected to any kind of restraint, control, or standards of behavior. I would hate to see what would happen if ALL drug and gun laws were removed, as so many people seem to want so badly. I'm old enough to recognize the concept of Unintended Consequences, and I've witnessed plenty of it during my life. Too bad you younger guys will have to learn it hard way.MiddleAgedKen
Member
BLC, MOM is referring to Radley Balko.
Balko has been following this story for a while now--what I find interesting is that it's the city's story that has changed a number of times.
Balko has been following this story for a while now--what I find interesting is that it's the city's story that has changed a number of times.
There are two issues here:
1) No-knock raids. IMO, this did not require one. The guy was suspected of growing weed, not something heinous and violent. Plant a few cops in an unmarked car across the street and pick the guy up when he goes out to get his mail or drive to work.
2) Shooting at an unknown target. "Know your target and what's beyond." If it sounds like hell's fury is trying to come through my front door without identifying itself one way or the other, I'm shooting at the door because what's beyond the door isn't friendly.
Imagine if this was the MO for local scumbags. Break the door down while dressed in black pajamas. Then proceed to rape, rob, and pillage. We'd all be saying "should've shot through the door when they heard it being kicked in."
1) No-knock raids. IMO, this did not require one. The guy was suspected of growing weed, not something heinous and violent. Plant a few cops in an unmarked car across the street and pick the guy up when he goes out to get his mail or drive to work.
2) Shooting at an unknown target. "Know your target and what's beyond." If it sounds like hell's fury is trying to come through my front door without identifying itself one way or the other, I'm shooting at the door because what's beyond the door isn't friendly.
Imagine if this was the MO for local scumbags. Break the door down while dressed in black pajamas. Then proceed to rape, rob, and pillage. We'd all be saying "should've shot through the door when they heard it being kicked in."
Amen. For so many reasons.SSevenN said:
Samuel Adams
Member
Apparently CPD has never heard of Kathryn Johnston formerly from Atlanta.
mossberg
Member
First degree murder and thinking about Capital? Harsh. Should just send the whole thing to judge Judy.
It's all about officer safety guys.
Make the connection.
To heck with the safety of innocents and those innocent until proven guilty - they're only citizens. Not important at all - certainly not more important than officers of the law.
All that really matters is that the special class of people known as Law Enforcement officers get home safely every night. Wouldn't want to lose any more agents of the state than need be.
Make the connection.
To heck with the safety of innocents and those innocent until proven guilty - they're only citizens. Not important at all - certainly not more important than officers of the law.
All that really matters is that the special class of people known as Law Enforcement officers get home safely every night. Wouldn't want to lose any more agents of the state than need be.
Have you heard of "profiling"? Racial or otherwise, well- or ill-advised, it happens. We see it everyday, some harmless, some very harmful.
And here's one person's valid way of dealing with it. We may or may not agree, but that's not the point.
I am not defending anything or anyone. I am simply pointing out realities which exist that we can do little about, but must deal with. And I only bring this up because I believe at the heart of this tragedy, profiling played a part.
- Status
Similar threads
