Man Faces Death Penalty For Shooting Cop During No-Knock Raid

While it seems like the no-knock approach didn't work out well in the two recent threads, it's also not a new approach for the police, and they must find that its on average safer than not or else they wouldn't keep doing it. Probably with a no-knock approach, 9 times out of 10 they manage to get in before the suspect can pick up a gun and no one gets killed. Knocking on the door of a hardened criminal just gives him time to get ready for a confrontation. So, maybe sometimes these things don't work out, but I don't know if I'd say that means it is unwise in general.

 

I dont think the issue is a no-knock raid. The issue is the increase of these types of raids and raids on low-threat individuals. We shouldn't be doing these raids on common drug dealers. I can understand if it was a meth lab or a high profile target, but knocking down the door of a middle class family is ridiculous.

 

Because police are smart, logical and only care about public safety, amirite?

This is another symptom in the militarization disease. They think they are in Iraq and nabbed an enemy combatant who gave info on someone about to set off an IED.

Like Space Ghost posted, if the guy is a drug dealer, show up at daytime and search his house.

 

I'm not sure this is relevant. Shooting first against any potential criminal is probably the "safest" option for police - that doesn't make it right or a good idea.

 

What a crock of ****.

I don't know what is worse: the story or your defense of the local police playing special force ops here

 

My experience is that these SWAT goons all think they are breaching an Al Qaeda safe house in Faluja every time they kick a door. The first thing they will talk about is how dangerous their job is, but they will do so with a twinkle in their eye. They really seem to savor it, and their role as tough guy muscle. The SWAT members self-select, and the selecting factor is the desire to kick in doors, throw flash bangs and shoot bad guys. Not saying they aren't disciplined or don't follow the rules, but the guys setting the rules are the SWAT guys.

No knock warrants are absolutely more effective than knocking, and waiting for the bad guy to flush drugs. You know what else is really effective? Beating up perps to get them to talk, and putting secret listening devices in everybody's home so the police can monitor whatever conversations they like. Why don't we allow the cops to do these things? The society is set up so that the needs of the police necessarily are secondary to the rights of the citizens.

The bill of rights basically dictates that cops have to do their job with one hand tied behind their backs. Deal with it. We the people don't want the police to run wild. That's why when people call someplace a "police state" they are saying it pejorativly.

 

It's also very dangerous to allow an unknown intruder to break into your house without attempting to defend yourself.

 

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1fXmHAEi_5w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

What you are supposed to do when some random person breaks into your house unannounced is first ask them, "Are you the enemy?", you then wait for an answer and whoever says yes, you shoot them.

I personally think we need to do away with "no knock" warrants altogether because anyone who breaks into another person's home unannounced is begging to be shot and killed. I think we'd save the lives of cops, and of innocent people who are trying to defend themselves.

Sure it would make it harder on the police, but that's not my problem.

 

I rather criticize the policy that initiated the misunderstanding and possibly served as a direct consequence of the death rather than the raw outcome itself.

Many innocent people have been wounded and killed because of the nature of these raids, let alone the principle that it severely erodes our civil liberties.

 

A.L.L. O.F. T.H.I.S.

 

The issue is the raid, not the person trying to defend it.

You are putting lives at risk over what? If you are wrong and you do this type of raid and the other person is armed, and you shoot them and later find nothing - you've just killed an innocent person who thinks they were trying to defend their home from an intruder. And in this case, the cop was harmed.

It makes no sense. Unless it is an absolute matter of life or death, police should not be doing these types of raids.

 

no knock warrants serve their purpose. kidnapping, etc...

a no knock warrant for a drug accusation is ridiculous. especially if the information comes from an informant, who can be unreliable and full of alternate motives.

 

The few SWAT officers I've met all served in Iraq and Afghanistan (this includes HPD, SAPD, and DPD in general). I think they never turned off War-mode. This includes state prosecutors. The enemy in their sights aren't residents in Tikrit, but American civilians living in the Third Ward or Greenspoint. The no-knock warrants and accompanying attitudes are a symptom of the military bringing the war back home. As Americans, we have failed to sufficiently support veterans in transitioning back to civilian life so many of them become LEOs.

 

That's fair, there's probably legit times that a no knock warrant would be acceptable, but they are few and far between.

 

I completely agree with you on that, actually, which is usually why I'm usually not a fan of self-defense arguments -- I think people and cops especially should be more willing to take on risk themselves to preserve the lives of others. Too often, I think people have chosen to kill other people out of an abundance of caution for their own safety and courts have allowed it.

But, I was specifically addressing posters who said cops shouldn't do this because it puts cops and/or perps at risk. If it increased risk for cops, they wouldn't be doing it. It does open one risk -- that otherwise mild-mannered suspects will shoot at you in a misunderstanding -- but probably mostly minimizes many other risks, like perps having time to arm themselves. So given the range of options available to them, I suspect they like this one because they get the least resistance, on average. (It may have a secondary benefit for the suspects because they may be less likely to get shot if they don't have time to get a gun in their hands, though I doubt that's the concern.)

Is it a good thing to do? That's totally different. I think the courts should be very judicious about when they allow this approach. Again, I think it's the overabundance of caution in which the guys with the guns shift as much of the risk onto counterparties as they can, which isn't just. But we consistently seem to allow it.

 

When we have so many armed folks out there that are told it's a good thing to shoot anyone in their home, then these incidents will happen.

I may not be the biggest fan of these kinds of warrants or anything that jeopardizes our rights against the govt, but the cop was doing his duty, and got killed because of it.

 

I usually fall into the pro-cop side when it comes to incidents like this, but not this time.

I think you should have more evidence before doing a raid like this than just some informant giving hear-say.

I'm not a gun nut (I don't even own a gun), but I would probably react the same way if a bunch of thugs busted into my house at 5:30 in the morning with guns. How many times do you hear on the news about people pretending to be cops?

I'm trying to put myself in that guy's situation. It's 5:30 in the morning, I'm barely awake, I have no reason whatsoever to suspect that my house would be raided by police, I hear about home invasions every day on the news......I would probably do the same thing he did to protect my family.

 

Please read the article again. You have absolutely no back ground on this guy and what prior experiences he may have had in life. Some people go to sleep in fear because of where they live everynight. Guy is asleep and wakes to unannounced strangers in his house barging in on him when he WAS DOING NOTHING ILLEGAL.


What's next, the cops gonna start beatin on someone for hustlin cigarettes?

The cost to tax payers on this case must be just ridiculous all on hear-say. At least the dip **** swat got their adrenaline rush.

 

I don't think you know what a search warrant is. That means probable cause exists to believe a crime has been committed, and that the home owner had in fact, done something illegal.

People who dabble in that lifestyle tend to keep guns around and expect to get their home burglarized.

When you lead that lifestyle, actually you do expect someone to come into your house, where money and drugs are stashed; Cops or **** heads.

These warrants aren't based off of "hearsay". CI's get paid very well and they stay employed for being right. More times than not they go buy drugs with money owned by the police (serial #'s marked down). CI is searched before goes to do the buy. These are very controlled transactions, so much so that a CI's work is admissible in court. It's not like they found a random person walking on the sidewalk, "Hey wanna make some money, jump in!?"