A no-knock warrant is a stupid tactic deserving of death? Some of you guys scare me, I hope the hell you never move into my neighborhood. The practice is carried out for good reason. It's illegal to shoot before you even see your target, again for a good reason. Maybe his cell mate will offer him plenty of comfort.
No Knock Warrant: Another Drug Raid Nightmare
- Thread starter BigV
- Start date
bushidomosquito
New member
It's getting cops and innocent people killed. It's not the most brilliant plan ever. There are plenty of other ways to get the bad guys. How about waiting until they come out and can see your uniforms? Then if they shoot it's pretty apparent that you found the right house.
VonFireball
New member
Remember when cops used to actually show courtesy even to criminals?
Remember when they had to knock and how much more civil society was in general?
As though a no knock warrant is gonna do something.
If the guy is a real dealer, stalling for time to flush pound after pound of contraband down the toilet ain't gonna cut it. If he can get it all down his toilet in time, it makes him a small time dealer who just flushed his stash, a victory for the cops and a major setback for the dealer.
Way I see it is like this:
I'm sitting at home, minding my own business. Suddenly, my door is blown off the hinges by men clothed in black ski mask(s) or other face coverings.
Anyone can yell "POLICE, GET DOWN ON THE GROUND!". It's not just a line limited to law enforcement.
Face it, any normal human being hearing his door fly off it's hinges is going for his gun. It's the normal thing to do.
What if they were armed thugs, dressed in black, making a home invasion robbery? POLICE, DOWN ON THE GROUND!!!! would be a great opening line for one of the scumbags to shout in order to gain an upper hand.
Until I see the ATF, DEA, POLICE, or US MARSHALL logos I ain't droppin that gun for nobody. In fact, I would shoot any home intruder who failed to be able to properly identify themselves. Unmarked cops dressed in black carrying sinister and evil looking black weapons included.
It's no small wonder more cops are killed these days. Look at the heavy handed tactics some of these police departments like to use.
As the home invasion/no knock warrant style entry continues to be used more and more, you'll see the body count pile up. Maybe, if enough incidents are there, the morons who are supposed to "serve and protect" us will actually reconsider the way they go about enforcing warrants.
No, they'd rather go after them first blood style, rather than catching them at their job or outside their house (i.e where the guns and drugs are stashed).
That wouldn't be sensible though, because then they could kick down the door in much greater safety.
Remember when they had to knock and how much more civil society was in general?
As though a no knock warrant is gonna do something.
If the guy is a real dealer, stalling for time to flush pound after pound of contraband down the toilet ain't gonna cut it. If he can get it all down his toilet in time, it makes him a small time dealer who just flushed his stash, a victory for the cops and a major setback for the dealer.
Way I see it is like this:
I'm sitting at home, minding my own business. Suddenly, my door is blown off the hinges by men clothed in black ski mask(s) or other face coverings.
Anyone can yell "POLICE, GET DOWN ON THE GROUND!". It's not just a line limited to law enforcement.
Face it, any normal human being hearing his door fly off it's hinges is going for his gun. It's the normal thing to do.
What if they were armed thugs, dressed in black, making a home invasion robbery? POLICE, DOWN ON THE GROUND!!!! would be a great opening line for one of the scumbags to shout in order to gain an upper hand.
Until I see the ATF, DEA, POLICE, or US MARSHALL logos I ain't droppin that gun for nobody. In fact, I would shoot any home intruder who failed to be able to properly identify themselves. Unmarked cops dressed in black carrying sinister and evil looking black weapons included.
It's no small wonder more cops are killed these days. Look at the heavy handed tactics some of these police departments like to use.
As the home invasion/no knock warrant style entry continues to be used more and more, you'll see the body count pile up. Maybe, if enough incidents are there, the morons who are supposed to "serve and protect" us will actually reconsider the way they go about enforcing warrants.
No, they'd rather go after them first blood style, rather than catching them at their job or outside their house (i.e where the guns and drugs are stashed).
That wouldn't be sensible though, because then they could kick down the door in much greater safety.
We can all babble on "what I'd do if..." but the reality is you could do something really different if you were actually there.
Similar point. Many people would never pick up a fella on the road waiting for a ride. But flip things around (where YOU become the person waiting for a ride) and now YOU want someone to give you a quick ride. You don't mean any harm anyways....?
Right-o. Story in Katrina. Some cops were thugging around (and I mean thugging around) and a fella asked a cop for his ID. Flipped his ID wallet so fast you couldn't even tell what it was.
Makes it less geniune. Even further, I -PLAN- (not, "when I get there, I'll do this) to scrutinze ID heavily. No ID? erg....
Similar point. Many people would never pick up a fella on the road waiting for a ride. But flip things around (where YOU become the person waiting for a ride) and now YOU want someone to give you a quick ride. You don't mean any harm anyways....?
Right-o. Story in Katrina. Some cops were thugging around (and I mean thugging around) and a fella asked a cop for his ID. Flipped his ID wallet so fast you couldn't even tell what it was.
Makes it less geniune. Even further, I -PLAN- (not, "when I get there, I'll do this) to scrutinze ID heavily. No ID? erg....
I read several police forums and they seem to be for it for the most part. Reason being, while you are politely ringing the bell or knocking they are flushing the evidence down the hopper. Or arming up for battle. Being armed and on guard is one thing, shooting an unseen target is another. If the cops are as bad as some of you seem to think, why is the guy still breathing?
Don't forget that it's standard tacticool practice for the police to wear ski masks. That way it's impossible to know if the heavily armed man breaking in your front door is a good guy or a bad guy. The perfect lose-lose situation for everybody. Tacticool trumps common sense every time!
longcoldwinter
New member
I sure they work real good when they get it right and dont break in to a innocent persons home, problem is screw ups can end up get innocents killed cop and citizen alike.
Did you actually read the article? Somebody is breaking through your door a week after your house is broken into and you ask "who is there?". Are cops serving a "no knock" warrant gonna answer that question? This is armchair rhetoric. The police were serving a "no-knock" warrant at night, on somebody with no prior record, on the word of a burglar. How the hell can you find fault with what they homeowner did and say nothing of what the police did?
RedneckFur
New member
JasrST4, It is obvious that this police technique has caused both officers and innocent people to die, needlessly. Do you feel that a few pounds of drugs are worth the life of even one innocent person? I personally feel all the cocaine in Columbia isnt worth the life of one single innocent man, woman or child. The technique is flawed. Why support it? 
Ridge_Runner_5
New member
Seems like nobody here actually read the article...the guy's house had been broken into several days earlier...turns out the informant that told the cops he had marijuana in there was the guy who broke in, and saw some asian trees that resembled marijuana...the cops did a no-knock warrant in the middle of the night over a few plants that COULD have been MJ that were ID'd to them by the guy who broke into the house...they had terrible intel and I hate to say it, but that cop was crawling through a door with no warning to the occupant...he deserved to get shot. To die? No. But he did something stupid and paid for it...
In TX, if there is no knock, then the officer should expect to be shot.
With "no knock", there is no knowledge of it being anything but illegal.
If someone is illegally on your property, with threat of personal or property damage, you may shoot them without notice.
Even if you catch them leaving, after they have damaged or stolen property.
"Victims" are finally getting their rights back, and criminals are learning the hard way.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/SB00378I.htm
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisions/press/pressreleases/PressRelease.2007-03-27.0601
I love being born and raised Texan.
With "no knock", there is no knowledge of it being anything but illegal.
If someone is illegally on your property, with threat of personal or property damage, you may shoot them without notice.
Even if you catch them leaving, after they have damaged or stolen property.
"Victims" are finally getting their rights back, and criminals are learning the hard way.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/SB00378I.htm
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisions/press/pressreleases/PressRelease.2007-03-27.0601
I love being born and raised Texan.
JuanCarlos
New member
Preserving potential evidence isn't necessarily worth the risks posed to the suspects (who aren't yet guilty of anything), or the the public at large.
A better excuse, but I'd think a standoff beats the occasional completely innocent person getting killed. Especially since cops choose to be cops, but nobody chooses to have the cops mistakenly burst into their home and shoot them.
Well, I suppose they choose to go for a gun or make a sudden movement, but this is largely reflex...at least I know it would be for me.
This, on the other hand, I wholeheartedly agree with.
True. Of course, by the time the court proceedings are over the media has moved on and nobody cares anymore, even if the suspect in question is cleared of all charges and the officers are found guilty of wrongdoing (unlikely in this case, I'd say, but still). Which is why nothing actually changes.
How would you know if they were a good guy or bad guy even without the masks? Bad guys are sometimes white guys with crew cuts as well. Hell, bad guys are sometimes actual cops.
Though I do wonder what kind of response you'd get if you asked one of the nice men in the ski masks for his badge number.
EDIT: Actually, come to think of it you could have been suggesting that their use of ski masks is what makes the ski mask no longer the universal sign for "bad guy." In which case, ignore the above.
Yes, I read the article. Did you? Yes, I'll ask who's there. I won't fire at an unseen target. Apparently the prosecutor doesn't think the law accomodates the owner's paranoia. Sounds like the pot head had his stash ripped off and probably was fearful but that doesn't make his actions more reasonable.
You should lobby your state representatives if the law bothers you. Obviously it's the law there, it exists for a reason, the cops certainly know the danger. It must be worth it to them, since they're the ones with their asses on the line. I doubt they knew the size of what he had, whatever it was probably was stolen but I'm not basing my opinion on the trigger happy shooter's feelings or the cop's feelings. What he did was unjustified from what I've read and it's why he's in jail.
Guilt is determined at the trial. You are saying they need to go to trial and then get permission to search the premises. I'm sure every criminal on earth would agree with that.
Yeah sure, it's better that a few cops get taken out. And it wasn't a mistaken address.
JuanCarlos
New member
Show me where I said that. Are you under the impression that no-knock warrants are the only kind in existence?
In this case, no. I'm speaking of no-knocks in general with that part. And yes, better that a few cops get taken out, cold-hearted as that may sound.
I would be interested in the opinion of any officers here on this statement.
Were I a policeman, I believe I would resent unnecessarily hazardous tasks that seem to place a low value on my life. The best example I can think of is issuing speeding tickets on limited access highways. How many guys are hit and maimed or killed giving out $100 speeding tickets?
I had a friend die last year while serving a warrant. They knocked, the door cracked open, a single shot fired. That shot snuck past his vest through his arm pit and near his heart. His first and only son was four months old.
My friend volunteered for that, but my sense is that there is pressure to engage in unduly risky acts as part of the culture.
Were I a policeman, I believe I would resent unnecessarily hazardous tasks that seem to place a low value on my life. The best example I can think of is issuing speeding tickets on limited access highways. How many guys are hit and maimed or killed giving out $100 speeding tickets?
I had a friend die last year while serving a warrant. They knocked, the door cracked open, a single shot fired. That shot snuck past his vest through his arm pit and near his heart. His first and only son was four months old.
My friend volunteered for that, but my sense is that there is pressure to engage in unduly risky acts as part of the culture.
You responded by saying preserving the evidence wasn't worth the risk since they aren't guilty YET. Guilt can only be determined after evidence is gathered.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82029&highlight=Ryan+Frederick
JuanCarlos
New member
Ah. Fair enough. My point is that in general the person whose home is being entered is presumed innocent, so any risk you're putting them in by going with a no-knock entry should be viewed through that lens. And, in fact, some actually are completely innocent...mistakes have been made in the past, and will continue to be.
Really, it's the "destruction of evidence" part that always gives me pause. I can understand the necessity of no-knocks when it comes to actual danger posed to the officers (above and beyond that that will always be present anyway). I have a serious problem with no-knocks that are issued solely to "preserve evidence," however. You know the old saying "better than 100 guilty men go free...?" That's just for prison, I'd say it goes double for being shot in my home because upon waking up, I didn't realize who it was storming my house.
Keeping in mind, of course, that I'm talking about the idea of no-knock warrants (and some of the more "aggressive" knock-and-announce warrants) in general...not this specific case.
We also have to ask the question, what is causing more harm to our society? The currently illegal drugs, or the side effects from those drugs being illegal. By and large, the drugs themselves cause little harm compared to the harm caused by prohibition. Most "drug crimes" are not from the use of these drugs, but from the illegal trade of these drugs because the only way to settle disputes in an illegal market is through violence. Most of the druggies committing crime for their drugs only do so because of the insane black market markup and because there is nowhere to go for help. Back at the beginning of the 20th Century, Bayer Heroin cost the same as Bayer Aspirin. The only reason it costs so much now is because it is a black market item.
With the prohibition of alcohol, we smartly realized that despite all the damage that alcohol can do, we are better off by keeping it in the legal market. We can then ignore the people who use it responsibly, or only use it every once and awhile, and go after the people who cause trouble. It took us only 13 years to realize this
Our current round of prohibition has been going on for nearly 40 years. How long until we admit that we made a mistake and go back to a method of legalized regulation? Face it, "keeping it illegal" has not and will not work. The proponents of prohibition have had their chance and the only thing we have to show for it is more people than ever in prison and increasing violence around the trade of these substances.
People will indulge in mind altering substances, that is why people drink alcohol. Yet alcohol is legal. If someone who has a steady job and is otherwise law abiding wants to take some mind altering substances on their own time, let them. As long as they aren't hurting anyone else I don't care. Tax them like alcohol and use the funds raised to offset the damage they cause. (FYI, did you know that drug dealers don't pay taxes. )
Most of us are smart enough to see beyond the government propaganda. If I really wanted some cocaine, even in my little North Dakota city, I can get it. I know people who know where to get it. It's an open secret where to go for that stuff, it's readily available. But I don't, do you know why? It sure as hell isn't because it is illegal. It's because I know that while cocaine isn't as bad the the propaganda makes it sound, it is very addictive and I don't want to take that chance. I don't smoke pot anymore because I ate allot and got fat when I did. I don't hardly drink anymore because the only reason I did was because it was illegal for me to do so. Once I turned 21 that was gone and I found that I really didn't enjoy drinking.
So here I am at 23 year old virtually drug free (aside from the occasional drink) and the law had absolutely nothing to do with that choice. (again, aside from drinking.) Surprise surprise, it seems that adults are capable of making their own decisions without the government helping me at gunpoint.
The government needs to stop knocking down peoples doors, jailing them, and killing them "for their own good". The sooner the better.
With the prohibition of alcohol, we smartly realized that despite all the damage that alcohol can do, we are better off by keeping it in the legal market. We can then ignore the people who use it responsibly, or only use it every once and awhile, and go after the people who cause trouble. It took us only 13 years to realize this
Our current round of prohibition has been going on for nearly 40 years. How long until we admit that we made a mistake and go back to a method of legalized regulation? Face it, "keeping it illegal" has not and will not work. The proponents of prohibition have had their chance and the only thing we have to show for it is more people than ever in prison and increasing violence around the trade of these substances.
People will indulge in mind altering substances, that is why people drink alcohol. Yet alcohol is legal. If someone who has a steady job and is otherwise law abiding wants to take some mind altering substances on their own time, let them. As long as they aren't hurting anyone else I don't care. Tax them like alcohol and use the funds raised to offset the damage they cause. (FYI, did you know that drug dealers don't pay taxes.
)Most of us are smart enough to see beyond the government propaganda. If I really wanted some cocaine, even in my little North Dakota city, I can get it. I know people who know where to get it. It's an open secret where to go for that stuff, it's readily available. But I don't, do you know why? It sure as hell isn't because it is illegal. It's because I know that while cocaine isn't as bad the the propaganda makes it sound, it is very addictive and I don't want to take that chance. I don't smoke pot anymore because I ate allot and got fat when I did. I don't hardly drink anymore because the only reason I did was because it was illegal for me to do so. Once I turned 21 that was gone and I found that I really didn't enjoy drinking.
So here I am at 23 year old virtually drug free (aside from the occasional drink) and the law had absolutely nothing to do with that choice. (again, aside from drinking.) Surprise surprise, it seems that adults are capable of making their own decisions without the government helping me at gunpoint.
The government needs to stop knocking down peoples doors, jailing them, and killing them "for their own good". The sooner the better.
spacemanspiff
New member
Psssshaawwwww! I would have retreated to my Safe Room and locked myself in. Then I can monitor on the security cameras who is entering my home, and shoot them from my remote controlled gun turrets if need be.