View Full Version : No Knock Gone Wrong (again) in Minneapolis
Is it my imagination or does Minneapolis seem to have an unusually high rate of problematic LE events? Personally, not a fan of NKW under anything but extremis situations. Assuming the info we are getting is accurate and not designed to make LE look bad, this kid had no record and was a legal gun owner, asleep on the couch of an address they were looking for another person.
What the connected between them is, is unclear, but you can imagine being awoken from a dead sleep by yelling and reaching for a pistol in such an event before your brain can register what is happening.
I'm not going to armchair opinion whether it was a good shoot in isolation, and maybe members who have done such work. I can understand from the LEOs POV, you're entering a dwelling looking for a violent criminal and see a dude coming from under a blanket with a pistol in his hand, it's go time.
But, that puts the law abiding kid on the couch (accepting for now what we have been told of him) and the LEO in a lose lose proposition, and the kid came out the loser. Had the kid been some hood rat with an illegal gun and long criminal history who happened to nbe there, my empathy meter would be at zero, but that's now what appears to be the case here.
LEOs I know have told me they feel NKW are often abused, and I know one guy who left the tac team because he felt they were being called out for them due to lazy detectives who had judges signing off on them without even reading them (according to him..), and had the tac team serving warrants on many they didn't require them at all.
Finally, I want to know more details on this one before passing judgement on either sides, but it's one that potentially shows NKW may not be the best option, and get LEO and or non coms killed. Of course demonstrations have already started minus any investigations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBxrr1v8S_8
The media has a knack for portraying these guys as Saints. But I agree. If he really is a non-criminal with a legally owned weapon, this is horse crap.
LEOs I know have told me they feel NKW are often abused, and I know one guy who left the tac team because he felt they were being called out for them due to lazy detectives who had judges signing off on them without even reading them (according to him..), and had the tac team serving warrants on many they didn't require them at all.
It's been a minute since I was on a tac team, but my one 'oh shit!' moment: we were called to do a NKW for a guy with multiple FTAs (failure to appear in court). Guy was considered high risk because of "his history." We're assembling, our MFIC is questioning the detectives who pushed the button have us do the NKW. Turns out the guy failed to appear on multiple traffic citations. Yes...traffic citations. His "history" that made him so dangerous to need a tac team bust his door down? He beat the crap out of a guy who tried to rob him.
Our officer said "hol' up....". He had a patrol car pick him up, which they did, and without any issues or problems. Oh, the reason he had so many FTAs? He did not read or speak English.
I am not going to say we abused it or not; I don't have any numbers to suggest one way or the other. But I can say, the system is biased towards LE.
NKW's should be a lot more rare than they are. They should only happen in extreme circumstances, if they are wrong heads should roll. Putting folks through this. Risking the lives of the officers and the public. There need to be extreme consequences. This is "hero or zero" stuff.
I mean seriously. Say they raid your house in the middle of the night, shoot your dogs, scare the shit out of you and your family. Trash your home. Then go all "oops, we had bad intel". How F'ing pissed would you be? I'm not even talking about a human fatality, but just imagine it's you.
I'd be like "I'mma blow your damn house up in the middle of the night!" pissed off. I'd honestly WANT to kill me some cops, and I'd feel justified as hell about it.
Gotta wait and see how the facts play out on this one, but at first blush it don't look good.
Averageman
02-08-22, 10:13
It's been a minute since I was on a tac team, but my one 'oh shit!' moment: we were called to do a NKW for a guy with multiple FTAs (failure to appear in court). Guy was considered high risk because of "his history." We're assembling, our MFIC is questioning the detectives who pushed the button have us do the NKW. Turns out the guy failed to appear on multiple traffic citations. Yes...traffic citations. His "history" that made him so dangerous to need a tac team bust his door down? He beat the crap out of a guy who tried to rob him.
Our officer said "hol' up....". He had a patrol car pick him up, which they did, and without any issues or problems. Oh, the reason he had so many FTAs? He did not read or speak English.
I am not going to say we abused it or not; I don't have any numbers to suggest one way or the other. But I can say, the system is biased towards LE.
That's F'ed up, but they I am sure look at it like, "Why lift anything heavy when you've got heavy lifters available?"
You know before we could use a range, we had to have a SDAD where you mapped out the firing zone, left and right limits of fire and a buffer zone. What that displayed was where a round can be fired without it being a hazard to others. This to me would have the propensity to send rounds all over the neighborhood.
Also, a SDAD showed how far a round could go before it was at maximum range. Think how far a 5.56 round will go before it loses enough energy to fall to the ground.
These things when used correctly are good, when used wrong they go very, very bad.
NKW's should be a lot more rare than they are. They should only happen in extreme circumstances, if they are wrong heads should roll. Putting folks through this. Risking the lives of the officers and the public. There need to be extreme consequences. This is "hero or zero" stuff.
I mean seriously. Say they raid your house in the middle of the night, shoot your dogs, scare the shit out of you and your family. Trash your home. Then go all "oops, we had bad intel". How F'ing pissed would you be? I'm not even talking about a human fatality, but just imagine it's you.
I'd be like "I'mma blow your damn house up in the middle of the night!" pissed off. I'd honestly WANT to kill me some cops, and I'd feel justified as hell about it.
Gotta wait and see how the facts play out on this one, but at first blush it don't look good.
For sure! And the cherry on top is that it happened in the lunatic left wing State of MN. The media nut bags are dancing in their studios with all the division the can create with this deal.
For sure! And the cherry on top is that it happened in the lunatic left wing State of MN. The media nut bags are dancing in their studios with all the division the can create with this deal.
Look at the media coverage of it now, GF is mentioned in the same sentence every time to make sure to inflame and create social unrest even thought there is zero similarities between these events.
Gabriel556
02-08-22, 11:01
I’m torn here with outrage. If the media were truly reporting it would likely be swept under the rug, but they are fanning flames and this should trigger heads to roll if it’s not a “life saving” no knock. I hope the riots ensue and the anger is directed to the politicians. GF shouldn’t be mentioned but this NKW crap needs to stop. This isn’t somebody who’s going to be holed up with hostages for their entire life in a compound. They almost always have to go out for something, pick them up then. I’m pissed because if my door was opened, I’d respond much the same way, and likely be shot because I’d have my weapon raised when I identified a gun on whomever broke into my house.
Based on their past actions the story is likely to be true. Not sure if they will get awards for this one or not.
https://www.startribune.com/editorial-why-give-awards-in-botched-police-raid/26121564/
Look at the media coverage of it now, GF is mentioned in the same sentence every time to make sure to inflame and create social unrest even thought there is zero similarities between these events.
Naturally.
BoringGuy45
02-08-22, 11:29
NKW's should be a lot more rare than they are. They should only happen in extreme circumstances, if they are wrong heads should roll. Putting folks through this. Risking the lives of the officers and the public. There need to be extreme consequences. This is "hero or zero" stuff.
I mean seriously. Say they raid your house in the middle of the night, shoot your dogs, scare the shit out of you and your family. Trash your home. Then go all "oops, we had bad intel". How F'ing pissed would you be? I'm not even talking about a human fatality, but just imagine it's you.
I'd be like "I'mma blow your damn house up in the middle of the night!" pissed off. I'd honestly WANT to kill me some cops, and I'd feel justified as hell about it.
Gotta wait and see how the facts play out on this one, but at first blush it don't look good.
NKWs should only be used when the target is known to be highly dangerous and almost certain to shoot it out when the cops announce their presence. It shouldn't be "has a history of violent behavior" because that can simply mean the suspect gets drunk and gets into bar fights a lot. "Known to carry a gun" shouldn't be a justification either; the gun could be legal, or even if it isn't, it doesn't mean he's necessarily going to start popping off shots as soon as the team announces their presence.
At any rate, this'll probably end up being considered a good shoot. The police were acting, as far as we know, in good faith in executing that warrant, and they were confronted by a guy with a gun. No cop is going to have a guy point a gun at him during a search warrant and stop and think "Wait! What if I'm in the wrong house? What if this guy is just startled and it hasn't hit him yet that the police are here? Should I wait to pull the trigger until we've cleared up his reason for pointing that gun at us?" So while this is tragic all around, it's difficult to hold the police who pulled the trigger guilty for doing so. The answer is, as stated above, the reduction of NKWs!
NKWs should only be used when the target is known to be highly dangerous and almost certain to shoot it out when the cops announce their presence. It shouldn't be "has a history of violent behavior" because that can simply mean the suspect gets drunk and gets into bar fights a lot. "Known to carry a gun" shouldn't be a justification either; the gun could be legal, or even if it isn't, it doesn't mean he's necessarily going to start popping off shots as soon as the team announces their presence.
At any rate, this'll probably end up being considered a good shoot. The police were acting, as far as we know, in good faith in executing that warrant, and they were confronted by a guy with a gun. No cop is going to have a guy point a gun at him during a search warrant and stop and think "Wait! What if I'm in the wrong house? What if this guy is just startled and it hasn't hit him yet that the police are here? Should I wait to pull the trigger until we've cleared up his reason for pointing that gun at us?" So while this is tragic all around, it's difficult to hold the police who pulled the trigger guilty for doing so. The answer is, as stated above, the reduction of NKWs!
The officer that pulled the trigger is not really to blame. Whomever pulled the warrant should be held accountable though.
ETA: To clarify, whomever pulled the warrant should be held accountable IF the investigation finds reason. I DO NOT have any facts to say that this is the case.
The officer that pulled the trigger is not really to blame. Whomever pulled the warrant should be held accountable though.
The officers involved need to get their day in court too.
I was pleased that our county Sheriff said there would be no NKWs except in the extreme cases. Of course, that begs the question whether the Tac team got an extreme warrant but the wrong address. Here they have streets, avenues, places, lanes with the same number or name. Was that 33rd St or 33rd Lane? No, it was 33rd Place.” Someone has to scout it out and be a point person. But, hopefully the policy will reduce the chances.
Black_Sheep
02-08-22, 12:40
Being a Twin Cities metro resident I’ve probably seen more news coverage of this NKW incident than most. By all accounts he was a good kid with no criminal history. The firearm was legally owned and his CCW permit was valid. Quite honestly, being awakened in such a confusing and chaotic manner would result in my being shot as well, because I’d be reaching for a weapon before the cobwebs fully cleared.
The guy they were looking for was a St Paul murder suspect. The kid was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. I think before a NKW is served there should be surveillance to confirm the subject is actually present. It would go a long way towards eliminating these types of unfortunate events. The fact that two other raids looking for the same suspect took place at roughly the same time tells me that authorities had no idea where their suspect was.
More on a previous(and seems to be similar) raid. Somehow African American males were being looked for, but they went all in on a SE Asian family instead.
https://reason.com/2007/12/18/more-on-the-vang-khang-raid/
Wasn't this PD supposed to be defunded which scared &/or agitated a good many?
the fact someone can call in and have a house SWATED within a hour or so and they come in extremely hard over a phone call is the problem !
They need to be held liable for anything and everything at an extreme cost like wrong house you pay out millions ! Wrongful death 100s of millions !
Get the house you need and do your homework !!! And if you have to wait and wait and wait
I do agree many times its the dude was a thug anyway and made out to be a good guy in that case no payout since he was a thug anyway and just got his before he did something else !
The cure to all this is when you get bad guys they do not go back out on parole or get released on bond they get put away to never come out and do it again ! And if they do goodbye for ever
Sadly its just a mess anymore without proper prosecution of criminals actually paying for their crime
Johnny Rico
02-08-22, 13:50
I hope the trigger puller gets absolved of any wrongdoing. I hope they take a good long look at the one who requested the change to a NKW, the judge who signed off on it, and anyone else responsible for this cluster****.
It's looking like the dead kid picked the wrong couch to crash on.
https://www.startribune.com/17-year-old-arrested-in-st-paul-homicide-that-prompted-no-knock-warrant-leading-to-amir-lockes-death/600144372/
Murder suspects brother, and the suspect was known to crash there. Apparently found a jacket related to the murder.
Black_Sheep
02-08-22, 14:13
To add to my previous post, No Knock Warrants were supposed to be abolished under the post George Floyd police reforms. Originally the warrant was not supposed to be a NKW, someone made a conscious decision to change it.
MPD is a shit show, and has been for years. Allegedly one of the officers involved also participated in a controversial action where MPD officers in an unmarked van were actively shooting at random people on the street with less than lethal weapons. An armed civilian returned fire…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rujyJ4FaaQQ
Being a Twin Cities metro resident I’ve probably seen more news coverage of this NKW incident than most. By all accounts he was a good kid with no criminal history. The firearm was legally owned and his CCW permit was valid. Quite honestly, being awakened in such a confusing and chaotic manner would result in my being shot as well, because I’d be reaching for a weapon before the cobwebs fully cleared.
The guy they were looking for was a St Paul murder suspect. The kid was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. I think before a NKW is served there should be surveillance to confirm the subject is actually present. It would go a long way towards eliminating these types of unfortunate events. The fact that two other raids looking for the same suspect took place at roughly the same time tells me that authorities had no idea where their suspect was.
A couple things. Data shows that the brain is 15 seconds behind regarding the volume of stimuli. I have info that backs that up. That is key with anyone's reaction time, be it a shooting, seeing a deer pop out in front of you when you are driving, whatever. In this case, if one is asleep, on a couch, and someone busts in, you are already behind. Toss in the uber-tactical OODA thing if you want but the outcome is the same. So yeah, if it was me, hell yeah I would have had my gun in my hand when I heard that door open. Conversely, that cop is also behind the same 15 seconds. He sees me on the couch reaching for a gun, he's going to shoot me. Right, wrong, indifferent.
The other thing, it's not uncommon to execute raids/warrants/whatever in multiple locations at the same time unless you have corroborating information. A CI could have said he's was shacked up at Boo's place, a brother could have said he was home, no, he was over there instead. Not ideal and nothing anyone wants to do: the more elements, the higher a chance something could go wrong. It sounds like in this case (and I don't have the info) that they could have parked a car down the street and confirmed and that it was not in extremis and had to happen wright then and only then.
So if the raid was "wrong", how far down the line do you absolve someone of fault? I'm kind of torn on this. I have a hard time absolving the trigger-puller of any responsibility, but this shit should roll uphill too. If it was my family member I'd want every swinging dick involved to hang. That life can't be brought back, $$$ won't replace it either. "Gee, it was a mistake, sorry. Oh, here's a nice fat check for ya" ain't gonna cut it.....not even close.
"Mistakes" or boo-boos under the color of authority should be violently squashed. No one makes you become a cop. If harsh penalties for these types of things (i.e. fvck-ups) makes you bristle, then find another line of work.
I am certainly not anti-cop. I am anti-heavy handedness, anti-JBT behavior. Sorry, but just placing a check on someone's table, shrugging and saying "We're sorry" just doesn't get it. I'd want blood.
I think the media is just focused on one area to show there actually is a problem.
My area had this happen a decade or so back.
SWAT got a pass to kick in multiple address doors looking for a murderer, one of the doors the criminal was NOT at had an old lady and 7 or 8 year old girl.
SWAT kicked the door, and grandma jumped up to protect her grandchild, the SWAT retard then shot the sleeping child who was on the couch killing her and blamed the grandmother.
The DA threw the case so the child killer is still on the swat team.
I’ve revisited this thread twice and tried say what I feel about this, but I don’t want to get swatted, so…. Just wow.
I’ve revisited this thread twice and tried say what I feel about this, but I don’t want to get swatted, so…. Just wow.
Yeah, that's a pretty damn good way of describing my feelings on the subject.
Meanwhile, they hooked up the suspect 120 miles away. Caught him on the street.
As to the OP topic, I get WHY the officer shot the guy. In the same situation, same knowledge, I would have shot him too. I just question whether it was necessary to put everyone in that dangerous situation at all. It goes bad all too often. I don't think the risk was justified.
john armond
02-08-22, 15:57
To add to my previous post, No Knock Warrants were supposed to be abolished under the post George Floyd police reforms. Originally the warrant was not supposed to be a NKW, someone made a conscious decision to change it.
MPD is a shit show, and has been for years. Allegedly one of the officers involved also participated in a controversial action where MPD officers in an unmarked van were actively shooting at random people on the street with less than lethal weapons. An armed civilian returned fire…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rujyJ4FaaQQ
WTF did I just watch????????
I haven’t been a beat cop in several years, but come on, riding down the road in a supposedly unmarked van randomly shooting at people..even with less lethal rounds…seriously WTF!!!!! Kinda reminds me of the cops walking down the road and shooting less lethal at people sitting on their porch. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that the same department? I don’t blame someone for returning fire on them.
So if the raid was "wrong", how far down the line do you absolve someone of fault? I'm kind of torn on this. I have a hard time absolving the trigger-puller of any responsibility, but this shit should roll uphill too. If it was my family member I'd want every swinging dick involved to hang. That life can't be brought back, $$$ won't replace it either. "Gee, it was a mistake, sorry. Oh, here's a nice fat check for ya" ain't gonna cut it.....not even close.
"Mistakes" or boo-boos under the color of authority should be violently squashed. No one makes you become a cop. If harsh penalties for these types of things (i.e. fvck-ups) makes you bristle, then find another line of work.
I am certainly not anti-cop. I am anti-heavy handedness, anti-JBT behavior. Sorry, but just placing a check on someone's table, shrugging and saying "We're sorry" just doesn't get it. I'd want blood.
It definitely needs to go uphill too. A huge part of the problem with bad officers and agencies are at the very least bad prosecutors and judges.
WTF did I just watch????????
I haven’t been a beat cop in several years, but come on, riding down the road in a supposedly unmarked van randomly shooting at people..even with less lethal rounds…seriously WTF!!!!! Kinda reminds me of the cops walking down the road and shooting less lethal at people sitting on their porch. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that the same department? I don’t blame someone for returning fire on them.
Yes it is. They also had the NG in amongst them during the front porch incident.
WTF did I just watch????????
I haven’t been a beat cop in several years, but come on, riding down the road in a supposedly unmarked van randomly shooting at people..even with less lethal rounds…seriously WTF!!!!! Kinda reminds me of the cops walking down the road and shooting less lethal at people sitting on their porch. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that the same department? I don’t blame someone for returning fire on them.
Same bunch.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/minneapolis-police-national-guard-paintball-shooting-porch-a9541016.html
WTF did I just watch????????
I haven’t been a beat cop in several years, but come on, riding down the road in a supposedly unmarked van randomly shooting at people..even with less lethal rounds…seriously WTF!!!!! Kinda reminds me of the cops walking down the road and shooting less lethal at people sitting on their porch. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that the same department? I don’t blame someone for returning fire on them.
Same bunch.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/minneapolis-police-national-guard-paintball-shooting-porch-a9541016.html
john armond
02-08-22, 16:44
Yes it is. They also had the NG in amongst them during the front porch incident.
And the city has been under democrat control since 1977. Last Republican mayor was in 1973…and he was only there for one day as far as I can tell. And yet liberals know how to do things right. Just look at all the liberal utopias and their violence and poverty free areas across the country that have been under their political and social tutelage.
It definitely needs to go uphill too. A huge part of the problem with bad officers and agencies are at the very least bad prosecutors and judges.
I also like to turn the tables and think "What would happen to me if I did something similar?" If I mistakenly killed someone who had a gun in his hand because I startled him in the middle of the night (but turns out wasn't a bad guy after all) my ass would be in a crack.
I thought about it and this is the best I can come up with as far as analogies: Let's say you own land that borders on a National or State Park. You hear noise out in the woods, way back. Being nighttime you grab your pistol, and since you're on your own property you aren't breaking the law. You head on back through the woods and come upon a couple of young black men laying there asleep (they strayed onto your property, not realizing they had gone off of Park grounds, but you don't know that.....kind of like sleeping somewhere you had no idea a murder suspect was wanted at). As you get near, in a forceful voice, you say "Hey, what're you doing here?" One of them, startled, turns around with a legally owned CCW pistol in his hands. You shoot first, 'cause he had a gun and you didn't want to be the one getting toe-tagged. He dies.
I was within my legal boundaries to move about on my property with my legally owned weapon. He was legally carrying and had accidentally strayed onto my property. The gun in the hand of that guy in MN was no more dangerous to that cop than this guy's was to me. It was an accident, a bad situation all around. What would happen to me?
Something tells me that just saying "Oops, sorry, didn't mean that" wouldn't fly. I'd do time.....maybe not life, but a couple years at a minimum and never be able to own a gun (or vote) again. That is my point: the trigger puller is not scot-free in this whole thing because of poor decisions higher up. THEY should do the real time, but the trigger puller needs to pay also, to bear the "Scarlet Letter" that killing someone unjustly carries with it.
While I consider myself Pro-LEO, and in particular their right to defend themselves against bad guys, my position regarding no knocks has moved significantly and continues to move.
In our area of Georgia, there have been extremely notorious and bad examples of no knocks gone bad.
Wrong houses, little to no investigation to confirm the bad guys are there or that it's even the right place. Much less was the charge justified.
Nearly all of these were drug raids based on CI information. Nearly all had a detective claiming they had done investigation which fell apart after the fact. Much like in Texas recently.
My view is that the leadership that allows it and the judges that are approving things with 5 minute review in the middle of the night are the ones that fault.
I'm not ready to eliminate no knocks, but I'm at the point that the hurdle should be very high and in particular:
1) suspect has to be confirmed to be at the location either via visible, electronic, or similar methods.
2) Warrants must be backed by solid investigation and in particular not just the word of CI's.
3) Body cameras must be worn, absolutely by the entry team to confirm knock or no knock. Some of the notorious incidents should have been wearing their body cam by policy but did not have it turned on for mysterious reasons.
4) the crime of the suspect should be significant enough to justify potential innocent bystander loss of life. IE: no failure to appear for misdemeanor and non-violent crimes.
Anything else out of the above should be worked with a standard warrant.
Obviously exigent circumstances like holding someone hostage or similar would not be restricted but they already do not require a warrant.
They're also needs to be some standard about what constitutes a knock then enter warrant versus a no knock. Knocking and announcing, then smashing the door in 5 seconds later to me is effectively a no knock as it does not allow the homeowner time to comply.
NKW is a tool that should not be eliminated, but is a very heavy hammer that is significantly getting overused statistically. It poses such risk of accidental death that the people who approve its use should be held accountable if they make a mistake.
Not sure? Then maybe wait and catch the guy when you are sure. Or can do so without risk to innocent bystanders. Just like they should have done with David Koresh, as despicable as he was.
When trying to sort this out in my head I'm thinking in terms of negligence. The notorious cases nearly always have an aspect of negligence involved if not worse things. And in nearly everything else, negligence is not a valid defense.
Lest people think that it's just thugs who are impacted by this, you might want to familiarize yourself with the various Georgia cases. It will make your hair stand on end as you realize it could happen to you and your family.
Every time a situation like this crops up, the decedent was "a great kid". Can you honestly recall a police-involved shooting where comments ran to "That guy was Satan on earth!"? No, of course not. The kid was innocent, no doubt, but who sleeps strapped?
Is it possible the kid didn't know he was overnighting in the home of a murder suspect? Was it likely?
Other side of the coin:
Was this NK necessary, given the location of the suspect was obviously not known?
Exactly how much Shoot/Don't Shoot training do MPD police/SRT get?
A measured response, guided by surveillance, AKA: Police Work, would have resulted in a safer outcome for all. How many more cops across the country will be executed for this? Along with training, we need to get back to the time when cops knew their neighborhood. In those days, beat cops knew as much of what was going on as today's FBI. They weren't enemies and outsiders and that's exactly what's got our police in a bad place now. Did I just say "All cops are bad"? No, but the focus is sharply on the bad cops, and the MSM isn't helping. You don't hear about the guys helping kids find a way out of the ghetto. News doesn't report good deeds. Perception is reality.
Every time a situation like this crops up, the decedent was "a great kid". Can you honestly recall a police-involved shooting where comments ran to "That guy was Satan on earth!"? No, of course not. The kid was innocent, no doubt, but who sleeps strapped?
I have a Glock 19 within arm's reach in the bedroom.
FWIW valid points about only hearing of the bad cops, never the good deeds. Incidents like this one, however, will not help that narrative.
john armond
02-08-22, 17:28
While all are important, number 7 seems particularly important nowadays.
The Nine Principles of Sir Robert Peel
Sir Robert Peel was instrumental in having the Act for Improving the Police in and Near the Metropolis (the Metropolitan Police Act) passed in the English Parliament in 1829. Peel had a specific vision as to the principles under which the police should operate. The nine principles that he penned nearly 200 years ago are just as important to proper police operations today as they were in early nineteenth-century London.
1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties depends on public approval of police actions.
3. Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4. The degree of cooperation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity to use physical force.
5. Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use of physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advise and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. Police should always direct their attention strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
When I was a beat cop, I tried to walk into and get to know as many business owners and employees as I could. Know your area. Had a call one time where a “man with a gun” was walking across a local food store parking lot. Well the store right next to the food store was a pawn shop with an FFL. Guess where he was going and what he was going to do with the gun. Yeah, I still arrived on scene, but as I was pulling up, I saw him walking to the pawn shop door with his shotgun with the muzzle up and barrel laying on his shoulder. He was talking to a guy that worked there as they were going inside. 10-8. Never even got out of the car. Now I understand that policing in a southern town is different than a large city, but the principal is still the same.
who sleeps strapped?
Is it possible the kid didn't know he was overnighting in the home of a murder suspect? Was it likely?
We should make a poll. When I overnight at friend’s houses, I usually sleep clothed on a couch, and depending on the “kids in the house” situation, I sometimes sleep with my weapon holstered vs placing it on a table.
We’ll not get into our posture in my home.
While all are important, number 7 seems particularly important nowadays.
The Nine Principles of Sir Robert Peel
Sir Robert Peel was instrumental in having the Act for Improving the Police in and Near the Metropolis (the Metropolitan Police Act) passed in the English Parliament in 1829.
If his principles were followed as regular practice we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
This also kind of leads into peacekeeper/sheriff model of old versus the US version of policing and specifically law enforcement.
Driving through a national battlefield locally that is adjacent to an old state highway a friend commented to be careful there's nearly always a ranger clocking just ahead. This by virtue of the fact that the national park owned a narrow strip of land on the opposite side of the road.
What they are doing is a law enforcement mindset far outside their intended scope.
You see this quite a bit with fish and wildlife in Florida, and a worse the new NOAA law enforcement which is another federal agency with police powers spoken into existence in the name of protecting habitat.
I have no problems with rangers dealing with problems on the park. But doing fundamental traffic work 100% in overlap with both city and county departments locally is a bit silly. And I'm starting to think unhealthy.
This is the same national battlefield that will close at the drop of the hat saying it doesn't have enough people to work the park.
I also like to turn the tables and think "What would happen to me if I did something similar?" If I mistakenly killed someone who had a gun in his hand because I startled him in the middle of the night (but turns out wasn't a bad guy after all) my ass would be in a crack.
I thought about it and this is the best I can come up with as far as analogies: Let's say you own land that borders on a National or State Park. You hear noise out in the woods, way back. Being nighttime you grab your pistol, and since you're on your own property you aren't breaking the law. You head on back through the woods and come upon a couple of young black men laying there asleep (they strayed onto your property, not realizing they had gone off of Park grounds, but you don't know that.....kind of like sleeping somewhere you had no idea a murder suspect was wanted at). As you get near, in a forceful voice, you say "Hey, what're you doing here?" One of them, startled, turns around with a legally owned CCW pistol in his hands. You shoot first, 'cause he had a gun and you didn't want to be the one getting toe-tagged. He dies.
I was within my legal boundaries to move about on my property with my legally owned weapon. He was legally carrying and had accidentally strayed onto my property. The gun in the hand of that guy in MN was no more dangerous to that cop than this guy's was to me. It was an accident, a bad situation all around. What would happen to me?
Something tells me that just saying "Oops, sorry, didn't mean that" wouldn't fly. I'd do time.....maybe not life, but a couple years at a minimum and never be able to own a gun (or vote) again. That is my point: the trigger puller is not scot-free in this whole thing because of poor decisions higher up. THEY should do the real time, but the trigger puller needs to pay also, to bear the "Scarlet Letter" that killing someone unjustly carries with it.
If nothing else, you would certainly be paying for it monetarily instead of uninvolved 3rd parties.
Driving through a national battlefield locally that is adjacent to an old state highway a friend commented to be careful there's nearly always a ranger clocking just ahead. This by virtue of the fact that the national park owned a narrow strip of land on the opposite side of the road.
Read about a town or 2 in Ohio that effectively no longer exist over similar actions.
What would happen to me?
Something tells me that just saying "Oops, sorry, didn't mean that" wouldn't fly. I'd do time.....maybe not life, but a couple years at a minimum and never be able to own a gun (or vote) again.
Don’t you live in NC? This dude got a year probation. https://www.wxii12.com/article/hunter-gets-probation-for-ft-bragg-soldier-s-death/2045785 https://www.wwaytv3.com/hunter-pleads-guilty-death-ft-bragg-trail/ Civvie hunter (poacher, really) shot a Soldier that was doing PT on a dirt road in the woods on Ft Bragg. Normal place to do PT, called the All American Trail. It is NOT a legal hunting area. Said he shot at a sound. How good was he at hitting random sounds of a Soldier running? Well, it took him two shots to kill him.
Everytime I read about one of these shit cases, I think about that story.
Don’t you live in NC? This dude got a year probation.
Snip
Civvie hunter (poacher, really) shot a Soldier that was doing PT on a dirt road in the woods on Ft Bragg. Normal place to do PT, called the All American Trail. It is NOT a legal hunting area. Said he shot at a sound.
In Georgia it would have most likely been a manslaughter conviction along with firearms charges, etc.
Negligence plus stupidity.
Averageman
02-08-22, 18:59
I think if I was a Governor, I would propose that in order to get a NKW the Judge issuing the warrant and the Local CLEO must be on hand for every time they are executed.
Want to point a finger? There's the Top Two Guys
Really want to get a bad guy who's unobtainable otherwise. There you go, pay up or shut up.
I think if I was a Governor, I would propose that in order to get a NKW the Judge issuing the warrant and the Local CLEO must be on hand for every time they are executed.
Want to point a finger? There's the Top Two Guys
Really want to get a bad guy who's unobtainable otherwise. There you go, pay up or shut up.
Not a bad idea but keep in mind that with a jurisdiction of many millions it's not really practical. We've had many discussions on immunity here in the past and I don't want to have one now but the reality is every Judge and Prosecutor in my state has total immunity.
When I took over I specifically told my Prosecutor and my detectives that every NKW goes through me or it's an automatic no go. But even with that the individual cities don't need my approval to do thier own. Like several posting here we did many 20 years ago and looking back it just wasn't worth it. Way too many possibilities to end poorly. Most were for narcotics back in the day and if the narcotics officers were using CI's they were always(still) lying to try to work out of something.
There are exceptions but a good rule is if lives are not at risk (true hostage situation) then there's no reason for a NKW.
Coal Dragger
02-08-22, 21:34
The war on drugs is stupid.
Only stupid people engage in enforcement of stupid laws.
No knock warrants on suspects selling drugs that should be legal is also stupid. No evidence is worth someone getting killed.
If it’s not kidnapping, a hostage situation, or a case of imminent harm to innocents no knocks should be strictly illegal.
The idiot officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson on not being shit bags who conduct no knock search warrants.
The end.
sandsunsurf
02-09-22, 09:41
The war on drugs is stupid.
Only stupid people engage in enforcement of stupid laws.
No knock warrants on suspects selling drugs that should be legal is also stupid. No evidence is worth someone getting killed.
If it’s not kidnapping, a hostage situation, or a case of imminent harm to innocents no knocks should be strictly illegal.
The idiot officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson on not being shit bags who conduct no knock search warrants.
The end.
Maybe you didn’t read the OP article closely - this was a no-knock for a murder suspect, not a drug dealer. Maybe you should have some respect for LE, unless you’re an ANTIFA supporter.
The war on drugs is stupid.
Only stupid people engage in enforcement of stupid laws.
No knock warrants on suspects selling drugs that should be legal is also stupid. No evidence is worth someone getting killed.
If it’s not kidnapping, a hostage situation, or a case of imminent harm to innocents no knocks should be strictly illegal.
The idiot officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson on not being shit bags who conduct no knock search warrants.
The end.
'The end.' I guess it's easy to come to a fast and spurious conclusion when you don't bother to actually understand the facts. Armchair quarterback much?
Maybe you didn’t read the OP article closely - this was a no-knock for a murder suspect, not a drug dealer. Maybe you should have some respect for LE, unless you’re an ANTIFA supporter.
I don't care if he doesn't respect LE. But another poster in a thread who has no desire to actually engage in anything, only to sneak in, drop his load, and sneak out. So many of these now. 'Closely'? I am not sure sure he read any of the article or knows any of the facts, at all.
The war on drugs is stupid.
Only stupid people engage in enforcement of stupid laws.
No knock warrants on suspects selling drugs that should be legal is also stupid. No evidence is worth someone getting killed.
If it’s not kidnapping, a hostage situation, or a case of imminent harm to innocents no knocks should be strictly illegal.
The idiot officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson on not being shit bags who conduct no knock search warrants.
The end.
That right there is the problem. I don't care if they have all the dope in the world, that's not a rational justification for a breach/bang/clear at 5am.
If it’s not kidnapping, a hostage situation, or a case of imminent harm to innocents no knocks should be strictly illegal.
Most of those are covered under exigent circumstance rules. You don't need any warrant, just an articulable eminent threat of death or great bodily harm.
I do believe the no knock still has a place in LE, but it's vary narrow. It happens to involve what was happening in this case. If you have an armed and dangerous suspect who's already under warrant for a violent crime and you're actively hunting them before they hurt someone else, you might have a case for A no knock warrant. IF in this case (or any other) they served multiple NKW's on different residences at the same time for the same suspect? That's a defacto admission they haven't confirmed his presence anywhere. Sorry, but "suspect was known to crash there" isn't sufficient basis for any warrant to be signed.
You have to do the work to get the reward. If you NEED a NKW for a known armed & dangerous suspect, then YOU should have your career on the line if you're wrong and an innocent person gets hurt. I realize there may be operational circumstances where this wouldn't be feasible, but whenever practicable the officer requesting the warrant should also be at the front of the stack. That way we won't have to look around for who to blame if it turns out to be a biblical CF, cause you'll be front & center in more ways than one!
Obviously, if a person that doesn't need to be and should not be shot is shot there is something very wrong with the NKW or the procedures leading up to it. Innocent people keep getting shot and killed in these things, and it doesn't seem the police care about the deaths they are causing, since nothing is really changing to avoid these deaths. At least from where I sit. These are real people dying.
sandsunsurf
02-09-22, 10:27
I don't care if he doesn't respect LE. But another poster in a thread who has no desire to actually engage in anything, only to sneak in, drop his load, and sneak out. So many of these now. 'Closely'? I am not sure sure he read any of the article or knows any of the facts, at all.
True, he’s allowed to have his opinion.
I miss the old M4C that was full of SMEs, LE, MIL and those that supported the country, with valid posts where facts trumped rumors or bullshit. Now it seems like there are more and more politicized comments from rando keyboard warriors that have never had to use violence to save their own lives, the lives of their neighbors, and the lives of their countrymen.
Obviously, if a person that doesn't need to be and should not be shot is shot there is something very wrong with the NKW or the procedures leading up to it. Innocent people keep getting shot and killed in these things, and it doesn't seem the police care about the deaths they are causing, since nothing is really changing to avoid these deaths. At least from where I sit. These are real people dying.
The problem is you can't take the human factor out of it. I have already posted that science shows the brain is 15 seconds behind stimuli, so you are always working from behind, and the more stimuli, the worse it is.
Now dude is on the couch, presumably asleep. Has gun nearby. He hears the door coming down, human nature is to grab the gun to confront. It's what any of us would do. He did not have 15 seconds; he had 9.
Cop busts in. Sees guy on couch with or reaching for gun. Instant threat. He did not have 15 seconds he had 9.
It was an unfortunate set of circumstances that never should have conspired to begin with. But both of those guys did what any of us would do. There but for the grace of God and all.
True, he’s allowed to have his opinion.
I miss the old M4C that was full of SMEs, LE, MIL and those that supported the country, with valid posts where facts trumped rumors or bullshit. Now it seems like there are more and more politicized comments from rando keyboard warriors that have never had to use violence to save their own lives, the lives of their neighbors, and the lives of their countrymen.
I agree, and we had a more robust discussion of things, better than piping to bitch just to presumably bitch; or I'm-right-you're-wrong-nanny-nanny-boo-boo playground horseshit; or well-if-you-read-the-third-word-in-my-post-you'd-know-what-I-meant cybersnobbery.
True, he’s allowed to have his opinion.
I miss the old M4C that was full of SMEs, LE, MIL and those that supported the country, with valid posts where facts trumped rumors or bullshit. Now it seems like there are more and more politicized comments from rando keyboard warriors that have never had to use violence to save their own lives, the lives of their neighbors, and the lives of their countrymen.
I agree, and we had a more robust discussion of things, better than piping to bitch just to presumably bitch; or I'm-right-you're-wrong-nanny-nanny-boo-boo playground horseshit; or well-if-you-read-the-third-word-in-my-post-you'd-know-what-I-meant cybersnobbery.
The problem is you can't take the human factor out of it. I have already posted that science shows the brain is 15 seconds behind stimuli, so you are always working from behind, and the more stimuli, the worse it is.
Now dude is on the couch, presumably asleep. Has gun nearby. He hears the door coming down, human nature is to grab the gun to confront. It's what any of us would do. He did not have 15 seconds; he had 9.
Cop busts in. Sees guy on couch with or reaching for gun. Instant threat. He did not have 15 seconds he had 9.
It was an unfortunate set of circumstances that never should have conspired to begin with. But both of those guys did what any of us would do. There but for the grace of God and all.
If NKW's continue, and they probably will, then innocents will continue to get killed. These stories will continue to be broadcast, and the image of the police will continue to erode. If I shot an innocent person how understanding would the justice system be toward me, not very I suspect. I'm not anti-police, but i also don't trust them much since they are agents of the state. NKW's just seem like an out of control situation.
Imagine the shit storm and perp walk if the sleepy guy shot the raiding officer instead. Would it still be all "...oops, our bad"?
I don't hate the player(LE) I hate the game (NKWs).
Sent from my BE2028 using Tapatalk
I agree, and we had a more robust discussion of things, better than piping to bitch just to presumably bitch; or I'm-right-you're-wrong-nanny-nanny-boo-boo playground horseshit; or well-if-you-read-the-third-word-in-my-post-you'd-know-what-I-meant cybersnobbery.
He may have not read it or
- he could have read a couple of links I shared concerning a previous Minneapolis raid where it was entirely about looking for drugs
- or he could have read the articles on this and put more weight on the drug angle because(according to at least 2 article) the original killing occurred during a drug transaction and other articles mention drugs found at the apartment which doesn't seem to have any connection to the guy that the police shot.
So, at least to an extent, there is a drug law exacerbating/creating the problem to it.
The problem is you can't take the human factor out of it. I have already posted that science shows the brain is 15 seconds behind stimuli, so you are always working from behind, and the more stimuli, the worse it is.
Now dude is on the couch, presumably asleep. Has gun nearby. He hears the door coming down, human nature is to grab the gun to confront. It's what any of us would do. He did not have 15 seconds; he had 9.
Cop busts in. Sees guy on couch with or reaching for gun. Instant threat. He did not have 15 seconds he had 9.
It was an unfortunate set of circumstances that never should have conspired to begin with. But both of those guys did what any of us would do. There but for the grace of God and all.
So that officer who was put into the position of shooting an innocent man, who should he be mad at for being put in that circumstance? The officer who submitted the warrant? The judge who signed it? The tac team commander who accepted it and carried out the warrant? :confused:
So that officer who was put into the position of shooting an innocent man, who should he be mad at for being put in that circumstance? The officer who submitted the warrant? The judge who signed it? The tac team commander who accepted it and carried out the warrant? :confused:
You tell me. Is a unfortunate chain of events. So was the space shuttle Challenger. I'm not absolving people responsibility, just saying it's a little more complex than what some people are claiming.
Whoever gave the judge the information so he came to a decision to sign the warrant, the judge for not confirming the information, there's enough blame so everyone gets a piece of the poop pie.
Edited to add, I don't believe that guy should have been shot, but he was. I don't believe the cop should have shot him, but he did. I don't think we should come out of this situation just saying NKWs shouldn't happen, but why they shouldn't happen. I think I've said from the outset that this was pretty jacked up.
Johnny Rico
02-09-22, 11:35
So that officer who was put into the position of shooting an innocent man, who should he be mad at for being put in that circumstance? The officer who submitted the warrant? The judge who signed it? The tac team commander who accepted it and carried out the warrant? :confused:
At the very least, we need to scrutinize the officer who requested the initial warrant be changed to a NKW. As well as the judge who signed off on it. Judges are supposed to scrutinize warrants, especially NKWs, not simply rubber stamp them.
You tell me. Is a unfortunate chain of events. So was the space shuttle Challenger. I'm not absolving people responsibility, just saying it's a little more complex than what some people are claiming.
Whoever gave the judge the information so he came to a decision to sign the warrant, the judge for not confirming the information, there's enough blame so everyone gets a piece of the poop pie.
Edited to add, I don't believe that guy should have been shot, but he was. I don't believe the cop should have shot him, but he did. I don't think we should come out of this situation just saying NKWs shouldn't happen, but why they shouldn't happen. I think I've said from the outset that this was pretty jacked up.
I think my big concern with your position is that by divvying up the poop pie so much, the weight of the wrong is diluted to the point of negligible impact. Everyone who was involved gets a slap on the hand and the only ones who truly get spanked are the taxpayers who have to pay the damages. That sends the wrong message.
The person who drew up the warrant was wrong. The suspect was 120 miles away. That person should at a bare minimum, lose their job. The warrant itself should be reviewed. If there were mistruths presented that caused the judge to assume the warrant was lawful to sign, then the person swearing out the warrant should be indicted (or at least named in any civil action(s)). If there were legal omissions or flaws in the warrant itself, then the judge should be fired.
As long as everyone gets to point fingers at others and there's no impactful punishments meted out, we'll continue having tragedies like this happen. At some point it could cause law enforcement to lose NKW's entirely, via federal law. I'd rather see restrictions and accountability, not the complete loss of an important tool. When you reasonably need a NKW, you NEED it. JMO
john armond
02-09-22, 12:05
At the very least, we need to scrutinize the officer who requested the initial warrant be changed to a NKW. As well as the judge who signed off on it. Judges are supposed to scrutinize warrants, especially NKWs, not simply rubber stamp them.
Supposedly the judge from the Chauvin trial signed the KNW. Numerous articles seem intent on conflating the two events.
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-judge-peter-cahill-presided-derek-chauvin-trial-signed-warrant-amir-lock-20220207-tk3i6w4ucrcyjf3dew3wfekqzm-story.html
Adrenaline_6
02-09-22, 12:13
NKW's should be a lot more rare than they are. They should only happen in extreme circumstances, if they are wrong heads should roll. Putting folks through this. Risking the lives of the officers and the public. There need to be extreme consequences. This is "hero or zero" stuff.
I mean seriously. Say they raid your house in the middle of the night, shoot your dogs, scare the shit out of you and your family. Trash your home. Then go all "oops, we had bad intel". How F'ing pissed would you be? I'm not even talking about a human fatality, but just imagine it's you.
I'd be like "I'mma blow your damn house up in the middle of the night!" pissed off. I'd honestly WANT to kill me some cops, and I'd feel justified as hell about it.
Gotta wait and see how the facts play out on this one, but at first blush it don't look good.
Agreed. All I gotta say is if I wrongly had my house raided and they killed my dogs, trash my home in the process, and there results in zero consequence on their part, they better have killed me too. I seriously doubt there are many here who differ in that train of thought.
I think my big concern with your position is that by divvying up the poop pie so much, the weight of the wrong is diluted to the point of negligible impact. Everyone who was involved gets a slap on the hand and the only ones who truly get spanked are the taxpayers who have to pay the damages. That sends the wrong message.
The person who drew up the warrant was wrong. The suspect was 120 miles away. That person should at a bare minimum, lose their job. The warrant itself should be reviewed. If there were mistruths presented that caused the judge to assume the warrant was lawful to sign, then the person swearing out the warrant should be indicted (or at least named in any civil action(s)). If there were legal omissions or flaws in the warrant itself, then the judge should be fired.
As long as everyone gets to point fingers at others and there's no impactful punishments meted out, we'll continue having tragedies like this happen. At some point it could cause law enforcement to lose NKW's entirely, via federal law. I'd rather see restrictions and accountability, not the complete loss of an important tool. When you reasonably need a NKW, you NEED it. JMO
Don't misunderstand me: I agree, the culpable party should be appropriately punished. I just don't know who that it. The judge? Probably. I am not about pointing fingers. Fix it, handle the people who effed up, and move on.
The impetus for my response a few pages back was to said "...officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung (sic) by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson..." I was just trying to (albeit maybe poorly...typing, thinking, and opioids don't sometimes mix) explain how I understood how and why it could happen. I don't dig the Stalinist, knee-jerk reaction by people who like to have diarrhea of the keyboard and not read the article.
Just because I understand how and why the guy on the couch got shot, doesn't mean I condone what went down.
Don't misunderstand me: I agree, the culpable party should be appropriately punished. I just don't know who that it. The judge? Probably. I am not about pointing fingers. Fix it, handle the people who effed up, and move on.
The impetus for my response a few pages back was to said "...officers involved in this should be charged with murder, and if convicted hung (sic) by the neck until dead in front of their colleagues to serve as a lesson..." I was just trying to (albeit maybe poorly...typing, thinking, and opioids don't sometimes mix) explain how I understood how and why it could happen. I don't dig the Stalinist, knee-jerk reaction by people who like to have diarrhea of the keyboard and not read the article.
Just because I understand how and why the guy on the couch got shot, doesn't mean I condone what went down.
I never thought you did, so we're in agreement there. They just have to start doing something different than they've been doing up to now, because that isn't working. :(
Coal Dragger
02-09-22, 12:55
Maybe you didn’t read the OP article closely - this was a no-knock for a murder suspect, not a drug dealer. Maybe you should have some respect for LE, unless you’re an ANTIFA supporter.
I don’t care if it is a murder suspect.
Knock on the damn door.
Murder suspect might possibly have friends or family around them who aren’t guilty of anything. Do they deserve to get hurt or killed because of proximity in a dwelling?
Is your position that guilt by association means a no knock warrant should be served and just blast anyone in the dwelling with a weapon?
That sounds wrong and blatantly unconstitutional. I hope you aren’t in law enforcement.
Coal Dragger
02-09-22, 13:01
True, he’s allowed to have his opinion.
I miss the old M4C that was full of SMEs, LE, MIL and those that supported the country, with valid posts where facts trumped rumors or bullshit. Now it seems like there are more and more politicized comments from rando keyboard warriors that have never had to use violence to save their own lives, the lives of their neighbors, and the lives of their countrymen.
Dude I spent 2004 in Iraq as an infantry Marine. I’ve been shot at among other fun things, and have in fact been in a few fights. Not a super high speed operator, just a grunt doing grunt shit.
None of that has any bearing at all on law enforcement practices in this country and how wrong they can be.
SomeOtherGuy
02-09-22, 13:21
Short version: we should ban no-knock raids for any civil or law enforcement purpose other than hostage rescue. Flat ban. Using them to serve warrants, even arrest warrants, creates a thousand times more problems than it prevents.
I don’t care if it is a murder suspect.
Knock on the damn door.
Easy to say when you're not the one doing the knocking. MPD is going to own this, and it wasn't even their warrant. This entry was unnecessary and not even tactically sound. Maybe this shooting will be the vehicle for a change in thinking, but the damage is done. More evidence being an "aspiring rapper" is a dangerous career path.
Coal Dragger
02-09-22, 13:57
I’m not suggesting that having to knock on the door or otherwise announce your presence is advantageous for the officers serving the warrant. It’s not.
Sorry but part of the job is a higher risk to individual officers to try to ensure the safety of your fellow innocent citizens. It is unfortunate and I don’t want to see cops get hurt, but if it is a choice between a cop getting hurt or killed because he had to announce his presence and intent serving an arrest warrant vs an innocent citizen getting hurt because the cop didn’t do those things; I am siding with the innocent citizen 100% of the time.
I don't care if he doesn't respect LE. But another poster in a thread who has no desire to actually engage in anything, only to sneak in, drop his load, and sneak out. So many of these now. 'Closely'? I am not sure sure he read any of the article or knows any of the facts, at all.At this point why bother commenting, nobody is going to change their views?
What I see in the OP is the cops lied to get the NKW and killed someone not involved in the warrant they lied to get.
Next the poster you were commenting (in this post i quoted) to is calling people antifa for "not respecting" liars.
There isn't much left to say, other than his attitude is why more and more people everyday no longer trust police to do the right thing.
At this point why bother commenting, nobody is going to change their views?
What I see in the OP is the cops lied to get the NKW and killed someone not involved in the warrant they lied to get.
Next the poster you were commenting (in this post i quoted) to is calling people antifa for "not respecting" liars.
There isn't much left to say, other than his attitude is why more and more people everyday no longer trust police to do the right thing.
When he calls for the cop to be publicly hanged in front of his peers? Negative Ghost Rider. I don't care if you're pro cop, anti, ambivalent, whatever. That brings nothing to the conversation.
I do think that people are entrenched in their views. I'm all for a healthy discourse, let's talk about it. And I do think most of the posts here have done that. The one I mentioned, did not. I think you're right, I'm not sure how many views are going to be changed one way or the other.
I’m not suggesting that having to knock on the door or otherwise announce your presence is advantageous for the officers serving the warrant. It’s not.
Sorry but part of the job is a higher risk to individual officers to try to ensure the safety of your fellow innocent citizens. It is unfortunate and I don’t want to see cops get hurt, but if it is a choice between a cop getting hurt or killed because he had to announce his presence and intent serving an arrest warrant vs an innocent citizen getting hurt because the cop didn’t do those things; I am siding with the innocent citizen 100% of the time.
I agree with just about everything you said. I don't like NKWs. Anyone who's done them, do not like them. For most of the reasons you have mentioned plus others.
Believe it or not, tactical teams mitigate risk so bad things don't happen to innocent people. 99% of the time it works, sometimes it doesn't.
When he calls for the cop to be publicly hanged in front of his peers? Negative Ghost Rider. I don't care if you're pro cop, anti, ambivalent, whatever. That brings nothing to the conversation.
I do think that people are entrenched in their views. I'm all for a healthy discourse, let's talk about it. And I do think most of the posts here have done that. The one I mentioned, did not. I think you're right, I'm not sure how many views are going to be changed one way or the other.I apologize, I missed the hanged part I was skimming though the thread.
I agree with just about everything you said. I don't like NKWs. Anyone who's done them, do not like them. For most of the reasons you have mentioned plus others.
Believe it or not, tactical teams mitigate risk so bad things don't happen to innocent people. 99% of the time it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Does "so bad things don't happen to innocents people" simply refer to no one getting shot or killed during a raid?
Does "so bad things don't happen to innocents people" simply refer to no one getting shot or killed during a raid?
It refers to everyone involved. Opposite of Fallujah where we put down every MAM. No one being shot/killed.
It refers to everyone involved. Opposite of Fallujah where we put down every MAM. No one being shot/killed.
That really doesn't mean bad things didn't happen to innocents in cases where the wrong house gets hit though.
That really doesn't mean bad things didn't happen to innocents in cases where the wrong house gets hit though.
Or a cop gets hit by XXX or a kid gets killed, bad address or... whatever. No plan survives first contact and sometimes shit goes sideways, even with a "regular" warrant, a traffic stop, whatever.
Maybe you didn’t read the OP article closely - this was a no-knock for a murder suspect, not a drug dealer. Maybe you should have some respect for LE, unless you’re an ANTIFA supporter.
So what? 1st of all "suspect"
2nd, they couldnt figure another way to apprehend him?
3rd, no one was in immediate danger until they excecuted the warrant.
Getting bad guys needs to be 2nd to protecting everyone else.
Or a cop gets hit by XXX or a kid gets killed, bad address or... whatever. No plan survives first contact and sometimes shit goes sideways, even with a "regular" warrant, a traffic stop, whatever.
I am being specific on ending up at the wrong address due to sloth or outright false statements(although wrongful/false arrest are much the same) in typically letting the perpetrator walk away unscathed.
I am being specific on ending up at the wrong address due to sloth or outright false statements(although wrongful/false arrest are much the same) in typically letting the perpetrator walk away unscathed.
Sorry, my bad I wasn't tracking. Yeah, that's no bueno, and if it was up to me those parties would be behind bars. Those types of cops/judges are just as bad as those who shake down people for protection money or make up evidence. Them, I loathe.
Coal Dragger
02-09-22, 19:30
When he calls for the cop to be publicly hanged in front of his peers? Negative Ghost Rider. I don't care if you're pro cop, anti, ambivalent, whatever. That brings nothing to the conversation.
I do think that people are entrenched in their views. I'm all for a healthy discourse, let's talk about it. And I do think most of the posts here have done that. The one I mentioned, did not. I think you're right, I'm not sure how many views are going to be changed one way or the other.
For the record I am a pro public hanging for murderers, rapists, chi-mo’s etc. Not because I would want to see it, but because our current justice system doesn’t seem to be deterrent enough.
Unfortunately bad things happen and there should be accountability for those who do bad things. That includes law enforcement officers. The concept of qualified immunity for example is absurdly abused at this point and should be amended by law to be much much narrower in scope.
Every individual involved in the process of obtaining and executing that no knock warrant should face punishment to some degree. The decision makers who obtained the warrant should face murder charges. The leader of the team executing it should too, he/she made an intentionally reckless decision , and someone who was innocent died as a result of the entire stupid process.
I’m also not a fan of prosecutorial immunity, nor immunity for judges. Again it is absurdly abused.
sandsunsurf
02-09-22, 22:41
So what? 1st of all "suspect"
2nd, they couldnt figure another way to apprehend him?
3rd, no one was in immediate danger until they excecuted the warrant.
Getting bad guys needs to be 2nd to protecting everyone else.
A murderer by definition is an immediate threat to any human in their presence. Protecting everyone else was/is the purpose of a search warrant for a wanted person in a residence, as opposed to waiting for the murder suspect to get pulled over by an unsuspecting officer for traffic violations and the resulting shoot out. Are you also in favor of no cash bail requirements and citations only for property crimes?
That sounds wrong and blatantly unconstitutional. I hope you aren’t in law enforcement.
I hope you’re more respectful in real life. Based upon your later posts you probably are, but that comes across pretty shitty.
Like most of us on this board I’m sworn to protect the constitution and I embrace that fully (even after retiring). I’ve had two friends shot at through the damn door within 20 seconds of knocking. Murder suspect’s location is a legit place to seek a no-knock, depending on circumstances. We know nothing about why they chose a no-knock instead of setting a perimeter and calling the occupants out, but so many of y’all are instantly believing the MSM reports (which is ironic or hypocritical) that it was just “what MPD does.”
I fully support the right of all of us non-criminals to own guns and to legally protect ourselves, period. This was a bad situation and maybe Locke didn’t believe the voices were cops, but he still made the bad choice to present his gun. He made the decision, the cop reacted. No need for a hanging.
A murderer by definition is an immediate threat to any human in their presence. Protecting everyone else was/is the purpose of a search warrant for a wanted person in a residence, as opposed to waiting for the murder suspect to get pulled over by an unsuspecting officer for traffic violations and the resulting shoot out.
There is a big range with lots of options between locating someone by random chance(which no one here has advocated for) and forcing entry in to see if they might be there which is something of a random chance with risks of injury and death.
True, he’s allowed to have his opinion.
I miss the old M4C that was full of SMEs, LE, MIL and those that supported the country, with valid posts where facts trumped rumors or bullshit. Now it seems like there are more and more politicized comments from rando keyboard warriors that have never had to use violence to save their own lives, the lives of their neighbors, and the lives of their countrymen.Kindof funny to hear from someone who joined m4c much later than some of the other posters including myself.
You did hit on a key point... Saving innocent lives. How many did they save in this incident?
Before you say somone is antifa for believing rhis was bad tactics, policy, and policing you should do to that math.
sandsunsurf
02-10-22, 00:50
Kindof funny to hear from someone who joined m4c much later than some of the other posters including myself.
You did hit on a key point... Saving innocent lives. How many did they save in this incident?
Before you say somone is antifa for believing rhis was bad tactics, policy, and policing you should do to that math.
I joined the year before you, sooooo… not sure what you’re saying. Maybe your math is wrong?
A murderer by definition is an immediate threat to any human in their presence. Protecting everyone else was/is the purpose of a search warrant for a wanted person in a residence, as opposed to waiting for the murder suspect to get pulled over by an unsuspecting officer for traffic violations and the resulting shoot out. Are you also in favor of no cash bail requirements and citations only for property crimes?
I hope you’re more respectful in real life. Based upon your later posts you probably are, but that comes across pretty shitty.
Like most of us on this board I’m sworn to protect the constitution and I embrace that fully (even after retiring). I’ve had two friends shot at through the damn door within 20 seconds of knocking. Murder suspect’s location is a legit place to seek a no-knock, depending on circumstances. We know nothing about why they chose a no-knock instead of setting a perimeter and calling the occupants out, but so many of y’all are instantly believing the MSM reports (which is ironic or hypocritical) that it was just “what MPD does.”
I fully support the right of all of us non-criminals to own guns and to legally protect ourselves, period. This was a bad situation and maybe Locke didn’t believe the voices were cops, but he still made the bad choice to present his gun. He made the decision, the cop reacted. No need for a hanging.
You’re missing a fact. The residence they hit was NOT the murder suspect’s location. The officer(s) swearing out the warrant failed due diligence and they killed an innocent citizen as a result. Now we already know they probably won’t suffer any real consequences as a result of their negligence, only the taxpayers will.
But, MPD is such a total shit-show, they don’t really deserve the benefit of the doubt automatically. They should be working quadruple overtime to prevent tragedies like this. Instead, they’re in the national news. Again. There’s a reason they have the rep they do, and it’s not excellence in community service. :(
I joined about the year before you, sooooo… not sure what you’re saying. Maybe your math is wrong?Yep, forgot this was not my original account. I first became active on the aite in the pre-obama run up.
I must be antifa because of my error.
I notice you did not address the question... How many innocent lives were saved in this incident?
There is a middle ground that seems beyond you. Whats worse, you dont seem to understand how much a botched raid like this hurts police. Both boots on the ground and the overall effort.
This was bad... They did not get the bad guy, and killed an innocent bystander in the process. It's into negligence range in my book.
As to the snarky comments from some about the bystander wrongly killed, the three cases I'm very familiar with in my state it was: a baby in a crib, a grandmother, and a respected businessman.
You’re missing a fact. The residence they hit was NOT the murder suspect’s location. The officer(s) swearing out the warrant failed due diligence and they killed an innocent citizen as a result. Now we already know they probably won’t suffer any real consequences as a result of their negligence, only the taxpayers will.
But, MPD is such a total shit-show, they don’t really deserve the benefit of the doubt automatically. They should be working quadruple overtime to prevent tragedies like this. Instead, they’re in the national news. Again. There’s a reason they have the rep they do, and it’s not excellence in community service. :(
If the suspect was that dangerous, a surveillance detail should have confirmed the wanted suspect entered the residence and watched the residence up until the point the warrant was executed. You don't just blindly send SWAT into a residence without good intelligence. It's dangerous for the public and dangerous for SWAT to not follow good investigative protocols.
I fully support the right of all of us non-criminals to own guns and to legally protect ourselves, period. This was a bad situation and maybe Locke didn’t believe the voices were cops, but he still made the bad choice to present his gun. He made the decision, the cop reacted. And that's that huh? No need for a hanging. Perhaps not, but a couple years and a felony conviction for negligent homicide or involuntary manslaughter will work.....and the chain of command too!
That "Oh well, it is what it is" attitude is what gives the hut-hut-hut gang such a bad rep. It is well deserved (more for some than others, not applicable to ones who've never killed someone innocent).
That "Oh well, it is what it is" attitude is what gives the hut-hut-hut gang such a bad rep. It is well deserved (more for some than others, not applicable to ones who've never killed someone innocent).
On this point, and this alone (from the rest of the shit sandwich the whole ordeal was), we need to take a breath. I stipulate that is one reason cops and tac teams get a bad rap. My question is, is the bad rep worth it?
You are driving, a deer darts in front of you, you swerve and hit a car, you kill a kid. You didn't do anything any of us would not do. Do you deserve the title "kid killer" merely because you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct)? You are at a restaurant, chilling and eating a Rueben. You are CC because it's what you do. A few tables away a guy pulls a gun. You in turn pull yours and you win the battle of the OK Corral. Turns out the guy was just wanted to show his gun to his buddy. He made a bad decision, and you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct).
I have pointed out on this thread, several times, that both of them acted in an inhuman reaction time; neither had the chance to gather the data to make an informed decision in those 9 seconds. They both reacted as any of us would.
Yep, because of that the cop's actions he and the team and the PD will be excoriated. But the reason they need to be excoriated is not that but the whole domino sequence of events before and after.
There should not, ever, be an "oh, well" attitude when it happens. There should be a pause to determine how to prevent it from happening again. As I also said (this is not directed at you), one death is too many.
sandsunsurf
02-10-22, 09:24
I notice you did not address the question... How many innocent lives were saved in this incident?
There is a middle ground that seems beyond you. Whats worse, you dont seem to understand how much a botched raid like this hurts police. Both boots on the ground and the overall effort.
This was bad... They did not get the bad guy, and killed an innocent bystander in the process. It's into negligence range in my book.
We don’t know, and may never know how many innocent lives were saved or lost in this incident.
The middle ground starts with the presumption that the officers involved are innocent of acting maliciously or negligently. We don’t know the reasons why MPD chose a NKW over surround and call out. We only know what the media has told us, and the small part we can see and hear in the video. It looks like they should have called the suspect out of the residence, but maybe they had information that led them to believe a hostage situation was probable unless they breached. This looks bad, but the middle ground does not include convicting cops in social media and hanging them in town square.
On a side note, I think maybe the profiles aren’t showing sign-up dates correctly, so for the record I’ve been part of M4C since 2010 and I think 12 years is long enough for me to bring up “the good ole days” of M4C!!
Averageman
02-10-22, 09:39
The kid was innocent, no doubt, but who sleeps strapped?
Ummmmm me.
I've slept with a pistol bed side or under my Pillow for thirty years.
Oh, and any Van I run across firing randomly about the neighborhood at folks, I am returning fire until it stops, catches fire or has changed shape and is no longer a threat.
If the suspect was that dangerous, a surveillance detail should have confirmed the wanted suspect entered the residence and watched the residence up until the point the warrant was executed. You don't just blindly send SWAT into a residence without good intelligence. It's dangerous for the public and dangerous for SWAT to not follow good investigative protocols.
I think I'm on pretty safe ground to say pretty much everyone here agrees this was a chit show. The disagreement appears to be targeting where it went wrong, and who should be held accountable for it. That PD seems to have an unusually high rate of problematic events at this point. Without capitulating to the LE hating progressives and ilk, how does that get addressed to the benefit of the LEOs and citizens?
Not my lane, but my understanding is such things invariably start from the top down when you trace back where the problems stem.
We don’t know, and may never know how many innocent lives were saved or lost in this incident.
Do we not? My count is 0-1…..
Ummmmm me.
I've slept with a pistol bed side or under my Pillow for thirty years.
Oh, and any Van I run across firing randomly about the neighborhood at folks, I am returning fire until it stops, catches fire or has changed shape and is no longer a threat.
I don't have one that close, but within arm's reach I have a pistol, an AR, a shotgun. The shotgun only because I forget to put it in the safe. The AR may or may not be there regularly, but is there more often than not. The pistol always.
I suspect that there's an inverted bell curve: the people who have guns close by are people 'like us' or criminals; most people don't.
But this lends evidence to my point that the dude who was shot, that could have been any of us if the po-po busts in our house because instead of busting into 123 Oak Lane they busted into 123 Oak Street instead.
Ummmmm me.
I've slept with a pistol bed side or under my Pillow for thirty years.
Oh, and any Van I run across firing randomly about the neighborhood at folks, I am returning fire until it stops, catches fire or has changed shape and is no longer a threat.
You are most certainly not alone. Even though I live in a very safe neighborhood, my Benelli M4 loaded with 000 Buck and 3" Federal slugs, P30 Kurtz and Becker BK2 sit within arms reach of my bed.
What I don't get is these judges signing NKWs and then once they are in custody the same judges bounce the suspect on a nickel bond or ROR. Da Fuq is up with that?
ETA: As for sleeping strapped, I always have at least a pistol close at hand. If I was this guy? Place comes off like "Hoodrat Manor" from the article. If I was crashing there for the night I'd have my 10.5 wrapped up like a teddy, and maybe sleeping in PC jammies. :p
On this point, and this alone (from the rest of the shit sandwich the whole ordeal was), we need to take a breath. I stipulate that is one reason cops and tac teams get a bad rap. My question is, is the bad rep worth it?
You are driving, a deer darts in front of you, you swerve and hit a car, you kill a kid. You didn't do anything any of us would not do. Do you deserve the title "kid killer" merely because you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct)? You are at a restaurant, chilling and eating a Rueben. You are CC because it's what you do. A few tables away a guy pulls a gun. You in turn pull yours and you win the battle of the OK Corral. Turns out the guy was just wanted to show his gun to his buddy. He made a bad decision, and you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct).
I have pointed out on this thread, several times, that both of them acted in an inhuman reaction time; neither had the chance to gather the data to make an informed decision in those 9 seconds. They both reacted as any of us would.
Yep, because of that the cop's actions he and the team and the PD will be excoriated. But the reason they need to be excoriated is not that but the whole domino sequence of events before and after.
There should not, ever, be an "oh, well" attitude when it happens. There should be a pause to determine how to prevent it from happening again. As I also said (this is not directed at you), one death is too many.
Might toss in drunk driving too. Undoubtedly most who do make it home without an issue, but it sure sucks when they don't and they willfully ignore that potential negative effect of their decisions on others.
to want to shut down NKW does not make one anti LEO :)
I do NOT think any individual LEO should be sued or responsible the city YES
again the system is breaking down and prosecution is not happening properly but wont hold my breath
There should not, ever, be an "oh, well" attitude when it happens. There should be a pause to determine how to prevent it from happening again. As I also said (this is not directed at you), one death is too many.
That’s the crux of the problem. Almost always the attitude isn’t “oh well”, it’s “how much dirt can we dig up on the victim, so as to pretend we just did society a favor by straight up executing an innocent citizen in their own home”. :(
That’s the crux of the problem. Almost always the attitude isn’t “oh well”, it’s “how much dirt can we dig up on the victim, so as to pretend we just did society a favor by straight up executing an innocent citizen in their own home”. :(
Oh yeah, covering their collective asses big time.
I do not know the trigger puller. I am throwing a dart here (see that caveat?), but......I will wager he has justified it in his own mind and is living with it quite well. "He had a gun, I had no choice. Wish it didn't happen that way but life must and will go on". And you know what? The Thin Blue Line will coalesce around him and make it so. Instead he should be facing termination and criminal felony charges. Not life or hanging but a couple years to think about it and then a felony conviction so he can go work for $10 an hour at a gas station for the rest of his days once he gets out. Oh, his chain of command should join him in all of the above.
Unless there are serious ramifications for these fvck-ups they will continue. [and I don't mean lawsuits where the taxpayer is left holding the bag]
You are driving, a deer darts in front of you, you swerve and hit a car, you kill a kid. You didn't do anything any of us would not do. Do you deserve the title "kid killer" merely because you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct)? You are at a restaurant, chilling and eating a Rueben. You are CC because it's what you do. A few tables away a guy pulls a gun. You in turn pull yours and you win the battle of the OK Corral. Turns out the guy was just wanted to show his gun to his buddy. He made a bad decision, and you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct).
Your first scenario (the deer) is kind of "iffy" as to whether you'd be held legally liable. In many jurisdictions you'd have to live with it. But your second one? You're going down brother! Gray Bar Hotel for you!
Coal Dragger
02-10-22, 14:31
On this point, and this alone (from the rest of the shit sandwich the whole ordeal was), we need to take a breath. I stipulate that is one reason cops and tac teams get a bad rap. My question is, is the bad rep worth it?
You are driving, a deer darts in front of you, you swerve and hit a car, you kill a kid. You didn't do anything any of us would not do. Do you deserve the title "kid killer" merely because you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct)? You are at a restaurant, chilling and eating a Rueben. You are CC because it's what you do. A few tables away a guy pulls a gun. You in turn pull yours and you win the battle of the OK Corral. Turns out the guy was just wanted to show his gun to his buddy. He made a bad decision, and you reacted as you were trained (or reacted as a matter of instinct).
I have pointed out on this thread, several times, that both of them acted in an inhuman reaction time; neither had the chance to gather the data to make an informed decision in those 9 seconds. They both reacted as any of us would.
Yep, because of that the cop's actions he and the team and the PD will be excoriated. But the reason they need to be excoriated is not that but the whole domino sequence of events before and after.
There should not, ever, be an "oh, well" attitude when it happens. There should be a pause to determine how to prevent it from happening again. As I also said (this is not directed at you), one death is too many.
I have made up my mind on the deer or critter darting into the road scenario already. Unless the road around me is clear and I have room to work, I’m running right over that sumbitch. I’ve seen too many cars or trucks in the ditch or otherwise worse off trying to avoid Bambi than if they had just center punched that hoof-rodent with their front bumper.
The only reason I haven’t had to do exactly that on multiple occasions is I’ve had the opportunity to memorize where deer and elk hang out on my route to and from work, and what time of day or night to expect them. Then I slow down in those areas and watch the shoulder of the road very carefully.
Oh yeah, covering their collective asses big time.
I do not know the trigger puller. I am throwing a dart here (see that caveat?), but......I will wager he has justified it in his own mind and is living with it quite well. "He had a gun, I had no choice. Wish it didn't happen that way but life must and will go on". And you know what? The Thin Blue Line will coalesce around him and make it so. Instead he should be facing termination and criminal felony charges. Not life or hanging but a couple years to think about it and then a felony conviction so he can go work for $10 an hour at a gas station for the rest of his days once he gets out. Oh, his chain of command should join him in all of the above.
Unless there are serious ramifications for these fvck-ups they will continue. [and I don't mean lawsuits where the taxpayer is left holding the bag]
There's a disconnect here that people are not getting. If your training is such that if 'X' happens 'Y' occurs, then that is what you do. Sometimes there's time to decide if that is indeed the right course of action. Neither the cop nor the guy on the couch had enough time to consider ANY course of action other than what was natural for both of them: guy on couch hears door crashing, he pulls his gun. Cop sees gun, cops sees threat. I submit that the cop did not have enough time to make the conscientious choice go in the door, see a guy grab a gun, and make a shoot/no shoot decision. The reaction time based on what we know does not support that. There was no 'justifying it in his mind' during the action. Afterward, maybe.
There's a slippery slope element to this, too: the 'why-don't-you-just-shoot-him-in-the-leg-or-taze-him crowd', right?
I have made up my mind on the deer or critter darting into the road scenario already. Unless the road around me is clear and I have room to work, I’m running right over that sumbitch. I’ve seen too many cars or trucks in the ditch or otherwise worse off trying to avoid Bambi than if they had just center punched that hoof-rodent with their front bumper.
The only reason I haven’t had to do exactly that on multiple occasions is I’ve had the opportunity to memorize where deer and elk hang out on my route to and from work, and what time of day or night to expect them. Then I slow down in those areas and watch the shoulder of the road very carefully.
Yup, me too. I live a mile from a state park and deer are a dime a dozen.
There's a disconnect here that people are not getting. If your training is such that if 'X' happens 'Y' occurs, then that is what you do. Sometimes there's time to decide if that is indeed the right course of action. Neither the cop nor the guy on the couch had enough time to consider ANY course of action other than what was natural for both of them: guy on couch hears door crashing, he pulls his gun. Cop sees gun, cops sees threat. I submit that the cop did not have enough time to make the conscientious choice go in the door, see a guy grab a gun, and make a shoot/no shoot decision. The reaction time based on what we know does not support that. There was no 'justifying it in his mind' during the action. Afterward, maybe.
There's a slippery slope element to this, too: the 'why-don't-you-just-shoot-him-in-the-leg-or-taze-him crowd', right?I don't think anybody is saying the cop should have shot him in the leg, etc.
Many of us are saying the cop should not have been there.
If there were a real reason for urgency, the mouth piece for the PD/City would have been on the news that evening saying because of XYX we had no choice but to enter.
That isn't happening.
Had the cop not been there in the first place, the dead guy would be the alive guy.
Blame whom ever you want, the judge, detective, it doesn't matter.
The cop made the decision to enter the house with a gun drawn and someone is now dead, he made that decision.
He could have asked is the guy actually here, did we do XYZ, but he decided to go in blind and death happened.
If someone tells me to do something stupid, I at least question it. If I figure bad results will happen I refuse to do it.
A quick Internet search of "No knock warrant gone wrong" had pages if results. Looks like most states have experience it, so how many dead people is enough?
They drag out capital punishment for decades to not kill an innocent person, yet a couple a year are slaughtered due to these warrants being abused.
There are people in this thread that are making excuses for this shit show, to them what number is "enough dead innocent people"?
To me one would be plenty, but since we are defending the screw up obviously one doesn't matter.
I don't think anybody is saying the cop should have shot him in the leg, etc.
Many of us are saying the cop should not have been there.
If there were a real reason for urgency, the mouth piece for the PD/City would have been on the news that evening saying because of XYX we had no choice but to enter.
That isn't happening.
Had the cop not been there in the first place, the dead guy would be the alive guy.
Blame whom ever you want, the judge, detective, it doesn't matter.
The cop made the decision to enter the house with a gun drawn and someone is now dead, he made that decision.
He could have asked is the guy actually here, did we do XYZ, but he decided to go in blind and death happened.
If someone tells me to do something stupid, I at least question it. If I figure bad results will happen I refuse to do it.
Sure, and if you've seen my previous posts I am also in the crowd of "this never should have happened in the first place".
To me there are two parts to this event. One, the overarching and most significant, is how it got signed off and the shit sandwich it became with a domino effect of bad decisions. From beginning to end, it was bad. It never should have happened. Two, the cop who shot the guy. My argument with that is, he never made the decision. He acted instinctually and by training. Right or wrong, there it is.
YOU may not be in the camp of whether or not he should have shot him elsewhere or used less than lethal, but every single time a cop shoots anyone, whether it's a bad shoot or not, it's always a question that comes up.
We don’t know, and may never know how many innocent lives were saved or lost in this incident.
This is not that hard: the action took zero bad guys off the street, and resulted in the loss of life of one innocent civilian.
If anything, this raid could have made it harder to get the bad guy when they found him 120 miles away as he was forwarned!
The middle ground starts with the presumption that the officers involved are innocent of acting maliciously or negligently. We don’t know the reasons why MPD chose a NKW over surround and call out. We only know what the media has told us, and the small part we can see and hear in the video. It looks like they should have called the suspect out of the residence, but maybe they had information that led them to believe a hostage situation was probable unless they breached. This looks bad, but the middle ground does not include convicting cops in social media and hanging them in town square.
You seem to be so focused on defending the cops breaking the door down that you are missing what *most* of us are saying:
- NKW's present very high risk to innocent civilians. Provable based on the ongoing incidents. Is it 1%, 3%, 5%, we don't know. What we do know is that many go wrong. And worse, they are avoidable in most cases.
- *Most* of us are not blaming the guy doing the raid that you seem to resonate so much with. Instead, we are blaming the detectives who asked for the warrant, and the judge who approved it. And yes, in nearly every case gone wrong we find there was insufficient investigation, bad CI info, and rushed middle of the night "get the judge to sign it so he does not get away".
- Given the repeated "wrong house" situation, that is clear proof that enough investigation was not done in those cases.
- Blindly defending the NKW decision simply hurts legit police effort. We see this very clearly.
- If told by superiors to execute the raid, yes, the boots have to execute. *But*, there becomes a point of "Nazi prison guard" syndrome that a questionable order has to be challenged. Or perhaps doing like Chuck, asking some pointed questions.
Put another way, in the modern military it's a career killer if not more to make a wrong house, or killed an innocent civilian and not getting the bad guy.
This is to the point that officers have to take challenging ethics courses that cover this type issue.
If there is no accountability, then it leads to the "oh well, have to break a few eggs" mindset. Some of which we have seen here. NKW use has skyrocketed from almost non-existent to now it's largely the norm for some agencies. Thus the increase in unneeded innocent bystander deaths. Many of which are not "promising young rappers" or a girlfriends standing behind a bad guy. (GA: Baby in a crib dead due to bad CI, grandmother killed by "wrong house", Businessman shot from a raider from *outside* his house even before the knock as they saw him reaching for a shotgun as he went down the hall)
At the minimum there should be CLEO signoff, and some accountability to judges who rubber stamp these things.
So instead of calling people names like Antifa and victim blaming, perhaps read some of the nuanced positions earlier. *Most* of us are not for eliminating NKW, just tightening up due diligence requirements significantly. Many times of late they are used for things which simply do not justify the risk to innocent bystanders nor the officer.
Also give some thought to your reaction time... are you so sure you would respond hands up if at 3 am someone burst into your bedroom? The 15 seconds mentioned earlier is much longer at 3AM when someone is in sound sleep. (The exact reason that's when NKW's or 1 knocks are done)
On a side note, I think maybe the profiles aren’t showing sign-up dates correctly, so for the record I’ve been part of M4C since 2010 and I think 12 years is long enough for me to bring up “the good ole days” of M4C!!
As to time on the forum, no worries. I just get a bit tired of folks decrying how badly the place has sunk. NKW has been a hot topic going way back, over a decade. Questioning it's use does not make you an Antifa loving left wing anymore than a reasonable defense of LEO would make you a jackbooted nazi.
Do we not? My count is 0-1…..
Yep
Doesn't everyone sleep with a gun nearby? When suddenly awakened by masked men, yelling incoherently, and right on top you, isn't the natural human inclination to go for your gun?
This is really starting to look like an "ends, justify the means" procedure. If we can catch some desperado by these means, then the collateral damage (meaning dead person) is worth it. That leaves a very very bad taste in my mouth. Police chiefs and Sheriffs seem to be ok with this since nothing is being done about the dead people. The buck stops with them. They should just stop this whole thing right now, but they won't. Let's face it, it's dangerous to be around cops when they are working, in a whole variety of ways.
Doesn't everyone sleep with a gun nearby? When suddenly awakened by masked men, yelling incoherently, and right on top you, isn't the natural human inclination to go for your gun?
Mine's about 5 feet away. I want to make sure I'm sort of out of the sleep before I get my hands on the gun. I suppose this has it's disadvantages as well as advantages.
There's a disconnect here that people are not getting. If your training is such that if 'X' happens 'Y' occurs, then that is what you do. Sometimes there's time to decide if that is indeed the right course of action. Neither the cop nor the guy on the couch had enough time to consider ANY course of action other than what was natural for both of them: guy on couch hears door crashing, he pulls his gun. Cop sees gun, cops sees threat. I submit that the cop did not have enough time to make the conscientious choice go in the door, see a guy grab a gun, and make a shoot/no shoot decision. The reaction time based on what we know does not support that. There was no 'justifying it in his mind' during the action. Afterward, maybe.
There's a slippery slope element to this, too: the 'why-don't-you-just-shoot-him-in-the-leg-or-taze-him crowd', right?
Yeah that's what I was referring to, afterwards.
If there were criminal and career-ending consequences to things like this those jacked-up on Red Bull, flat-topped, 'roided out Gung-Ho Gary's itchin' to bust a cap and their chain of command (even more important than the shooter himself) would be revamping their "battle plans" drastically. "Gee, is a no-knock really necessary? Are we 110% sure the perp is in there? Are we 110% sure of the whereabouts of any innocents in there?"
As long as it is only the taxpayer who bears the burden this stuff will continue.
chuckman.....you and I are in some minor disagreement on this issue, but we're not that far off albeit a few minor points. Agree wholeheartedly on the reaction times of both the shooter and the shootee. There HAS to be a fix though. Someone much more famous than me once said something to the effect of "Better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be imprisoned".
Averageman
02-10-22, 16:30
So, battering ram the door down and throw in a flash bang or two of six. Unfold your lawn chair and relax, they will show themselves, at worst you've got some busted ear drums, but everyone leaves happy.
If there are no known hostages, WTF is the difference between 30 minutes and two hours? I mean, WTF everyone goes home.
Sure, and if you've seen my previous posts I am also in the crowd of "this never should have happened in the first place". This is where the answer lies.
To me there are two parts to this event. One, the overarching and most significant, is how it got signed off and the shit sandwich it became with a domino effect of bad decisions. From beginning to end, it was bad. It never should have happened. Two, the cop who shot the guy. My argument with that is, he never made the decision. He acted instinctually and by training. Right or wrong, there it is.
YOU may not be in the camp of whether or not he should have shot him elsewhere or used less than lethal, but every single time a cop shoots anyone, whether it's a bad shoot or not, it's always a question that comes up.
And it comes out of the mouths of those ignorant of firearms and actual real-time shooting training and reactions.
While I wouldn't say the officers that entered are most to blame, I don't think they are blameless either.
While ignorance isn't an excuse on something like this, not one could honestly claim they didn't know any better on their actions having a strong possibility of this happening.
No duty to protect. If there is no legally binding duty for police to live up to that claim, I sure don't want to hear they "had" to play a role in events that lead up to an incident like this and it wasn't like the NKVD was setting up Maxims a block or 2 back to encourage them forward either.
There's a disconnect here that people are not getting. If your training is such that if 'X' happens 'Y' occurs, then that is what you do. Sometimes there's time to decide if that is indeed the right course of action. Neither the cop nor the guy on the couch had enough time to consider ANY course of action other than what was natural for both of them: guy on couch hears door crashing, he pulls his gun. Cop sees gun, cops sees threat. I submit that the cop did not have enough time to make the conscientious choice go in the door, see a guy grab a gun, and make a shoot/no shoot decision. The reaction time based on what we know does not support that. There was no 'justifying it in his mind' during the action. Afterward, maybe.
Then law enforcement is doomed to a very hard path, as public sentiment will continue to grow.
In parallel, support for drop of immunity will continue to grow.
If it's a training thing, then the training is broken.
I watch situations like some of the ones discussed here and wonder how in someone's right mind did they not question this??? Like shooting the 10yo mentally deficient kid holding a knife, 100' from anyone, with the given justification that he was planning on hurting himself. Really? While there does come a point that some action has to be taken, rolling up and doing so is indefensible. I'm not talking about cases where they are threatening someone, or resisting arrest and pull a knife.
We had a recent case in GA Cherokee county where an unruly early teen locked himself in his room with a pistol and threatened to kill himself. So his parents called the police. the kid was threatening no one. On scene commander started (rightfully) trying to talk him down. They asked him to come to the door without the pistol as a show of good faith. Which he did, and was promptly shot in the head by the local swat "sniper." WTF??? Turns out the sniper was not briefed, rolled up, jumped out, did not have his radio turned up so did not hear the on-scene commander giving instructions, etc. Saw the kid, took the shot. Was cleared, said he "thought he had a gun" which was highly questionable given other officer testimony and the angle, etc... Broke policy in multiple areas, and was *negligent*.
LEO does a very hard job. Thankless in many aspects. But as a group, this type of issue should trigger "are we making it harder on ourselves" type thinking. You clearly did based on your poignant personal experience.
I know you served, so don't know what your experience/training was. But young army officers now understand very clearly that they will be held accountable at a personal and professional level if they screw up like some of these. Specifically, they are expected to vet the tactical plan and if possible, the information it was based on. It's a bit unfair, as in many cases they cannot vet the intel.
What I hear from multiple young IN active duty officers: for sure they (and superiors) are normally held accountable outside of "fog of war" situations. And sometimes even then. For IN officers with a Ranger tab, it's a huge part of their culture apparently. The commanding officer has to accept responsibility even if one under his command screwed up. It was either a bad command decision, bad instructions, or poor training. All in the officer's space.
And they would only be under arms operating in enemy country. (It's worse if something happens and they are not in enemy contact)
Why would we allow/tolerate lack of accountability when in our own country????
I know you were not defending bad NKW's... don't mean to imply you were. But I'm totally baffled at folks who defend these bad cases, justify them in some way.
Then law enforcement is doomed to a very hard path, as public sentiment will continue to grow.
In parallel, support for drop of immunity will continue to grow.
If it's a training thing, then the training is broken.
I watch situations like some of the ones discussed here and wonder how in someone's right mind did they not question this??? Like shooting the 10yo mentally deficient kid holding a knife, 100' from anyone, with the given justification that he was planning on hurting himself. Really? While there does come a point that some action has to be taken, rolling up and doing so is indefensible. I'm not talking about cases where they are threatening someone, or resisting arrest and pull a knife.
We had a recent case in GA Cherokee county where an unruly early teen locked himself in his room with a pistol and threatened to kill himself. So his parents called the police. the kid was threatening no one. On scene commander started (rightfully) trying to talk him down. They asked him to come to the door without the pistol as a show of good faith. Which he did, and was promptly shot in the head by the local swat "sniper." WTF??? Turns out the sniper was not briefed, rolled up, jumped out, did not have his radio turned up so did not hear the on-scene commander giving instructions, etc. Saw the kid, took the shot. Was cleared, said he "thought he had a gun" which was highly questionable given other officer testimony and the angle, etc... Broke policy in multiple areas, and was *negligent*.
LEO does a very hard job. Thankless in many aspects. But as a group, this type of issue should trigger "are we making it harder on ourselves" type thinking. You clearly did based on your poignant personal experience.
I know you served, so don't know what your experience/training was. But young army officers now understand very clearly that they will be held accountable at a personal and professional level if they screw up like some of these. Specifically, they are expected to vet the tactical plan and if possible, the information it was based on. It's a bit unfair, as in many cases they cannot vet the intel.
What I hear from multiple young IN active duty officers: for sure they (and superiors) are normally held accountable outside of "fog of war" situations. And sometimes even then. For IN officers with a Ranger tab, it's a huge part of their culture apparently. The commanding officer has to accept responsibility even if one under his command screwed up. It was either a bad command decision, bad instructions, or poor training. All in the officer's space.
And they would only be under arms operating in enemy country. (It's worse if something happens and they are not in enemy contact)
Why would we allow/tolerate lack of accountability when in our own country????
I know you were not defending bad NKW's... don't mean to imply you were. But I'm totally baffled at folks who defend these bad cases, justify them in some way.
Can you imagine....you call the cops to try and save your kid and they blow his head off, because of a failure to communicate. It would take all my will power to not despise every cop on the premises.
Then law enforcement is doomed to a very hard path, as public sentiment will continue to grow.
In parallel, support for drop of immunity will continue to grow.
If it's a training thing, then the training is broken.
I watch situations like some of the ones discussed here and wonder how in someone's right mind did they not question this??? Like shooting the 10yo mentally deficient kid holding a knife, 100' from anyone, with the given justification that he was planning on hurting himself. Really? While there does come a point that some action has to be taken, rolling up and doing so is indefensible. I'm not talking about cases where they are threatening someone, or resisting arrest and pull a knife.
We had a recent case in GA Cherokee county where an unruly early teen locked himself in his room with a pistol and threatened to kill himself. So his parents called the police. the kid was threatening no one. On scene commander started (rightfully) trying to talk him down. They asked him to come to the door without the pistol as a show of good faith. Which he did, and was promptly shot in the head by the local swat "sniper." WTF??? Turns out the sniper was not briefed, rolled up, jumped out, did not have his radio turned up so did not hear the on-scene commander giving instructions, etc. Saw the kid, took the shot. Was cleared, said he "thought he had a gun" which was highly questionable given other officer testimony and the angle, etc... Broke policy in multiple areas, and was *negligent*.
LEO does a very hard job. Thankless in many aspects. But as a group, this type of issue should trigger "are we making it harder on ourselves" type thinking. You clearly did based on your poignant personal experience.
I know you served, so don't know what your experience/training was. But young army officers now understand very clearly that they will be held accountable at a personal and professional level if they screw up like some of these. Specifically, they are expected to vet the tactical plan and if possible, the information it was based on. It's a bit unfair, as in many cases they cannot vet the intel.
What I hear from multiple young IN active duty officers: for sure they (and superiors) are normally held accountable outside of "fog of war" situations. And sometimes even then. For IN officers with a Ranger tab, it's a huge part of their culture apparently. The commanding officer has to accept responsibility even if one under his command screwed up. It was either a bad command decision, bad instructions, or poor training. All in the officer's space.
And they would only be under arms operating in enemy country. (It's worse if something happens and they are not in enemy contact)
Why would we allow/tolerate lack of accountability when in our own country????
I know you were not defending bad NKW's... don't mean to imply you were. But I'm totally baffled at folks who defend these bad cases, justify them in some way.
You bring up a bunch of great points. First, I don't defend them (NKWs). They are part of the process, but I don't defend them. I don't even defend the officers actions, but I understand how it happened.
Qualified immunity? Drop it. I hate it.
Training needs to be better. Shoot / no shoot training needs to be better although that has gotten better over the past couple decades. On the military side we got into that some with Duane Dieter's CQB and rapid reaction training with escalation and de-escalation and shoot/no shoot. It will never be perfect no matter how much training you have though. But that was in the military. Most cops don't have access to that type of training without big bucks and we know municipalities are not going to pay the big bucks.
While I wouldn't say the officers that entered are most to blame, I don't think they are blameless either.
While ignorance isn't an excuse on something like this, not one could honestly claim they didn't know any better on their actions having a strong possibility of this happening.
No duty to protect. If there is no legally binding duty for police to live up to that claim, I sure don't want to hear they "had" to play a role in events that lead up to an incident like this and it wasn't like the NKVD was setting up Maxims a block or 2 back to encourage them forward either.
Succinctly put. The biggest turd to be eaten starts higher than the shooter, but he is NOT absolved in any way shape or form.
I know I'll catch flak for this, but it won't be the first time nor the last: look at the makeup of SWAT units. You're not going to see older beat cops (maybe a few, but I'm talking total statistical makeup). Younger, more agitated types. Many not vets but want that "play Army" feeling, and those who are vets likely forget they aren't in Fallujah anymore; domestic law enforcement and foreign combat are two entirely different categories. This doesn't cover every single SWAT guy out there, but I'll bet my paycheck it covers 80% of 'em. When you're a hammer everything starts to look like a nail. That mentality needs to be brought to heel.
Averageman
02-10-22, 17:10
Mine's about 5 feet away. I want to make sure I'm sort of out of the sleep before I get my hands on the gun. I suppose this has it's disadvantages as well as advantages.
Well, my pistol is in the bed frame, and I've got a shotgun under the bed. If I go out from a SWAT Team, someone's coming with me.
See all of you A'holes in Valhalla if that's the case.
The thing is, I'm nobody, completely in the gray. I look like "The Great Lebowski", I cut my grass every week, park in my Garage and take my trash out every week. But here's the thing, I've got a weird address and I live on "Drive", but there's also a "Lane", so who knows what's happening on the "Lane".
I am an old warrior, I don't want any trouble, or drama, just want to be left alone to live as normal a life as I can now.
Really, if you have a warrant, just gimmie a call, it's likely a mistake or some crazy BS.
I wonder how many police officers and innocent people have been shot because the police didn't try the idea of arresting the violent perp when he went to the mailbox or the store?
I know I'll catch flak for this, but it won't be the first time nor the last: look at the makeup of SWAT units. You're not going to see older beat cops (maybe a few, but I'm talking total statistical makeup). Younger, more agitated types. Many not vets but want that "play Army" feeling, and those who are vets likely forget they aren't in Fallujah anymore; domestic law enforcement and foreign combat are two entirely different categories. This doesn't cover every single SWAT guy out there, but I'll bet my paycheck it covers 80% of 'em. When you're a hammer everything starts to look like a nail. That mentality needs to be brought to heel.
You are not alone. I personally believe SWAT teams are needed at a county or similar level. And they need the tools to do their job. I'm *not* anti-SWAT.
But then I see my podunk little town with a bearcat, a full "SWAT" team in multicam, etc. In a county with a very mature SWAT capability already. And like you mentioned, have seen or known the stereotype you mentioned. I don't fault them for training and being fit. But it's mindset.
Back to podunk agency swat teams, yes, there can be interagency prioritization, but SWAT calls are not the norm in our county, and I know the county would assist the smaller city agencies.
In that Cherokee county situation mentioned earlier, my first thought was "Wait, Cherokee county has a dedicated sniper????" (Still very rural, though subdivisions are taking over)
So I'm becoming a bit sensitive to the so-called militarization of PD's. Trust me, I feel every officer who qualifies with it should have a carbine in their trunk, etc. Or a dept having some trained in sniper type tactics and even capability. No issues there. I can even see how larger units could use a bearcat.
But why multicam??? Does that contribute to the "we're just like the army" mindset??? I'd be OK with a tactical uniform, urban grey camo, whatever.
I'm friends with multiple local, state, and federal officers. Even one ex-ATF now FBI. It's a hard job. I want them to have the tools *and training* needed. But at the same time... wonder if the old addage of "to a hammer, everything looks like a nail" has some truth.
I've been waiting for the riots in Minneapolis (again). But I'm guessing its too cold for that up there in the frozen tundra.
Sure, and if you've seen my previous posts I am also in the crowd of "this never should have happened in the first place".
To me there are two parts to this event. One, the overarching and most significant, is how it got signed off and the shit sandwich it became with a domino effect of bad decisions. From beginning to end, it was bad. It never should have happened. Two, the cop who shot the guy. My argument with that is, he never made the decision. He acted instinctually and by training. Right or wrong, there it is.
YOU may not be in the camp of whether or not he should have shot him elsewhere or used less than lethal, but every single time a cop shoots anyone, whether it's a bad shoot or not, it's always a question that comes up.I agree with everything you said, except the part about the cop making a decision.
In my opinion, he did.
He did not verify if the criminal was there. He blindly went in with a gun in hand, common sense says numerous things can go wrong with that situation. He still went through with it, knowing he was being irresponsible.
Pension be damned, doing irresponsible acts just because you are told to, is not a valid excuse.
There are others above him that are in the wrong, but none of them pulled the trigger.
BTW: I was NOT saying you agree with or are defending the circus in question.
I'm commenting on your comments is all.
There are a couple that are just the opposite, blindly defending the circus.
It’s amazing this didn’t turn out even worse -
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2022/02/04/amir-locke-shooting-search-warrant-released-in-bcas-investigation-into-fatal-mpd-shooting/
“Huffman said her department’s SWAT team was asked to execute warrants on three apartments within “the building on Marquette.”
Three apartments in the same building? They had less than zero idea where the suspect they were looking for was.
As for why it was a no-knock warrant -
“St. Paul police originally asked for a “knock-and-announce warrant,” but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It’s amazing this didn’t turn out even worse -
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2022/02/04/amir-locke-shooting-search-warrant-released-in-bcas-investigation-into-fatal-mpd-shooting/
“Huffman said her department’s SWAT team was asked to execute warrants on three apartments within “the building on Marquette.”
Three apartments in the same building? They had less than zero idea where the suspect they were looking for was.
As for why it was a no-knock warrant -
“St. Paul police originally asked for a “knock-and-announce warrant,” but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If true, they all need to feel the burn. This is categorically unacceptable use of lethal force.
I wonder how many police officers and innocent people have been shot because the police didn't try the idea of arresting the violent perp when he went to the mailbox or the store?
Well, we watched the feds on national television burn down a building with women and children inside (and get congratulated for it) when they could have picked up the guy they wanted on the way to the Whataburger he frequented almost daily.
If true, they all need to feel the burn. This is categorically unacceptable use of lethal force.
Agreed. "...but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
What the hell does that even mean?
If true, they all need to feel the burn. This is categorically unacceptable use of lethal force.
Agreed. "...but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
What the hell does that even mean?
Agreed. "...but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
What the hell does that even mean?
The only thing that matters is going home in one piece when the shift ends.
Agreed. "...but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
What the hell does that even mean?
StP wanted the warrant and help from MPD to execute the warrant on MPD turf for suspect/evidence related to a crime in StP. Someone in the MPD food chain refused to consider a standard warrant and vetoed the app unless StP requested NKW.
One could argue MPD knows their turf better than StP and was legit trying to ensure a more productive search. Or could be the fellow in question just likes turning up the pressure to see what happens. Gotta wonder if WE will ever know which it was.
StP wanted the warrant and help from MPD to execute the warrant on MPD turf for suspect/evidence related to a crime in StP. Someone in the MPD food chain refused to consider a standard warrant and vetoed the app unless StP requested NKW.
One could argue MPD knows their turf better than StP and was legit trying to ensure a more productive search. Or could be the fellow in question just likes turning up the pressure to see what happens. Gotta wonder if WE will ever know which it was.
WE don’t ever have to be given that information, but they haven’t earned the benefit of the doubt without it!
Coal Dragger
02-11-22, 13:37
Well, we watched the feds on national television burn down a building with women and children inside (and get congratulated for it) when they could have picked up the guy they wanted on the way to the Whataburger he frequented almost daily.
Reminds me of the time the Feds were planning a big raid on a fundamentalist Mormon Warren Jeffs affiliated compound to arrest the head chi-mo in charge. This was a few years ago in Custer County, South Dakota. Rather than allow this idiot Fed shit show proceed the Custer County Sheriff just arrested the dude when he was in town.
The only thing that matters is going home in one piece when the shift ends.
And that's how I would feel if i was doing that job, one of various reasons I could not do that job.
The only thing that matters is going home in one piece when the shift ends.
And that's how I would feel if i was doing that job, one of various reasons I could not do that job.
Rick critiques it, what leads up to it, and comments on the defenders.
https://youtu.be/LR0kOi0TKTA
Why can’t we debate no knock warrants without going absurd?
It can be the right house with the suspect at home and still end up with innocent people getting hurt or put in danger. And that should be the point, not all this other stuff.
Well, we watched the feds on national television burn down a building with women and children inside (and get congratulated for it) when they could have picked up the guy they wanted on the way to the Whataburger he frequented almost daily.
Is this murder suspect on the run, in hiding, or probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?
And why are people upset they went to multiple places he might have been? Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s mommas apartments unless they are sure he is home?
Why can’t we debate no knock warrants without going absurd?
It can be the right house with the suspect at home and still end up with innocent people getting hurt or put in danger. And that should be the point, not all this other stuff.
Is this murder suspect on the run, in hiding, or probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?
And why are people upset they went to multiple places he might have been? Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s mommas apartments unless they are sure he is home?
A single murder suspect can only be at one place at one time.
I don't think anyone that is critical of how things went would be opposed to police surveilling any place that 1 person could be at and, if/when that 1 person is observed, go from there. That approach will still not guarantee someone won't be injured or killed since nothing can guarantee that, but it would certainly mitigate the risks.
The taking brush shots approach is not good for a single location and is guaranteeing someone not involved will be harmed when done at multiple locations.
Why can’t we debate no knock warrants without going absurd?
It can be the right house with the suspect at home and still end up with innocent people getting hurt or put in danger. And that should be the point, not all this other stuff.
Is this murder suspect on the run, in hiding, or probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?
And why are people upset they went to multiple places he might have been? Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s mommas apartments unless they are sure he is home?
Put in danger? Might come to that. Killed or wounded as a result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time? No fvcking way is that acceptable. Can't shrug it off. Innocent people being killed under the color of authority is not only wrong it is criminal and should be treated as such.
"Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s momma's apartments unless they are sure he is home?" No issue with that. My problem is with killing an innocent person.
Sorry, but when it comes to an irreplaceable life I have ZERO acceptance of "the cost of doing business". Don't like he rules? Find another line of work. (not you Todd, just in general)
Why can’t we debate no knock warrants without going absurd?
It can be the right house with the suspect at home and still end up with innocent people getting hurt or put in danger. And that should be the point, not all this other stuff.
Is this murder suspect on the run, in hiding, or probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?
And why are people upset they went to multiple places he might have been? Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s mommas apartments unless they are sure he is home?
So you think we’re more absurd than killing an innocent man while their suspect is 120 miles away?
LOL
Why can’t we debate no knock warrants without going absurd?
It can be the right house with the suspect at home and still end up with innocent people getting hurt or put in danger. And that should be the point, not all this other stuff.
Is this murder suspect on the run, in hiding, or probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?
And why are people upset they went to multiple places he might have been? Like they shouldn’t look for him at his Moms or baby’s mommas apartments unless they are sure he is home?
Because the way this department seemed to be doing it was getting a no-knock warrant for an entire apartment complex - just keep kicking doors until you find the guy!
“He might be somewhere over there…”(waves hand in a vague direction)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Every time I click back on this thread I am believing there will be that one post that's finally going to change everyone's mind. I've yet to find it.
It’s amazing this didn’t turn out even worse -
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2022/02/04/amir-locke-shooting-search-warrant-released-in-bcas-investigation-into-fatal-mpd-shooting/
“Huffman said her department’s SWAT team was asked to execute warrants on three apartments within “the building on Marquette.”
Three apartments in the same building? They had less than zero idea where the suspect they were looking for was.
As for why it was a no-knock warrant -
“St. Paul police originally asked for a “knock-and-announce warrant,” but only went back to get the “no-knock” warrant after Minneapolis police said they would not serve the first one, the sources said.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A fishing expedition is totally unacceptable. If you are not certain where the murder suspect is located, you do some more detective work. Once the suspect is located, you establish surveillance on the house or apartment. If there is risk to too many other people when executing the arrest warrant, you evaluate other options.
If a SWAT team executes a low light entry on the residence of anyone, they should assume a person sleeps with a weapon nearby to defend themselves. That applies to a violent suspect or an innocent person who happens to live in a bad neighborhood.
Because the way this department seemed to be doing it was getting a no-knock warrant for an entire apartment complex - just keep kicking doors until you find the guy!
“He might be somewhere over there…”(waves hand in a vague direction)
Are you being obtuse or are you just not willing to follow any of the details?
This was the suspect’s brothers apartment. The victim was his cousin. The cops were not at the wrong address, they used the wrong tactics.
Evidence was reportedly collected, so I believe the warrant was for more than just the suspects arrest. So the place was getting searched one way or the other, my issue is not with the search it’s with the way it was done.
So all of the blah blah blah going on here is pointless, except the choice of doing a no knock.
Are you being obtuse or are you just not willing to follow any of the details?
This was the suspect’s brothers apartment. The victim was his cousin. The cops were not at the wrong address, they used the wrong tactics.
Evidence was reportedly collected, so I believe the warrant was for more than just the suspects arrest. So the place was getting searched one way or the other, my issue is not with the search it’s with the way it was done.
So all of the blah blah blah going on here is pointless, except the choice of doing a no knock.
I think everyone is focused on things like the part about "Is this murder suspect....probably most importantly, a real danger to the community?" turning up 120 miles away(that would likely count as the wrong address even for an atomic bombing) from where the no knock warrant was executed which indicates multiple layers of failures.
One of the things they felt the need to mention they seized was a small of amount of pot which may be related to the killing of Otis(think that was the guy's name) or it could be like Dallas PD allegedly finding a small amount of weed in Botham Jean's apartment after their DPD colleague lit him up in his own living room.
Every time I click back on this thread I am believing there will be that one post that's finally going to change everyone's mind. I've yet to find it.
"Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is already made up." :rolleyes:
"Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is already made up." :rolleyes:
Can you offer a rebuttal where anyone has said "oh my gosh, I'm wrong!" Just a lot of people, including myself, who like to argue their entrenched position, yah? The boomer generation thread, someone said something about us sounding like a bunch of whiny girls (or something like that).
Someone famous said "you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you are". (Not saying this about you or anyone specific, only that we're how many pages and posts in and people are still saying the same things).
Edited to add, not directed to you, just why I've bowed out. But keep reading. I'm entertained.
again, no knock warrants should be banned
Can you offer a rebuttal where anyone has said "oh my gosh, I'm wrong!" Just a lot of people, including myself, who like to argue their entrenched position, yah? The boomer generation thread, someone said something about us sounding like a bunch of whiny girls (or something like that).
Someone famous said "you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you are". (Not saying this about you or anyone specific, only that we're how many pages and posts in and people are still saying the same things).
Edited to add, not directed to you, just why I've bowed out. But keep reading. I'm entertained.
It's always worth trying to learn the thought processes of others.
I think the video footage of various police interactions has, and will continue, to cause some opinions to change away from the massive, long running PR campaign.
The fact this happened at all definitely shines a light on how many in positions of authority...from top to bottom...view the concept of "the consent of the governed" which is supposed to be a big chunk of how things are supposed to work.
Can you offer a rebuttal where anyone has said "oh my gosh, I'm wrong!" Just a lot of people, including myself, who like to argue their entrenched position, yah? The boomer generation thread, someone said something about us sounding like a bunch of whiny girls (or something like that).
Someone famous said "you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you are". (Not saying this about you or anyone specific, only that we're how many pages and posts in and people are still saying the same things).
Edited to add, not directed to you, just why I've bowed out. But keep reading. I'm entertained.
Sorry if it wasn't clear from my post, but I was agreeing with you. People don't like to be convinced; they like to think they've come up with all their own ideas, with exceptions of course.
Many cops, or people that think it can't possibly happen to them, will typically take one side of the argument. Conversely other folks, who don't like the idea of people being able to get away with wrongful death, essentially scot-free, despite incompetence or malice, under the color of law, take the other side of the argument. The first group are too vested in their own defense to see the other side of the argument. And the second group has allowed the perceived injustices to enrage them to the point where rhetoric, rather than discourse becomes the order of the day.
The first group sees the irrationality of some of the rhetoric from the second group, and then uses it as an excuse to disregard any remaining validity in the argument... And round and round we go. Confirmation bias rules the day, rather than genuine discourse. Seems to be getting more common nowadays. People's frustrations over the absurdities being pushed on them by the culture spills over to other aspects of their lives, and often has the effect of making them more intractable on secondary issues. Few people live fully consciously as it is, which tends to make them more prone to manipulation by those that seek to rule over them.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.