Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America

Interesting Article

I came across this article from the Cato site:
http://citypages.com/databank/18/876/article1635.asp

It is pretty interesting. After outlining a pretty amazing debacle, the last few pages talk about how the Minneapolis ERU, with a compliment of up to 80 officers, conducted 35 raids in 1986. In 1996, with 58 officers, they conducted 700 (more than the LAPD). Apparently, the unit became more of a political tool than anything else.
 
First of all, police officers are NOT civilians, they are police officers. Same thing goes for our men and women in the military. Some of you appearantly are confusing "CIVILIAN" with "CITIZEN." They do not mean the same thing.

As for "overkill" police raids.... TOO FREAKING BAD! People get hurt sometimes. Sometimes those people are unfortunately "innocent," to use the term loosely. I can't believe the ilk that spills out of some people's minds -- police were too hard on that drug dealer??? They offended the SANCTITY of a crack house??? What's next??? People show up with shields, AR15's, and war helmets because of a little thing called "officer safety." Bottom line - police go home at the end of the shift. You don't like it, take the crack pipe out of your mouth and stop ruining my country.
 
Nice pro-cop rant there, ZingZang. Now take the crack pipe out of your own mouth and look at the damage caused by the WOSD:

-People who don't use are being murdered by cops who kick in the door of the wrong house. And yes, it IS murder: unjustified use of lethal force.
-Asset forfeiture laws applied against people who don't use, who have to sue to get their own property back (and who rarely do because .gov refuses to cooperate).
-People who should get help are treated as criminals, when they've harmed no one and violated no one's rights.

Your precious WOSD has caused far more damage than the meagre (if any) benefits provided.
 
ZingZang & Coin-
I'm gonna gently ask you to tone down the blanket and/or specific insults. OK?

So, Police and Firefighters are no different than soldiers, huh? I wonder if that would be an insult to some of the guys in the Sandbox right now (many of them police officers themselves). You know, those guys who have no liberty to just up and quit? The ones who must accept an order, even if the likelihood of death is high?

I had no idea whatsoever that our Police and Firefighters worked under those circumstances.

Bottom line - police go home at the end of the shift.
Click to expand...
Call me a bleeding heart liberal, but I think ALL the innocents should go home at the end of the shift. When too many start going to the morgue, it's time for a paradigm shift; one that would put less cops in danger and kill less innocents in the process.
Rich
 
Good point if they were actually raiding crack houses.

From the referenced article (dated 1997):

Yet despite this crushing, high-stress workload, ERU members says they rarely see their efforts result in convictions. Last December, Kroll told the Star Tribune that in five years and hundreds of raids with the unit, he has never once had to testify in court on a crack-cocaine case resulting from his ERU work. A recent internal spot-check suggested that not even half the ERU's cases produce enough evidence to justify a criminal charge. Some cops in the unit, including Kroll, speculate that rather than serving their intended function--apprehending criminals too dangerous for other cops to go after--their raids are used to pacify residents and politicians who demand visible anti-crime action.
 
There are solders and civilians.

If your primary purpose is to kill people and destroy things then you are a soilder.

If not then you are a civilian.

What the CATO institute is noting, is the shift away from protect and serve, to kill and destroy.

There are some people who think that it is the primary role of police to kill and destroy......scary.
 
As for "overkill" police raids.... TOO FREAKING BAD! People get hurt sometimes. Sometimes those people are unfortunately "innocent," to use the term loosely.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Better that ten innocent persons suffer than one guilty escape...or something like that...:rolleyes:
 
/me puts down the crack pipe and backs away slowly.

Sorry, Rich. I just couldn't let that one go by.

(note to self: TTPO.)
 
To ZingZang...

I believe that if you're going to do an overkill raid on a crackhouse it's a lot different than raiding someone who has no major criminal offenses. Something as petty as possession of marijuana is overkill if a guy ends up with ten bullets just because they knew he had a valid concealed weapons permit. Suppose that Miami man had only a small amount in possession, does it really deserve a police raid of that intensity? I thought the idea was to meet force with equal force, and no more than is necessary. Now if a raid was conducted in order to catch a murderer or rapist by surprise do I agree with that? Damn right I do, such actions done by scum who cause suffereing upon the unwilling deserve every bit of condemnation. I don't think anyone here is really condoning the "sanctity of a crackhouse" just upset that the police aren't doing their homework when it comes to doing something as big as a raid.

Now this is off topic, but still of major concern, with laws like the Patriot Act what would you do if men masked and in camo busted down your door just because of remote suspicion that you were "linked to terrorism/drugs" oh yeah, did I mention that the Patriot Act is in direct violation of the 4th Amendment and 5th Amendment? What does that mean? It means that they can take you away for whatever reason, not need a warrant, not have to read you your rights, you get no due process, no lawyer either, and you are detained indefinately. Imagine just doing your daily routine, and all of a sudden you're hit with a flashbang you're blind and deaf until you regain your senses and see you're pinned on the ground and cuffed, now let's take this a step further and suppose they used the Patriot Act against you, good bye to everything you knew, because you don't even get your phone call or visits, they don't even have to tell you what you're charged for. What if it turns out the raid was unjust, and they didn't do their homework like the incident with that New York woman? People get hurt right? Such callous and indifference for his fellow man is what causes nations to divide, think about it, would you be saying the same thing of "TOO FREAKING BAD" if that was you who was shot with 10 bullets because they knew you concealed? Would it be "TOO FREAKING BAD" if for some reason that flashbang was in such close proximity to you that it killed you? Just some food for thought, I'm not trying to start a fight.


Epyon


P.S: I'd like to say on my behalf against greedy lobbying corporations and corrupt politicians everywhere, take your stupid coke rails/needles, and stop ruining my country!


EDIT: As much as I'd like to see scum like murderers and rapists get theirs I understand that due process is important. There's a reason that we have to go by the idea of "innocent until proven guilty".
 
I believe that if you're going to do an overkill raid on a crackhouse it's a lot different than raiding someone who has no major criminal offenses. Something as petty as possession of marijuana is overkill if a guy ends up with ten bullets just because they knew he had a valid concealed weapons permit.
Click to expand...


The trick for cops is that sometimes, the intelligence/report/whatever makes us believe that we ARE going to an armed, active, occupied crackhouse, when in fact it's just a guy with a baggie of marijuana. Then, once things start, the person who just has the baggie might react in a way (totally naturally on his part) that makes the officer(s) think the baggie-guy is a threat to the officer or his partners. You don't have a lot of time to think "oh, that guy is reaching for his glasses on his nightstand, not the gun lying right next to the glasses."

That makes none of these specific incidents any less tragic. Nor am I defending any particular scenario or event previously mentioned. I simply give a very generic example of one possible reason for things to go bad.
 
Thanks for your input jcoiii...

You're in law enforcement I presume? What are your views about these raids and such? How about the whole war on drugs policy?


Epyon
 
Shaggy said :
Better that ten innocent persons suffer than one guilty escape...or something like that...
Click to expand...
Are you absolutely sure about that? I learned it the other way around. Exactly the other way around: "Better ten guilty men walk free than one innocent man be imprisoned." Think about it.
 
Doesn't matter if they don't even have a baggie full of MJ. My old buddies on the KPD (before I smartened up about who I was friends with) would always keep some joints on hand to plant on suspects when they didn't have anything else to go on.
 
New to law enforcement (1.5 years in)

Taken on a case by case basis, I'd say some of these raids are at least a little suspect. I wonder "what were they thinking?"

Generally, I think that there are many times where an officer and his partner could have effectively dealt with the situation. I think tactical teams are called in too often for things that do not necessarily require them. Instead, I think officers should initially be taught to think tactically for themselves. Go beyond the "routine" of this is how I knock on a door. Most cops do this anyway.

Contrary to the above, I do also think that the really bad BGs are getting much more sophisticated in their weaponry, and a few in their tactics. Unfortunately, this means that we have to prepare as if any BG we face is the super bad BG. And, if I have to go to some house that I believe to be highly dangerous, you'd better believe that until I know different, anyone in that house will be considered in the "really bad BG" category. If I were in the team going in, remember that I only have the warrant given to me. Very likely, I did not know anything about the case until the briefing prior to the action.

I'd say that more often that not, the tragedy of an "innocent" (like a mj-baggie-guy) being killed is due to the people going in thinking that this person is the super dangerous kind. Then the person does something innocuous that appears to be life-threatening.

As to the war on drugs, my feelings are somewhat varied. Maybe another thread would be more appropriate for that long rambling post I'd have to write.
 
The Geneva Convention recognizes soldiers and civilians, but provides no separate category for police. I would be concerned if police were categorized separately and treated differently; ZingZang's 'to heck with the rest of you - we're better than you are' rant proves that concern.
 
A police investigation would later find that the drug dealer the raid team was looking for had been arrested days earlier. He couldn't possibly have been at Spruill's apartment because he was in custody. The officers who conducted the raid did no investigation to corroborate the informant's tip. A police source told the New York Daily News that the informant in the Spruill case had offered police tips on several occasions, none of which had led to an arrest. His record was so poor, in fact, that he was due to be dropped from the city's informant list.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the heart of the matter is that these guys forgot basic police procedure concerning informants. This is one of the first things taught in the Academy--reference Aguilar v. Texas andSpinelli v. US.

If the guy is such a basket case, why did they keep using him? Idiots.
 
Elsewhere is a thread about posting trends on TFL. Another trend, though I suppose it isn't "posting" specific, seems to be an acceptance of certain ideas now that would have raised a conniption fit here just a few years ago. The idea cops are NOT civilians, for example. Seems I remember a thread on exactly that subject and how absurd it was when LEO referred to other people as civilians, being civvies themselves...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top