Local LE Agency gone nuts!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lawdog, I know all about being given an impossible job to do and then told what you're doing is wrong--I'm becoming an elementary school teacher. :)

The best suggestion I have is not something that you or your fellow officers can do. My suggestion is that since we know that a no-knock is basically deciding that you don't mind if the subject has to be killed, it should be limited to suspects in violent crimes only. You would have to have at least threatened life or limb to qualify for a no-knock, no more of this war on drugs crap. Part of my point here is, even if this guy wasn't innocent, the charge was selling drugs to an informant, right? Well, we've got a liquor store down the street and nobody has ever suggested the cops go in guns blazing!
As for steps you personally can take, like I said, I'm not a cop. Sorry, I just don't know.

------------------
Don

"Its not criminals that go into schools and shoot children"
--Ann Pearston, British Gun Control apologist and moron
 
I know of judges who sign a stack of blank search warrants and deliver them to the cops to use as they wish. What constitutional protection?

Jim
 
Well, I agree with Jeff Thomas, this is a byproduct of the vaunted "War On Drugs", compounded by the militarization of civilian law enforcment.

Accepting innocent casualties as inevitable because they are worried some junkie will flush his stash is ridiculous.

Search the residence when he/she goes out, and arrest them when thay return. Problem solved. "Oh, but someone will tip them, and they won't come back" BE SNEAKY! Besides, who cares? They are gone. And most will not abandon everything they own. They will come back eventually. If you really want to nab them, follow them out. Grab 'em when they come out of the store. Better yet, when they come out of someone else's place after a deal. Then you know who else to watch. But someone always has a hard-on to play with all the cool Tac gear.

No-knock raids are absolutely un-neccesary. Warrant on a violent criminal? Road block. Pick him up in his vehicle as he leaves. Watch him for a few days and pick up his patterns. Pick out the most tactically safe spot. Homes are sacrement.

I hope this never happens to me. People storm my house, chances are I WILL open fire unless they clearly identify themselves TO MY SATISFACTION! A group of men in black carrying guns are a legitmate target in my home until I SEE identification or hear radio traffic I can identify. Shouting POLICE! will not do it. anyone can do that, and it has happened.

Once I open fire, I will not stop until they are out of my house or incapacitated, and most likely dead, or I am dead. when the first shot is fired, It's all or nothing. They will try to kill me, and I will do the same. After that, If I am still alive and they turn out to be police, I will not caom out until I see camera crews to record my surrender and ensure my safety.

Of course, this would be my worst nightmare. I will do everything I can to ID the people violating my home, but I will not put myself at risk to do so. In a No-knock situation, the idea is to give the person in the home as little time as possible. That puts me against the wall. I have to fire or take my chances with strange armed intruders. And I take no chances with my life and the lives of my family.
 
Jeff and Coinneach, I'm not being 'flip' about this. And I have never, ever trivialized the death of anyone, be they critter or civilian. Yes, there is a problem whenever anyone gets killed during a warrant service. A problem that is obviously not being addressed in California.

'No-knock' warrants are a vital and necessary tool in Law Enforcement. There is nothing you or I can do to change that.

If you feel strongly enough about it to flame us, go to your regional LE Academy, join on as a Reserve, serve some warrants from start-to-finish, then show us how to do it better. We always listen.

Don, Elementary school? Damn, amigo, you've got my respect. As far as things to do, well, let me buy you a beer sometime and I'll tell you about the time we tried pink BDU's for their quote-psychological impact-unquote.

Jim, you need to get the names of these judges. The places I've worked require an affadavit to be reviewed by the DA and the judge. And, let me tell you, those affadavits have to go into detail. Any judge signing blank search warrants needs to go before a judicial review board.

;-)LawDog
 
Coinneach
Take it easy my friend. I'm not saying it's okay for officers to spray and pray. And murder is intententional killings; we're talking accidental killings. Of cource these are serious screw-ups and not to be taken lightly. But logically, you can't judge Law Enforcement personal by these few incidents. Look howmany PDs there are in this country, how many entry teams, how many no-knocks that go down every year without a hitch.
So you want to keep your weapons loaded and at the ready to open up on any cops that might accidently serve a warrant at your address. Okay. So you want to intentionaly kill LEOs and you want to die. Have fun. Or calm down and stow the rightous indignation for a minute. Do you really beleive those team members said "Boy we're bored. Let's go hose some random citizens so we can enjoy some criminal and civil lawsuits."
These tactical tragedies do not go without consequences. The PDs do not exist in a vaccume.
 
I don't want to shoot ANY cops. I will shoot strange armed men breaking into my house in the middle of the night.
So would alot of other people, by the after-action reports from these shootings.
Upon indentification to my satisfaction, they will get no resistance from me.
I don't want to die. How utterly insipid. I am illustrating that once a gunfight begins, there are only two outcomes. you win or lose.
Oh, yes, accidental deaths are manslaughter.

Hope I don't have to repeat myself again.

[This message has been edited by Dave AA (edited December 05, 1999).]
 
CDF - you're missing the point. The only time a no-knock is acceptable is if there's a hostage situation. Killing one innocent man out of a thousand raids is unacceptable. Snap up the drug dealer when he leaves his house - then you won't have any such problems.

As an aside, here's a novel idea... No victim, no crime. That truism would put an end to all these mistakes/abuses.
 
As a (retired) LEO, I have misgivings about 'no-knock' warrants and the 'war on drugs' in general. (Been there, done that, am not comfortable with it.)Make no mistake, I think substance abuse (name your substance of choice) is stupid and bad. Personally, I have always wondered why anyone would want to use the stuff anyway. But I frankly could care less if some loser wants to mess up his life on his own time, as long as he doesn't affect others in the process. Sure, we'd be better off without the stuff. We might be better off without alcohol, too, but the last attempt to make people 'be good', known as Prohibition, didn't work too well, either. Back BTWOD (Before The War On Drugs) police had a little broader view on what their job was, and there weren't so many oh-so-special units itching to do their thing. Personally, I think the Republic is in less danger from illicit substances than it is from increasingly militarized police on a sacred mission...

------------------
 
LawDog / cdf, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I respect you for being willing to debate the issue, but I still disagree with the perceived need for all these no-knocks.

I've seen too damn many stories like this, with the most infamous being Ruby Ridge and Waco. Add to that the seizure laws we currently have, as well as the temptation to use all of that neat 'tactical' gear we all pay for, and I think you have a recipe for future mistakes - ultimately, they're not an accident - they are a logical and inevitable result of the current system. These 'mistakes' are inevitable, and we'll continue to see them over and over until the system changes.

This is a policy problem, IMHO. When we were kids, I think this kind of crap would have been very rare, and indeed reserved for cases of imminent violence. As you indicate, we have quite a few of these raids these days. I don't agree on the cost / benefit of this equation.

Do remember this - my family and I appreciate the police protection we have, and the sacrifices they make to make us all safer. I just wish my society would reduce the number of laws we have instead of increasing them, so our LEO's can spend their time on real crime, not regulation of private behavior - whether that's drugs, sex or firearms. We're probably not too far off from hearing about such 'mistakes' in the context of having LEO's seize those nasty SKS rifles from peaceful civilians ...

Take care. Regards from AZ
 
Sometimes the abuse of power does make it to the newspaper but that does not mean much. In New York City last year four police officers shot an unarmed man in his home 41 times. They are still on desk duty and not locked up. During a roit in Greenwhich Village (N.Y.C.) I saw a homeowner beaten bloody because he did not move off his steps fast enough for the two officers. They had their shields off so as not to be identified and weren't. There were videos taken showing the police were just as crazy as some of the rioters. To me this is one reason for the 2nd amendment so law abiding people can protect themselves from any unlawful, deadly actions by whomever. You will notice that the most vocal anti-gun politicans are the ones with the most heavily armed body guards, I.E. Kennedy, Koch and schumer.
 
"No knock searches are a vital and necessary tool in law enforcement." THAT is why the war on drugs must end!

Look, the bottom line is, when you enact laws which can not be enforced without abusive means, abusive means WILL be resorted to. And "no knock" searches ARE an abusive law enforcement technique!

Consider this: The requirement for search warrents serves TWO functions. One is to make sure that the police must demonstrate probable cause. The OTHER is to demonstrate to the home owner that these people at his front door really ARE police who REALLY have obtained the right to enter their home! And not crooks invading the home who ought to be shot.

In other words, warrents don't just protect the public against unjustified searches, they protect the police against justified self defense. BUT. They can only serve that purpose if they're actually presented! Anybody can, (And sometimes does.) yell "Police!" when breaking into a home. It means nothing.

Knock politely on the door with a search warrent, which you pemit me to read, and I'll let you in. Bust into MY house without knocking, and you'll get a .45 slug through your center of mass. If you're wearing SWAT gear I'll aim for the head. And I don't care whether you're wearing blue or not! Still fond of no knock searches?

Look, these legally sanctioned home invasions are NOT "necessary", they're merely convienient. You'll find some way to live without them. I don't guarantee you'll find a way to live WITH them, if you pick the wrong house.

------------------
Sic semper tyranus!
 
Seems to me the No-Knock perverts our priorities. It suggests that the *capture* of the armed puke is more important than the *safety* of innocents.

LawDog-
My response to the scenario you point up.
Alternative 1:
- Training, training, training.
- Loose the black uniforms and subguns but keep the armor
- Stake the puke out and then take him out if he reacts in any untoward way.
- Make use of the long rifle vs the carbine or subgun.

Obviously, with the time advantage, LEO's can set fields of fire that will minimize collateral damage far more than in a dynamic raid (eg: by shooting at a downward angle).

Alternative 2:
- Wait for the wife to leave and take her into custody
- Get the house layout and occupant list
- Do a *planned* entry

Clearly, these is not universal solution. But then, routine 3AM "NoKnocks, because we have the gear" are no solution at all.
Rich
Rich
 
I *like* all these no-knock invasions!

They serve important functions:

-disabuse the rest of us of any illustions re: LEOs'
-sell rifles to those who would have only got handguns otherwise

Now, that's not strictly serious. I have met only decent cops in my own experience thus far. However, based on the overall reposrts, I avoid police as conscienciously as I avoid other kinds of trouble. I also know that I would not have bought my first rifle had it not been for the capability to defeat at least some body armor...at the time I was hard-pressed to hit anything off-hand past 20 meters but could do OK within my apartment. Of course, I am also aware of my place being undefendable...worse luck.

Nice to see some US LE rushing to join a select group that also contains Stasi and other third-world sepoys. I hope that local Officer Friendly doesn't mind that I will refrain from helping him on the accound of the connection with his ninja buddies.

Likewise, I have started avoiding neighborhood where police presence is high...and that doesn't only mean the "ghetto"...I prefer not to even drive past PDs or park next to cops...just don't care for the proximity. Not sure what DON has accomplished, but all the battlefield reports are beginning to color my perception of the glorious defenders of the realm.


------------------
happy Cornered Rat
http://dd-b.net/RKBA RKBA posters
http://dd-b.net/olegv Portrait, nature photos
Aaahhh....what a great life!
 
I've had exactly three experiences with the Los Angeles Police Department. I don't want to get flamed, so I'll just relate the facts, with no commentary.

1. Neighbor's home alarm was going off for about 30 minutes. We finally called the cops. They told *me* to go investigate it! This was back when we lived in a neighborhood that was a bit scary after dark.

2. A homeless man decided to "squat" in a friend's apartment. We called the police department and they refused to send help.

3. My wife's car and a neighbor's car were broken into. About $1500 of stuff was stolen from my wife's car, including the stereo. The neighbors car was much worse, with all the wires hanging out of the ignition panel from a botched attempt to start the car. Thousands of dollars in damage and theft. The cops came, but refused to file a report or do anything about it, despite the fact that you could see the crooks' fingerprints all over the glass.

------------------
Romans 6:23
 
Gentlemen, I say again my last:
In Texas, Reserve officers work 16 hours per month. That's two 8 hour shifts. I would imagine that it's mostly the same for other states. You can do that without giving up your current jobs.

THEN let us cuss and discuss this subject.

Respectfully,
LawDog
 
DaveAA,
I was posting in direct responce to Coinneach, not you. No, I certainly don't wish for you to repeat yourself, unless you and Coinneach are the same person.
I am surprised at the anti-cop sentiment here. We all want unresticted acces to firearms,(wich we should have, by God)but we want to limmit what armaments our LEOs can carry. That's a bit of plurralism that I've never heard of before. I sure wouldn't mind having a good SMG and I wouldn't deny it to my local police.
I totaly agree with the opinions here regarding victimless crime and the war on drugs. We need a much more Libertarian philosophy in our lawmaking. But the police don't make the law, our socialist politicians do. I reserve my animosity for them, not the grunts on the street.
As to no-knocks; those team members are screaming "Police!" at the top of their lungs when they come through, identifying themselves. How many burglars form up in a squad-sized unit and do that?
If you gentlemen want to hate police, then do so. It's the easy thing to do. So do the Liberals, junkies, criminals, pacifists and everyone else. I thought TFL was the last bastion of LEO support.
 
Lawdog: Amen, I'll second that. Then alot of these preconcieved notions of police and thier "duties" would disappear. It's alot more fun to bielieve stories that are unsubstantiated and have no basis in fact. The truth on the other hand, and police work for that matter is usally quite mundane and boring. So to arrest one person with a misdemeanor warrant = 49 police units, 20 sheriffs units, swat teams, snipers, armored vehicles, really..... [who was answering other calls on service that night]? All this speculation the basis of from an unnamed police officer and a "letter to the editor". Now we have a judge who issued search warrants with no PC, we get no name, no other details to prove that this is fact or fiction.... In Iowa "no knock warrants" are issued VERY seldom from what i've seen. There are certain select criteria that must be met on the face of the warrant before there signed off on by ANY judge or magistrate. In those instances where that burden is met, those types of warrants are needed for officer saftey, or to prevent destuction of evidence. The war on drugs is just that a = WAR, it is a flow of poison into our country, ruining generations of young and old alike. How many persons are causualities of that drug trade and their minions? Hundreds of thousands? in this country; millions world wide? The economic destablization world wide runs into hunderds of billions from drugs and spin offs from its grasp. I would have no problem using a no knock warrant, [if justified] to throw a drug dealer and associates into jail, so he can't poison your children or anyone elses.
 
LawDog, I would actually be willing to pull those shifts and get myself inside the system so I would better appreciate your perspective. Your point is well taken - it always pays to walk a mile in the other fellow's moccasins. But I'm absolutely unwilling to help enforce laws regarding 'victimless' crimes. [We don't need to argue further about the ancillary victims from drug abuse - I know it damages families, etc.]

Our local sheriff uses reserve officers to help bust prostitutes and strip clubs. And, it's clear many of these guys get a big kick out of drug busts. And, they always publicize the hell out of this stuff, as if it really makes us safer.

I don't think my local PD is going to respond well when I say I'm going to pick and choose what laws I'll help enforce. And, I'm sure they'll want an oath along the lines of enforcing all that crap, and I'm not going to lie.

The only way I've learned what I have is to go on ride-a-longs with patrol officers, and have informal discussions with LEO's such as here on TFL, at the range, and in firearms classes. Most of those officers seem more interested in 'real' crime anyway.

I just don't see how I can become a reserve officer in good conscience - I either ignore my beliefs, or I don't take the oath seriously. Neither is acceptable. Any other ideas?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top