Sign in to follow this  

SWAT officer shot in the face breaking into window during no-knock raid

Recommended Posts

McKay    3,695

I am not saying that, you can stay alert with your gun but not fire anything that move in your house.... what if your brother or son is trying to surprise you and bang! killed.

 

Yeah there's no chance id ever sneak into a house of a friend or family at 5am to surprise them if I knew they had guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashel    538

It's not an uncommon tactic, especially in hitting drug cases.

 

The risk of someone seeing you and shooting first, is drastically lower than knocking and saying search warrant, where in many of these places, would result in several people inside arming themselves and shooting, as they have nothing to lose.

 

Seems more cowardice on the part of the police generally, but you still didn't answer my question, particularly around common drug warrants.  Much like some of the broader terrorism debates, you shouldn't use such highly combative, specialized forces for routine enforcement.

 

My, what a rosy perception of the powers of the executive there mac, as they are most certainly choosing the method and the targets. 

 

I still can't imagine a circumstance that requires a no-knock paramilitary squad breaking into people's homes for any reason, period.  What other countries have such laws?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    5,004

I am not saying that, you can stay alert with your gun but not fire anything that move in your house.... what if your brother or son is trying to surprise you and bang! killed.

 

You may have a lot of die hard gun owners who fully support the stand your ground law that would argue this with you until are blue in the face.  I made the same argument before on a mentally disabled person wondering on to someone's property.  Most replies I got were

"shoot first" or "shoot to kill, not to warn"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
macrosslover    217

Seems more cowardice on the part of the police generally, but you still didn't answer my question, particularly around common drug warrants.  Much like some of the broader terrorism debates, you shouldn't use such highly combative, specialized forces for routine enforcement.

 

My, what a rosy perception of the powers of the executive there mac, as they are most certainly choosing the method and the targets. 

 

I still can't imagine a circumstance that requires a no-knock paramilitary squad breaking into people's homes for any reason, period.  What other countries have such laws?

http://blackamericaweb.com/2014/04/11/nc-prosecutors-father-rescued-in-dramatic-fbi-raid/

 

there you go there's one example and there are many others.  Should they knock and wait, giving the hostage takers a chance to kill that hostage?  There is no doubt there are times when a no knock entry is required by a SWAT team.  However we could argue, if they are really needed on drug warrant searches, even if their is a risk of the evidence being destroyed.  In this particular case, they thought he was armed, which he ended up being so that part of the intel was right, which is why they went in with a heavily armed team.  I think the negative perception of "no knock" would be lessened somewhat if they changed the name to what it really is, tactical entry.  That's all it is, the police feeling the need to make a tactical entry into that home, either for their safety or evidence preservation.  No one would think twice about the military doing that in their raids, the police need that same advantage in certain situations.  Contrary to what people may believe, it is not easy to get a no knock warrant, police have to prove to a judge why exactly they need that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashel    538

They aren't the ######ing military so those tactics have no place in law enforcement.  These guys need to man up.

 

Ok, I'll grant you certain very specific hostage situations, as that one was, where the feds become involved.  Lets also be clear, that was a special FBI operation executed by their specialized Hostage Rescue Team, not your local SWAT executing a warrant.  What else you got?

 

It only requires two magical phrases - drugs and indoor plumbing FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
adrynalyne    7,957

Yeah there's no chance id ever sneak into a house of a friend or family at 5am to surprise them if I knew they had guns. 

Breaking in and sneaking  in are two different  things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
macrosslover    217

They aren't the ######ing military so those tactics have no place in law enforcement.  These guys need to man up.

 

Ok, I'll grant you certain very specific hostage situations, as that one was, where the feds become involved.  Lets also be clear, that was a special FBI operation executed by their specialized Hostage Rescue Team, not your local SWAT executing a warrant.  What else you got?

 

It only requires two magical phrases - drugs and indoor plumbing FFS.

while the FBI Hostage rescue team is super trained, your local SWAT team isn't just some run of the mill guys playing cops and robbers, they are still under the same law enforcement umbrella, as law enforcement is just one entity.  It would be foolish to suggest that only the Feds are the only ones who could use those kind of tactics, while local law enforcement is meant to sit there with their thumbs up their butt.  I don't understand what you mean when you say they should man up?  Should they stand there and be shot at because they should be men who can take a bullet?  Because they are police, they should go that extra length to risk dying?

 

It takes more than just saying drugs and indoor plumbing to get a no knock.  I can guarantee if they did not say that this guy was armed, they probably wouldn't have gotten a no knock warrant.  The standard is different from judge to judge, but these days more judges will not grant a no knock warrant, if the only reason why is you fear evidence destruction.  You have to articulate why your life or the life of others will be endangered if you don't have a no knock warrant.  If the only thing you have is, he has drugs and he's going to flush them, they're going to usually say nope on the no knock.

 

What they had in this particular case, is an informant, who said that the guy is always armed and always carries the gun with him, which proved to be accurate.  In any no knock story you read, whether it goes horribly wrong or good, that is the one thing you will usually always see, we believed the subject was armed and was a threat.  Hell rape isn't a drug offense, but if you say he's armed and will fight, you would probably get a no knock warrant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    12,665

The FBI etc. got their asses sued off after the Ruby Ridge incident and lost.

In the run-up FBI & US Marshals threw rocks at Randy Weaver's cabin to view the response of him and his dogs. When Weaver, his 14 year old son and a friend came out to see what alerted the dogs the Feds ended up killing the kid. Later, an FBI sniper shot Weaver's wife in the head while she was holding an infant, killing her.

This all over a shotgun Weaver cut off 2" under the limit.

Let me guess, stand your ground doesnt not apply here since they were police officers that got shot. And murder charges? Really?

There have been several recent cases where those who have shot a cop during a raid that found no criminal evidence or the warrant was flawed (wrong address etc.) have either had the charges droppef or the jury nullified the charges. Cops have also been fired or brought up on charges of manslaughter or second degree murder after shooting innocents.

IMO as lawsuits for negligence etc. in the raids where innocents are hurt, killed or property is damage pile up light bulbs will go off in the civilian side of govt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryoken    922

Seems more cowardice on the part of the police generally, but you still didn't answer my question, particularly around common drug warrants.  Much like some of the broader terrorism debates, you shouldn't use such highly combative, specialized forces for routine enforcement.

 

My, what a rosy perception of the powers of the executive there mac, as they are most certainly choosing the method and the targets. 

 

I still can't imagine a circumstance that requires a no-knock paramilitary squad breaking into people's homes for any reason, period.  What other countries have such laws?

There is nothing "Routine" about hitting a drug house.

 

Simple fact is, in cases like this, it IS combat. This way is proven to be the safest and most effective way to do it. Did it get messed up this time? Yep.. But if they did it the normal way he'd still have got shot in the face after he kocked and shouted search warrant. This type of entry has been used for at least the last decade, probably better part of the last two, and has been shown to be safer than the normal way for ALL parties. Cops have less chance of getting shot, and the criminals get caught unaware, and without time to react. Far far better than a bloody shootout every time you want to hit a drug house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    12,665

The problem is that PDs and the Feds have started using hard entry raids for situations that make no sense like regulatory violations. Hard to make excuses for those.

The increasing use of these raids is drawing fire from the left and right, which should tell you something.

Like many things the last several years there is an expanding culture of overreach in government and some parts of law enforcement. These raids, NSA etc.

Time to pull hard on the leash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashel    538

There is nothing "Routine" about hitting a drug house.

 

Simple fact is, in cases like this, it IS combat. This way is proven to be the safest and most effective way to do it. Did it get messed up this time? Yep.. But if they did it the normal way he'd still have got shot in the face after he kocked and shouted search warrant. This type of entry has been used for at least the last decade, probably better part of the last two, and has been shown to be safer than the normal way for ALL parties. Cops have less chance of getting shot, and the criminals get caught unaware, and without time to react. Far far better than a bloody shootout every time you want to hit a drug house.

 

What a bunch of hyperbole.  Do you write that assumption laden fan fiction yourself or are you going to cite a source?  It clearly hasn't been safer for many innocent and guilty residents, their children disfigured by flashbangs, their pets, or their property.

 

Is not your usage of the term 'drug house' just a code word for urban poor, colored neighborhoods?  I'm pretty sure they never do in 'drug houses' like mine cause whites in the suburbs won't stand for it and we deal and use way more drugs than in the city.

 

The normal way as in walking up to the front door, knocking, waiting for the tenant, showing the warrant, and then executing a search as they would for all other warrants - like say murder?  I guess that's just too practical and polite for US urban 'soldiers'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.