No knock warrants

[expvideo]

imported post

Here's something that's more bothering. I made agraph of the number of events per year from 1985-2006 from the site that Mainsail posted.

Seems like the violent acts by police while serving warrantsare on the rise...

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

 

[Pa. Patriot]

imported post

Just because there are things more dangerous than no-knock-warrants does not justify their use. :? There are probably things more dangerous than drunk driving.... so what?
Desperate attempt at justification of something blatently illegal.


The real issue is the constitutional one. Other than instances where there is imminent danger they are not legal. The end.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

expvideo wrote:

Here's something that's more bothering. I made agraph of the number of events per year from 1985-2006 from the site that Mainsail posted.

Seems like the violent acts by police while serving warrantsare on the rise...

That is probably because the police are doing more of them each year and the odds are increasing. The drug dealer occupation is onthe rise.



Maybe we should just get rid of the police completely. It is obvious that police kill people andwe can save so many lives lives each year by getting rid of them.

 

[expvideo]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

expvideo wrote:

Here's something that's more bothering. I made agraph of the number of events per year from 1985-2006 from the site that Mainsail posted.

Seems like the violent acts by police while serving warrantsare on the rise...

That is probably because the police are doing more of them each year and the odds are increasing. The drug dealer occupation is onthe rise.



Maybe we should just get rid of the police completely. It is obvious that police kill people andwe can save so many lives lives each year by getting rid of them.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[molonlabetn]

imported post

HankT wrote:

I am amused by the folks who think they can start shooting with real LEOs and "sort thingsout later."

I am equally amusedat theimplication that anyone shouldNOT react with force to a violent entry of their residence simply because there is a very, very low possiblity that it might be some mistaken cops doing a no-knock on the wrong house. That's an even more likely way to end up hurt.

If they are 'real' LEOs, they should have no problem properly identifying themselves as such. Otherwise, they are no better than petty thugs.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

expvideo wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

expvideo wrote:

Here's something that's more bothering. I made agraph of the number of events per year from 1985-2006 from the site that Mainsail posted.

Seems like the violent acts by police while serving warrantsare on the rise...

That is probably because the police are doing more of them each year and the odds are increasing. The drug dealer occupation is onthe rise.



Maybe we should just get rid of the police completely. It is obvious that police kill people andwe can save so many lives lives each year by getting rid of them.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

OK.. so contact the state and get the ball rolling. Complaining here is going to be a waste of your time.

 

[Marco]

imported post

only criminals impersonating them.



http://www.davrow.us

 

[CA_Libertarian]

imported post

molonlabetn wrote:

I agree with Hank that the likelihood for a mistaken no-knock is very low... thus it is prudent to treat any violentbreak-in as a criminal intent on doingone harm, untillearning otherwise.

+1

Thanks to LEO229 for the statistical perspective. This reaffirms my opinion that if someone forceably enters my home yelling, "Police! Search warrent," that it is statistically probable they are not LEOs.

 

[PavePusher]

imported post

Mild Rant Mode <ON>

According to the discussion here, because a no-knock warrent has gone bad once (or more than once), they should be banned.

Now, the anti-gun'ers say "Because a gun was used wrongly once (or more than once), they should be banned..."

Is the parallel clear yet?!:banghead:

Surely the people who used no-knocks improperly, or screwed up legitimate ones, should be individually held accountable for their actions.

Just as people who use guns improperly, or screw up a legitimate use, should be held individually accountable for their actions... are we all following yet?

One (or more) improper use of a procedure oritem does not justify a complete ban on all correct usage! Stop Falling Into TheTranzi Trap!!:cuss::banghead:



Now, the constitutionality of no-knocks is a whole different issue, but I am in no way qualified to comment on that issue with my current level of knowledge. Time for some more research...

And the fact that some very screwed up no-knocks have gone un-accounted for is also another subject.

Mild Rant Mode <OFF>

 

[expvideo]

imported post

PavePusher wrote:

Now, the constitutionality of no-knocks is a whole different issue, but I am in no way qualified to comment on that issue with my current level of knowledge.

Obviously not. Especially since, by your logic, ONE totalitarian leader of a nazi regime tried to exterminate the jews, so we shouldn't just go around trying to get rid of totalitarian leaders of nazi regimes.

Gun rights are different from police brutality. There is no sense comparing the two. No knock warrants are unconstitutional, and they get people killed. Guns don't hurt anyone. Bad people with guns hurt people. You can't say the same thing about no-knock warrants (well you could, but you would be wrong).

 

[PavePusher]

imported post

expvideo wrote:

PavePusher wrote:

Now, the constitutionality of no-knocks is a whole different issue, but I am in no way qualified to comment on that issue with my current level of knowledge.

Obviously not. Especially since, by your logic, ONE totalitarian leader of a nazi regime tried to exterminate the jews, so we shouldn't just go around trying to get rid of totalitarian leaders of nazi regimes.

Gun rights are different from police brutality. There is no sense comparing the two. No knock warrants are unconstitutional, and they get people killed. Guns don't hurt anyone. Bad people with guns hurt people. You can't say the same thing about no-knock warrants (well you could, but you would be wrong).

From my previous post: One (or more) improper use of a procedure oritem does not justify a complete ban on all correct usage!

Maybe I should have said is: "One (or more) improper use of (a procedure oritem with both good and bad uses), does not justify a complete ban on all correct usage!"

For the life of me I can't figure out a "legitimate/correct/good" use of genocide, totalitarian leaders, or of nazi regimes, so I don't think your critique applies here. If you have a better analogy, I'd love to hear it



Let us stipulate for a moment that no-knocks areConstitutional. (I really don't think they are, but again, I haven't read up onthe subjectenough to have an informed opinion.) Remember, this is hypothetical. If it's Constitutional, than a properly executed one, on a heavily armed, proven dangerous, homicidal drug dealer with 20 kilos of smack, two .40cal Glocks and a shotgun, is a legitimate usage.

A dozen SWAT officers killing a 90 year old woman in the wrong house in the wrong part of town, on a trumped up warrent obtained under false pretenses, is improper usage and they should go to jail. Individual accountability, as it happens.



If no-knocks are not Constitutional, then they should be banned. End of story. I agree with this 100%.



My point was that the sametype of argument was being used that the anti-gun-ers use, a facetious, illogical, emotion-based complaint about"bad once/bad always, and this applies to everything I don't like..."



I don't know if I have made myself any clearer or not, if not, my apologies for poor communicating.

 

[Legba]

imported post

(In response to the original question)... You don't have to be breaking the law to run afoul of it. I am something of an expert on the subject, truly. A wrong address ona warrant - St. instead of Blvd., say - and you are going up against the wall.

-ljp

 

[dng]

imported post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

How about this for no knock searches!

 

[Guest]

imported post

Agent19 wrote:

HankT wrote:

StrictlySig wrote:

I think the bottom line is surrender or die.

Sometimes, the problem is simple. I think you nailed it.

I am amused by the folks who think they can start shooting with real LEOs and "sort thingsout later."

That is a Defeatist attitude, gentelman.
:banghead:if your going to die anyway why not fight:question:

Anyone attempting to enter my home will meet resistance:exclaim:
I'd rather die trying, to protect my home family from invaders then quit before the fight starts.

I'm not a criminal nor is my wife. I have no reason to believe the invaders are the police, only criminals impersonating them.

Agent19,

The question here was regarding a _mistaken_ no knock entry.Whether you are guilty or not, if you surrender youprobably will not be shot. If you're innocentbut choose toresist because you know you're innocent you are going to be shot.

I'm not a criminal either. So I too have no reason to think or believe it is LEO's whether they yell 'police' or not. But the incident at my home last sunday, if you read my earlierpost, gives me plenty to ponder.

As the original poster said,'it's a horrifying position to be in'. I too, as I'm suremost of us have, considered the possibility ofthis mistakenlaw enforcementassault on our homes. This scenario and many others.

I personally totally disagree with these kinds of attacks on peoples homes, criminal activity in the home or not. Too often there are innocent people in these homes. Children andold people who should not be subjected to flash bang grenades followed by SS troops heavily armed and armored crashing in through the doors and windows. My dogs would almost certainly attack these invaders and thus be killed, and the bullets from that might then kill a 2 year old or a 91 year old. It wreaks of fascist like, totalitarian, terroristic, thuggish use of militarized police forces against the people of a 'free' nation. It also creates some fear among the rest of the population, us. And thats probably part of their goal. 'Dont break the law or this could happen to you'. AND it could happen to you by mistake! Thats why we are here discussing it now.

They need to catch their bad guy some other way.And live with it.Meaning a 'lesser charge' if need be.

 

[Marco]

imported post

http://www.davrow.us

 

[ilbob]

imported post

No knock warrants are one thing, but most do not realize that police rarely give you a chance to respond even when they bother to knock.As oftenas not, they knock, and say police, in a way that may or may not be heard inside the house as the battering ram is coming forward. Since they like to show up at 5 am when people are asleep, the chance of them being heard and people getting a chance to wake up dress and open the door is nil.

Since there are so few errors made, my suggestion is just change the law so that if a mistake is made by police in one of these kind of raids, that they be charged with home invasion.

 

[uncoolperson]

imported post

there should be something like an official sign to place on your door.


"this home is well defended against any forced entry. if you are police, to avoid this please kindly call my phone number and i will happily let you in"

 

[Marco]

imported post

The pistol isn't my 1st choicefor a gun fight

 

[Guest]

imported post

Agent, I dont recall you calling for a ban either. Or saying you did.

I said I disagree with NKW but thats still not actually calling for a ban.

Anyways, have a nice day.