Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

No officers directly charged with Breonna Taylor's death

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    Exactly. They literally rioted and looted in Minneapolis a few weeks back when a murder suspect, in public, on camera, was cornered by police and blew his own brains out. On camera. In front of numerous people also on camera.

    They'll riot no matter what.
    Yup. We've seen it here locally. Valid, probably cause based arrested of a seriously deranged sicko. And since he's black, next thing we know they're protesting in front of the PD, making tee-shirts to bail him out, the whole works. So many people drinking their own Kool Aid and completely ignoring these inconvenient things known as "facts". Which is a natural consequence of the trend of postmodern thought. Doesn't matter what reality is, just imagine your own reality and operate within that because it makes you feel better.
    "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

      Yep it's certainly a big issue, and I don't think they should be allowed (I'm pleased to see Louisville has banned them). I hope Rand Paul's bill eliminating no-knock warrants gets support, though I doubt it will - Congress seems more interested in other things.
      I can think of a number of situations where a no-knock warrant would be the best course of action, for instance to not give a suspect time to flee or destroy evidence, or when announcing that the police are at the door would put them at undue risk. The problem is when things go wrong, such as storming the wrong house, or innocents getting caught in a shooting match. So rather than banning no-knock warrants, I think strict regulation and only issuing them under a very narrow and clearly defined set of circumstances would be the better alternative.
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        I can think of a number of situations where a no-knock warrant would be the best course of action, for instance to not give a suspect time to flee or destroy evidence, or when announcing that the police are at the door would put them at undue risk. The problem is when things go wrong, such as storming the wrong house, or innocents getting caught in a shooting match. So rather than banning no-knock warrants, I think strict regulation and only issuing them under a very narrow and clearly defined set of circumstances would be the better alternative.
        If they have enough time to destroy evidence in the time it takes to identify yourself, there wasn't going to be much of anything to discover anyway.

        No. No-knock warrants are in direct violation of basic Castle doctrine.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by myth View Post
          I also think we shouldn't delude ourselves into imagining that there would not be BLM/Antifa protests if the officers HAD been charged. At this point, it's a mindless mob mentality, they're rioting no matter the outcome. Logic doesn't even enter into it. After all, the whole movement started up again after the George Floyd incident...and those officers were charged.
          The mob in the streets doing the violence is mindless, but I do believe there are forces behind it that know exactly what they're doing. I just haven't been able to to pinpoint exactly what this "force" is. Is it just political? Is it an actual foreign element? Is it a mixture of both?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by seanD View Post

            The mob in the streets doing the violence is mindless, but I do believe there are forces behind it that know exactly what they're doing. I just haven't been able to to pinpoint exactly what this "force" is. Is it just political? Is it an actual foreign element? Is it a mixture of both?
            Btw, BLM apparently modified their "what we believe" page after polls showed public support towards them has plummeted.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

              If they have enough time to destroy evidence in the time it takes to identify yourself, there wasn't going to be much of anything to discover anyway.

              No. No-knock warrants are in direct violation of basic Castle doctrine.
              You are still supposed to identify yourself on a no-knock warrant. The difference is delay, not the announcement. With a regular warrant you'd literally just knock on the door and hang out for them to answer. And after a reasonable amount of time if they don't, then you knock the door down and go in. One can easily flush an entire pound or two of cocaine (as an example) in a bathtub or toilet in the 1-5 minutes that officers might be waiting before breaching the door. Then consider if it's a big house, the officers will be advancing room by room, so if you're in the back room you might have another 30 seconds to a whole 1.5 minutes until they get do you. Drug dealers hide their stashes and are generally prepared to destroy it at a moment's notice for this reason. Even an 8-ball is a decent amount of dope, and it takes like 10 seconds or less to wake up, grab if from under a mattress then run to the toilet and flush it.
              "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                I can think of a number of situations where a no-knock warrant would be the best course of action, for instance to not give a suspect time to flee or destroy evidence, or when announcing that the police are at the door would put them at undue risk. The problem is when things go wrong, such as storming the wrong house, or innocents getting caught in a shooting match. So rather than banning no-knock warrants, I think strict regulation and only issuing them under a very narrow and clearly defined set of circumstances would be the better alternative.
                I agree. Doing away with no-knocks entirely is a stupid, knee-jerk reaction and is essentially a "win" for drug dealers everywhere. But they should be used sparingly and carefully. Where I work, there's a whole criteria for when and how to use them. Heck, we have criteria for when you can even use the SWAT team for a warrant. Most drug search warrants don't meet that criteria, so we just grab whoever is available and go do it. We do a threat analysis to determine if use of the team is warranted, because we don't want to seem heavy handed in how we deal with the community. It's the cowboy attitude to drug search warrants that leads to so much trouble, and I would venture to say that's partially because narcotics units are so very secretive by their nature. Which means only a limited number of supervisors know what they're planning to do, and puts more importance on how those few supervisors manage what's happening. A lot of this is simply a failure of leadership to exercise good judgement.

                Also, the times when no-knocks go badly are so very highly publicized. A lot of people lack the perspective to understand that there's probably hundreds or thousands of no-knock warrants being served in the U.S. daily without incident. Yes, they're high risk and it seems like the go wrong all the time, but the times they make the headlines are few and far between.
                "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by myth View Post

                  You are still supposed to identify yourself on a no-knock warrant. The difference is delay, not the announcement. With a regular warrant you'd literally just knock on the door and hang out for them to answer. And after a reasonable amount of time if they don't, then you knock the door down and go in. One can easily flush an entire pound or two of cocaine (as an example) in a bathtub or toilet in the 1-5 minutes that officers might be waiting before breaching the door. Then consider if it's a big house, the officers will be advancing room by room, so if you're in the back room you might have another 30 seconds to a whole 1.5 minutes until they get do you. Drug dealers hide their stashes and are generally prepared to destroy it at a moment's notice for this reason. Even an 8-ball is a decent amount of dope, and it takes like 10 seconds or less to wake up, grab if from under a mattress then run to the toilet and flush it.
                  I'll take a few drug dealers getting lucky, if it means Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine are not further deteriorated by things like these no-knock warrants.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                    I'll take a few drug dealers getting lucky, if it means Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine are not further deteriorated by things like these no-knock warrants.
                    Now that I can get on board with and support. Which is why I was disturbed by the misinfo surrounding this case. I initially thought it was the wrong house and was in fact a no-knock warrant situation. That changed the entire dynamic of the case, at least for me personally.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                      I'll take a few drug dealers getting lucky, if it means Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine are not further deteriorated by things like these no-knock warrants.
                      Except that's not the actual trade off that would happen. It would be a very substantial reduction in ability to enforce drug laws and substantial danger to police officers having to raid houses where they know there are weapons and violent felons committing crimes. Let's not forget that the drug problem in the U.S. is killing people by the literal boatload. And also keep in mind that no-knock warrants are happening at the residences of drug DEALERS, not simply drug USERS. Finding the drugs is of PARAMOUNT importance in drug cases, because the drug buys by Confidential Informants can't be used in court for charging purposes (for a host of legal reason). So you do controlled buys to gain probable cause that the suspect is dealing drugs, but you can't use those buys directly for prosecution without revealing the identity of your CI (which doesn't normally work). If you wait outside too long, they flush the drugs and your entire case has turned to a pile of feces. Defeats the entire purpose of working the case against the drug dealer to begin with.

                      Quit frankly, if someone lives in fear that they'll get killed due to a no-knock search warrant, then they should probably quit living in a house where drugs are being dealt (children aside, that's a whole different box of worms). People are responsible for the consequences of their own decisions, and there are many known, substantial risks in living in a drug dealer's house (or being a drug dealer)....and most of those risks don't have anything to do with the police. If you're not dealing drugs, there's no need to worry about no-knock warrants. Period. You're crusading to protect the rights of drug dealers, in a situation in which non-drug dealers have no reason to worry about this specific problem.
                      Last edited by myth; 09-26-2020, 05:41 PM.
                      "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by myth View Post

                        Except that's not the actual trade off that would happen. It would be a very substantial reduction in ability to enforce drug laws and substantial danger to police officers having to raid houses where they know there are weapons and violent felons committing crimes. Let's not forget that the drug problem in the U.S. is killing people by the literal boatload. And also keep in mind that no-knock warrants are happening at the residences of drug DEALERS, not simply drug USERS. Finding the drugs is of PARAMOUNT importance in drug cases, because the drug buys by Confidential Informants can't be used in court for charging purposes (for a host of legal reason). So you do controlled buys to gain probable cause that the suspect is dealing drugs, but you can't use those buys directly for prosecution without revealing the identity of your CI (which doesn't normally work). If you wait outside too long, they flush the drugs and your entire case has turned to a pile of feces. Defeats the entire purpose of working the case against the drug dealer to begin with.
                        First, I'm a libertarian and don't particularly care for any drug laws. Second,even if we do have drug laws, I'm sorry, but the 2nd amendment and related Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are paramount to me - no knock warrants directly erode those rights.

                        Quit frankly, if someone lives in fear that they'll get killed due to a no-knock search warrant, then they should probably quit living in a house where drugs are being dealt (children aside, that's a whole different box of worms). People are responsible for the consequences of their own decisions, and there are many known, substantial risks in living in a drug dealer's house (or being a drug dealer)....and most of those risks don't have anything to do with the police. If you're not dealing drugs, there's no need to worry about no-knock warrants. Period. You're crusading to protect the rights of drug dealers, in a situation in which non-drug dealers have no reason to worry about this specific problem.
                        Tell that to Bounkham Phonesavanh who will grow up permanently disfigured after being burned severely at 19 months of age during a no-knock warrant based on false info from an informant (and further false statements made by the deputy to the magistrate in order to get the warrant).

                        Tell that to Ismael Mena who died in a no knock raid that was based on false information from the police (including the wrong address).

                        Tell that to 92 year old Kathryn Johnston who died in a no knock warrant when she fired at people she thought were home invaders. The police then tried planting bags of marijuana and got caught. Said raid was based on fake paperwork claiming drugs were at her residence.

                        Shall we continue? I can keep listing all bloody day.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                          First, I'm a libertarian and don't particularly care for any drug laws. Second,even if we do have drug laws, I'm sorry, but the 2nd amendment and related Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are paramount to me - no knock warrants directly erode those rights.



                          Tell that to Bounkham Phonesavanh who will grow up permanently disfigured after being burned severely at 19 months of age during a no-knock warrant based on false info from an informant (and further false statements made by the deputy to the magistrate in order to get the warrant).

                          Tell that to Ismael Mena who died in a no knock raid that was based on false information from the police (including the wrong address).

                          Tell that to 92 year old Kathryn Johnston who died in a no knock warrant when she fired at people she thought were home invaders. The police then tried planting bags of marijuana and got caught. Said raid was based on fake paperwork claiming drugs were at her residence.

                          Shall we continue? I can keep listing all bloody day.
                          Right, because anecdotal evidence means so much? lol

                          Keep listing all you want, but every case you mention will continue to be the exception that proves the rule. You're not advancing your argument at all. Instances of police corruption are an entirely different discussion. The thrust of the no-knock debate is about legitimate police procedure, not corruption. I'll never endorse or support corruption.
                          Last edited by myth; 09-26-2020, 06:19 PM.
                          "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by myth View Post

                            Right, because anecdotal evidence means so much? lol

                            Keep listing all you want, but every case you mention will continue to be the exception that proves the rule. You're not advancing your argument at all. Instances of police corruption are an entirely different discussion. The thrust of the no-knock debate is about legitimate police procedure, not corruption. I'll never endorse or support corruption.
                            It does when you are claiming that if you aren't dealing drugs that you don't have anything to worry about. Every single instance I listed is direct evidence that your statement is wrong. I can easily list a dozen or more in addition to those, without breaking a sweat. Very clearly anyone with a sense of self preservation, and anyone who cares about the 2nd amendment, Castle Doctrine, and Stand Your Ground, should worry about no-knock warrants, whether they are drug dealers or simple innocent people whose lives will be shattered or ended by said warrants.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                              It does when you are claiming that if you aren't dealing drugs that you don't have anything to worry about. Every single instance I listed is direct evidence that your statement is wrong. I can easily list a dozen or more in addition to those, without breaking a sweat. Very clearly anyone with a sense of self preservation, and anyone who cares about the 2nd amendment, Castle Doctrine, and Stand Your Ground, should worry about no-knock warrants, whether they are drug dealers or simple innocent people whose lives will be shattered or ended by said warrants.
                              Are you really so obtuse as to think there are no examples at all, or that I was? Seriously, grow up and put on your big boy pants.

                              I'm speaking in broad terms, essentially about statistical probability. There's always an exception when speaking broadly about any topic, as I'm sure you know. Also, as I pointed out already...the problem with the cases you mentioned was police corruption, not the no-knock warrant.
                              "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by myth View Post

                                Are you really so obtuse as to think there are no examples at all, or that I was? Seriously, grow up and put on your big boy pants.

                                I'm speaking in broad terms, essentially about statistical probability. There's always an exception when speaking broadly about any topic, as I'm sure you know. Also, as I pointed out already...the problem with the cases you mentioned was police corruption, not the no-knock warrant.
                                Anyone with a working brain should be concerned about no knock warrants. Anyone who doesn't, is either dense, a bootlicker or doesn't give a damn about the 2nd amendment and neighboring legislation.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                160 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X