Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Giv
would you not agree then that you have not the authority to generalize if the police would NOT shoot?
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Giv
would you not agree then that you have not the authority to generalize if the police would NOT shoot?
I agree with this as well. I see no point for the officers lives to be risked or the inhabitants lives to be risked over drugs or warrants etc. If there is a hostage situation or something to that extent I can see the need to enter the residence.Quote:
Originally Posted by flan7211
The Indiana law applies to police who unlawfully enter a home.
In the event of a "raid" there is better than a 95% probability that a valid warrant had been issued for that address. Even if the address is incorrect, if it matches the address on the warrant and has been signed by a judge it is still legal.
HOWEVER, in some areas of our country the rights of citizens are neither respected or protected and in those areas it is not uncommon for police to conduct illegal searches, which can include entering and searching a home without a warrant or kicking down a citizen's door for suspicion of a minor offense (the odor of marijuana is frequently cited).
If a policeman takes it upon himself to kick in a citizen's door without a valid search or arrest warrant, I believe that is only permissible in the case of an emergency or if the officer is in pursuit of a fleeing felon who he saw enter the residence. Police need a damn good reason to legally kick in a door without a warrant. In the event police enter a home unlawfully, they usually do it on their own initiative without backup and know full well what they are doing is unauthorized. That makes them criminals.
Here in Denver I have not heard any cases of this occurring.
Generally, it is not because the dog is barking, but because it is posing a threat. I can tell you from my experience that it is a difficult decision to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
I am a dog lover and prefer dogs to most people. I recently had a situation where we were executing an arrest warrant ($500,000 bond) on a suspect and I was assigned to the rear of the residence in the event he attempted to flee. I began walking around the side of the residence in the dark when I hear a low growling. I shine my light on a dog house to the side of me and a pit bull getting up out of it. The dog didn't have a collar and wasn't secured by anything.
I could hear at the front door they were in contact with the suspect and I told the dog "Good doggie" and began to slowly back up out of the yard with the dog following me and growling. He stopped at the edge of the back yard and watched me, while I left the property to make sure my pants were unsoiled.
In this situation, everything turned out okay. But I always worry/wonder what would have happened if the suspect took off from the back and I had to chase him and the dog decided to chase me. I wouldn't want to hurt the dog, but I don't want to get tore up either.
I do agree with that. As I stated the police are just people as well. Every person perceives differently, has different levels of training, different levels of experience, different levels of skill, their personalities are different. Not to mention all of these things change on a daily basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
Regarding the dog issue, not long ago we had an officer get attacked by two pitts, I mean ATTACKED. They started going to town on his legs. He had serious gashes and bite marks on his legs. He was trying to get away but they kept pursuing him. They got him down onto his knees and started jumping at his face. He drew down and killed them both. The homeowner sued him for killing her "beloved babies".
I fail to see how this is news or why every state hasn't adopted such a law. Unlawful is unlawful. Something like this requires LE to have their t's crossed and their i's dotted before proceeding to kick someone's door in. Might make them think twice if a given warrant or situation even necessitates it which most don't anyway. It's time a little bit of power be returned to The People.
^^^ Yep. Come in my house using unwarranted force to gain entry...be prepared to be carried out in a body bag, regardless of what you are wearing or capacity you hold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger
Just as long as you are also prepared to go out the same way. If the police come into your home they will not be alone, as stated above they run in packs. Chances are that a tactical entry team will be deployed. If you shoot at the cops you may hit one or two of them before you realize that it's the police but by that time you are DRT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeeze
delete
I am certainly not using fear to motivate anyone. I condone protecting yourself and your property. I am just tired of tough guy talk online where people are saying f*ck the cops and no matter what if you come into my house and I didn't know about it you are going down. People just need to realize that it's one thing to type about how they are going to light the police up for unlawfully entering their home. Do they realize the emotional issues they may have by doing that? Would they feel guilty? That's all I'm saying, just consider the results of your actions and if your plan is morally okay, legally okay, and is okay with your family then by all means go for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
I think it's funny that when I started carrying a firearm I saw it as an increased responsibility. I now can take a life so I go OUT OF MY WAY to avoid situations that could present that scenario. Why is it that LE seems to think having more training, weapons and armor means they can create MORE of these situations? Seems counter intuitive to me. I can see doing this for proper reasons which are few and far between all the actual scenarios which make me angry that they over-use them. Every time they do this there's a chance for lost life on either side so you would think this would make them use this as a last resort. Using this tactic for someone growing some pot is just plain stupid IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Giv
delete
That is precisely my point. Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
I don't think anyone is arguing that point. That doesn't change anything I've said here. You can say the same thing in a thread about an active shooter scenario in a mall and it probably wouldn't change anyone's reaction to an incident like that. If it's an unlawful entry into your home you have the right to protect yourself from anyone and everyone. I bet those in the power to conduct such raids in Indiana will think twice about if it's worth it or not now. That's all this law creates is some pause to make sure they really are doing the right thing and if they are that they are triple checking all their facts to make sure no mistakes are made as they can't be afforded when lives are on the line. Accountability.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
I guess we have to make our houses fortresses. Steel cages around our doors and windows that require explosives to breach. Here is a good platform for up & coming politicians, "Vote for me! I will protect you from the government!"
If you do that then you clearly have something to hide. I was at a citizen academy for our county and during one class we were discussing drug houses and warrants and such. The question came up from someone in the class about how you could spot a drug house in your neighborhood. They were going over some of the signs (and presenting them as if each one condemned you as a drug dealer) and he brought up surveillance cameras. He asked the class who had them and I was in the back corner that night and raised my hand. He started to say 'See, none of you do so if you see them those are dug dealers' type thing but as he was saying his statement he glanced over to see my hand raised. Caught off guard he clarified 'You have security cameras watching your front porch and front of your house?' to which I replied 'I sure do.' and he seemed surprised by this. He instead decided to continue on with his other 'facts' to tell the aging hippie soccer moms who asked the question what to look out for.Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
The point is... you would be amazed what is passed off in LE circles as 'facts' when it comes to such things. You put bars, heavy duty locks/hinges and cameras on your house and you're now a target because you clearly have something to hide. This isn't science fiction either.
delete
You will. It amazes me how some of the LEO's who've been doing it for decades think and those are the ones training the new recruits how to think about situations. I think if the average citizen knew how easily they were labeled potential criminals these days they would be less inclined to sign away their freedom & liberties to these people.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
There was a time, in my youth, when I was interested in getting on the Sheriff's department here in Jefferson County. All the guys I networked with and made friends with pretty much proved something to me (and kinda turned me off to the idea of pursuing that career): Cops, after a time, see things very differently from the way non-LEOs see things. For instance, you see a kid sitting at a bus stop with headphones on, baggy clothes, and a general "urban" appearance and think he's just a kid, albeit not a very well dressed one, but you usually (generalizing here) don't think he's a hoodlum. A police officer will see the same kid and think (again, generalizing) he's up to no good. And I understand this, they deal with the worst in people and see so much negativity so often that they have to be more guarded. Like my deputy friend told me back in high school with regards to profiling and the reason cops usually assume based on appearance: "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck."Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
"The suspect in the shooting is at a local hospital under guard, with non-life threatening injuries." Quoted from the story listed above. I can only speak for myself, but being in the hospital under guard is not my idea of alive and well. Alive yes, but not well.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
Here is a link to some further stories about this issue involving the suspect; Matthew David Stewart.
http://www.deseretnews.com/topics/22...d-Stewart.html
I will offer this, there is much more to this story than a police raid gone bad.
The people of this country have a right to be secure in their person and property. The Fourth Amendment authorizes the government to search and seize after a warrant has been issued by a judge and supported by probable cause. If people are going to make the point that the government never has the right to search or seize, under any circumstance, then I am going to point out that you have not read or understood the Constitution.
As for the reason LE are searching, that is based on whatever particular laws they are empowered, by the legislature and executive (elected by the people) to investigate and enforce.
As for the civilian academy issue; I would say that having surveillance cameras on your front door may be an indicator of criminal activity. Certainly that alone is not probable cause. Also, if you have 9' fences around your property, topped with barbed wire or concertina wire, and vicious dogs with their vocal cords removed roaming your property, and welded cages over doors and windows on your residence, I would say those are indicators that you have something inside your dwelling that you are trying to protect or keep people away from. These are indicators, not probable cause that some criminal activity is taking place. If surveillance on this same residence shows that over a week long period, twenty known felons, all with previous convictions for trafficking in controlled substances come and go with some regularity, I would say we are inching our way toward probable cause, but not quite there. Through some diligent police work, I am able to get a hand to hand buy on three occasions (two of them surreptitiously recorded) with the occupant of this same dwelling, I would now present my investigative results to a magistrate and apply for a search warrant for the residence, and an arrest warrant for the person who sold me the (laboratory tested) controlled substance purchased on the three previous occasions.
Since the occupants of the said dwelling showed me the weapons they had inside and joked about shooting the first MF'er coming through the door, a tactical decision would need to be made on how we plan to serve the legally issued warrants. What I can say about this "hypothetical" situation is, some dogs may die. At least one door and fence will be probably be destroyed and several windows will probably be yanked out of their sills. Flash bangs and gas may be deployed, and the neighborhood might be better after all is said and done. Of course, the tactical decision may be made that a barricade will be place around the location, and the occupants will be required to surrender themselves to the authorities.
I can say that most cops see these raids the way soldiers see combat. They may not like it, but this is the job they signed on for. Afraid, but resolute, they are doing what they believe is right to make their jurisdiction safer for the rest of us. Hold the police accountable, but cut them a little slack. Not every cop is a jack booted thug, just itching to come crashing through your front door.
Typing on the internet is easy. Life is different.
Be safe.
Let me preface this post by saying that I support LE and am generally the first one to defend them when they are unfairly attacked on internet forums or even in real life.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
My question to you would be concerning the part I made bold above as it is the direct correlation between if and then. Why does someone who wishes to protect himself, his family or his belongings automatically become a person of interest or suspect at best? At what point did taking responsibility for your own life and possessions become an act of only a known criminal? Why are we now criminalizing those who don't live in a fantasy land where all their concerns are fielded by magical LEOs who are on-site at a moments notice with all the answers? This seems overzealous to a logical thinking and law abiding citizen such as myself and further draws the distinction between 'us' and 'them' which isn't good for either party. This is where I start to have a problem with these raids because the line between known convicted dangerous violent criminal posing an imminent threat and 'suspected pot grower' or 'delinquent tax payer' has become blurred and the next distinction is when people such as myself become labeled 'terrorist' because of my continuous questioning of our leaders as I feel is my duty as a citizen of this nation or even something as simple as a post on Facebook or a firearm purchase.
I also don't want to seem like I'm claiming all LE is 'jack booted thugs' but lots of the people who make the decisions as to what they do seem to be from my personal experiences and the connections I've made within various law enforcement agencies over the years.
delete
Can we get an admin to change the name of this thread to "Bitch about the Cops" please?
Who's doing that? Are you? The rest of us are having an intelligent adult conversation. How dare we say something not 100% shining the balls of everyone or we're cop-haters?Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Giv
I ain't bitching about no poh-lice but there are a lot of generalizations flying around here about the police just licking their chops to bust people's doors down and that cops are profiling people based on what their house looks like. Just saying cut the dudes some slack. Any cops I've dealt with have been fine. I'm not saying there aren't bad ones but they have a tough job and they keep society somewhat in tact.
IMO, because most of what I type here is just that, my personal opinion; right minded citizens should entrust their personal safety and that of their family and loved ones to no one else. A man is responsible for those he loves.
This means that you take responsibility to provide for them as best you can. You provide safety from those who would harm them. You do the best you can do to give them an environment where they can flourish and be productive members of society.
Sometimes this responsibility takes the form of arming yourself and facing those who would see you and your family as prey. Sometimes this means laying down your life to protect those you love. Sometimes this can mean laying down your arms so that those you love are not subjected to cross fire or collateral damage from government agents, who will not stop while executing their mission to enforce the law.
Each of us have to make that decision for ourselves. No one else can tell another man what is right or wrong. All we are doing is sharing opinions.
I don't like every law I've enforced. I haven't liked every elected official I've protected. My oath of office had no stipulation for what my likes and dislikes are or are not on any given day. I, like many members of this board, have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, enforce the laws of the federal government, and obey the leaders who have been appointed over me. Yes, some of those leaders have been criminals. Some of them have actually been tried, convicted and sentenced to jail terms. This does not change my personal obligation to use my brain, and my conscience to conduct myself in accordance with the oath I have sworn before God.
Based on more than 20 years in law enforcement, I do not consider myself to be in the minority or a rarity in LE. Many of those who wear a badge have also worn a uniform and served on foreign shores defending the same nation they now serve in our communities.
Some cops are bad. This happens in all professions. When cops go bad, no one wants rid of them more than I do or the thousands of others in the profession who place their lives into our fellow officer's hands.
Hold cops accountable. I just ask that everyone try to withhold judgment on all of these incidents for just a few days. At least wait until the almost always incorrect initial story has had time to work it's way through the flawed and biased news media.
I don't believe that anyone on this board is calling anyone names over these types of incidents. We are all just expressing our opinions. Free speech is good. I am glad we have this type of forum to discuss our opinions.
Be safe.
+1 to you CStone. You said it better than I ever could have.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
Cstone, I won't quote the whole paragraph where you stated how "in a perfect world" that's how LE would obtain a warrant, because we all know sometimes they don't get proof beyond a doubt that illegal activity is being done at or inside a home, but I fault not the LEOs, but their superiors and the judge responsible for issuance of the warrant. I agree with the pretty much unanimous idea that no-knock raids should have a pretty extensive list of needs to check off before it can be preformed, and then of course check the address, then go back and re-check. Of course mistakes can be made from time to time, but I think every law enforcement agency in our nation should always remember "Innocent until proven guilty" and go on that assumption at all times until that little bell goes off that actually does prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your suspects are doing wrong.
I'm in no way bashing cops (not all, there are a few I've dealt with that are actually no good), but in my experience, some of them do not uphold that mantra of "innocent until proven guilty." This is something I think agencies should work on, because I've seen it, especially in Evergreen, growing up some of the deputies acted like you being under 30 pretty much meant you were up to no good. I appreciate the LEOs who resist that cynicism.
He never said anything about "a perfect world"; he never even used those words. He did provide a pretty straightforward example of how a LEO would look at the totality of the information and circumstances and how one might work that information. AQuote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Additionally, where do you get the "because we all know" garbage? How the hell would you know? You read all the arrest and search warrants sworn out there in Jeffco or elsewhere for their completeness or truthfullness? You read internet forums? How do you know this? The threshold for a warrant isn't "proof beyond a doubt", its probable cause.
I guess the general consensus of the uninformed is that there are a ton of no-knock warrants are being signed off and done every day here in Colorado. That isn't true. The vast majority of search warrants being issued are "knock and announce" warrants.
Woah, easy tiger. I'm just saying, there are the few occasions where police obtain a warrant based on baseless, false, or otherwise wrong information, and they either A) Raid the wrong property than was intended, B) Raid a property under false pretenses or information, or C) make a mistake. I'm not saying it's common, hell it happens very seldomly, but I have read where there have been cases where people lost their lives because of wrong or mistaken information that led to a raid. Those facts are brought up in "Drug War Addiction" by Sheriff Bill Masters... I'm just simply saying that there should be a pretty big list of conditions that need to be met before obtaining a no-knock warrant (I don't know if there already is, if so, great). My whole point is that I just think that "collateral damage" with regard to LE is avoidable and should be treated as unacceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
Those search warrants that go bad are usually the leading story of the evening news and they are few and far between. Literally thousands of search warrants are executed daily with no issues, but like all sensationalistic things, the ones that go bad are front page news.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Masters isn't really an authority in this arena; he has worked in Telluride all his life and while a hippy area, not really a hot bed of drug use or enforcement.
LEO's look at risk all day, each and every day. There are risk matrix's regarding the use of tactical teams, the execution of warrants, the making of a traffic stop.
I suggest you read his book though, he pulls from his experience and then also from friends (I assume there is a decoder ring and secret handshake between LEOs? [Tooth]). But yes, one point he did clarify is that they are very very rare, but the point he made was that regardless of rarity, they still happen and it's all because the drug war. I appreciate the risks any uniformed service takes day in day out- different ball game, but I grew up in a firefighter family and always feared for my dad's safety when he went on a structure fire call.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
Bottom line: Stay safe out there. I hate seeing the one bad apple cop give the rest a bad rep. Or in the case for up here, the rookies who think they're South District LAPD when in fact they're county mounties in a mountain town with an almost non-existent crime rate.
Here is the issue to his book and the reason I won't bother to read it. He wrote it in 2000 and it was published in 2001. The laws have changed since then concerning asset forfeiture, which is the main crux of his argument; that LEO agencies seize assets and use the forfeiture money to fund their agencies and thus, more drug seizure means more money. Can't do that anymore. You literally have to get a fed agency involved and have them do the seizure and forfeiture and then they would do a split with the agency. Those thresholds are VERY high to get a fed agency involved as the AUSA's aren't going to prosecute a simple possession of any drug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13