Justified?

You never gave me an answer.
.

Sorry if you either didn't like or couldn't understand the answer I gave you.
That's probably a fair indication of why you keep failing to achieve what it is you want.

You are waiting for the government to save your ass while they are kicking in your door and shooting you in the middle of the night.
You might want to look at doing something different.

Or continue to fail.

.
 
.

Sorry if you either didn't like or couldn't understand the answer I gave you.
That's probably a fair indication of why you keep failing to achieve what it is you want.

You are waiting for the government to save your ass while they are kicking in your door and shooting you in the middle of the night.
You might want to look at doing something different.

Or continue to fail.

.
What part of the sentence "I would reach for my gun" implies I would wait for the fucking government to come rescue me?
 
What part of the sentence "I would reach for my gun" implies I would wait for the fucking government to come rescue me?
.

I was expressing the idea that you shouldn't have to, would be a better option.
Gave you an example of what you needed to do.
You might want to start with getting rid of the folks that sent the cops through your door.

Sorry you cannot understand that.

But hey ... If anyone currently on Capitol Hill has given you the impression they are interested in actually protecting your Rights ...
I would say that isn't the only thing you might not understand.

.
 
.

I was expressing the idea that you shouldn't have to, would be a better option.
Gave you an example of what you needed to do.
Sorry you cannot understand that.

But hey ... If anyone currently on Capitol Hill has given you the impression they are interested in actually protecting your Rights ...
I would say that isn't the only thing you might not understand.

.
Once again it seems you assuming that I was specifically referencing police when I said masked armed men.

I wasn't.
 
Once again it seems you assuming that I was specifically referencing police when I said masked armed men.

I wasn't.
.

Shoot them ... The Law Enforcement where I live will take a different route ... :thup:
Sorry I thought you were actually trying to talk about something relevant to correcting the problem with No Knock Warrants.

My Bad.

My guess is that you didn't even see this part of my original comment before you got your panties in a bind ...
"Whatever was broken, was broken before that moment ... As tragic as it is."

You started talking about shit you made up in head like that was going to make a difference.
.
 
Last edited:
You have no idea if there will be or not.
.

Yes, I do know ... That's not something that is done here.

Law Enforcement doesn't run around in the middle of the night shooting people, because the community that hires, pays them
or puts power in their hands, doesn't think that is the best idea and isn't waiting for the Federal Government to save us.

Not everyone is subject to the misery you insist on supporting in your community ...
Whether it be passive or looking in the wrong place for a solution.

If you wonder why the place you live is a shithole ...
Go to work fixing it, and where you actually have the most influence ... :thup:

.
 
I saw the video several times, it looks like they murdered him who was awakened by police shouting voices as they walked in.

It doesn't look like he was going to shoot the police as he was dropping his gun when he was shot. It was never pointed at anyone in particular.

The police created this tragedy with that no knock entry on a sleeping person who didn't have time to see who it was.
 
Exactly.

They are banned in my state but I think they should be banned at the federal level for all states.
Basically, you can't ban no-knock warrants entirely. What if the police are going to arrest an armed member of some violent gang? But the use of that should be restricted and regulated.
 
Basically, you can't ban no-knock warrants entirely. What if the police are going to arrest an armed member of some violent gang? But the use of that should be restricted and regulated.

The problem is that the police enter the wrong house too many times resulting having innocent people traumatized or killed.

They should do surveillance of the place first to be sure they have the correct target in the building.
 
The problem is that the police enter the wrong house too many times resulting having innocent people traumatized or killed.

They should do surveillance of the place first to be sure they have the correct target in the building.
Mistakes happen, and you can't guarantee they won't be happening in the future. People do mistakes.

To prevent all that, there is virtually only one way - to forbid arresting people in their private properties.
 



It looks like an assassination.

Police have a "no knock" warrant. They use the landlord's key to enter the apartment.

So, if it was Britain, and they could be 99% sure the guy was unarmed, he'd still be alive. But since it's America the cops were 99% sure he was armed, they shot him.

No-Knock Warrants are inherently dangerous because intruders shall be shot.

I consider No-Knock Warrants to be government-sanction murder and cops act as hitmen.
 
Basically, you can't ban no-knock warrants entirely. What if the police are going to arrest an armed member of some violent gang? But the use of that should be restricted and regulated.
They can arrest him on the street.

I don't know that I'd support an outright ban on no-knock warrants. But they certainly need to be used with extreme caution, with the awareness that they create a very real risk that either a police officer or an innocent citizen, will wind up dead as a result of one being carried out. Before a no-knock warrant is issued, there needs to be a very high standard of determining that the risk posed by the subject of such a warrant is so great as to justify the risk to innocent life, and that there is no less risky alternative. And judges who are careless in issuing such warrants, and officers who are careless in carrying them out, need to be held criminally responsible when this carelessness results in innocent deaths.
 
I don't know that I'd support an outright ban on no-knock warrants. But they certainly need to be used with extreme caution, with the awareness that they create a very real risk that either a police officer or an innocent citizen, will wind up dead as a result of one being carried out. Before a no-knock warrant is issued, there needs to be a very high standard of determining that the risk posed by the subject of such a warrant is so great as to justify the risk to innocent life, and that there is no less risky alternative. And judges who are careless in issuing such warrants, and officers who are careless in carrying them out, need to be held criminally responsible when this carelessness results in innocent deaths.

The agency that requested the check didn't even ask for a no knock. All they wanted was someone to check on the apartment. The responding force insisted on it even though the mayor had promised that no knock warrants weren't going to happen any more.
 
They can arrest him on the street.
Yes, but this also has disadvantages. Passers by, a suspect not being confined by the walls etc.

In any case, you can't just outlaw no-knock warrants without some serious reform, because sometimes the police are going to arrest really bad guys and they should be able to protect their lives.
 
The agency that requested the check didn't even ask for a no knock. All they wanted was someone to check on the apartment. The responding force insisted on it even though the mayor had promised that no knock warrants weren't going to happen any more.

If that is so, then wherever it got changed into a no-knock action, someone fucked up, seriously.
 
Yes, but this also has disadvantages. Passers by, a suspect not being confined by the walls etc.

In any case, you can't just outlaw no-knock warrants without some serious reform, because sometimes the police are going to arrest really bad guys and they should be able to protect their lives.

In this case and the Breonna Taylor case the person they were after weren't even there.
 
As you know, the vast majority of home invasions are at homes of drug dealers. Hey, go figure.

You also know that this shooting is a one off, a one in a million incident.

That being the case, why do you believe that putting police at a far greater risk of death is a brilliant idea?

IF you believe that is a brilliant idea, then you must also strongly support reducing all speed limits to 25 or 30 mph is also a grand plan. We would save tens of thousands of lives!

I could post links to stories all day long about home invasions that are not drug dealers and where the invaders do not know the residents where they are invading. If you're one of those, then you'd likely want to be able to defend yourself.

There was also a case of an actual cop yelling "Police" as he and his accomplices broke into a house with the specific intention of committing a robbery.

The police should never put themselves in the danger of a home invasion or no-knock warrant service for petty crimes. They should wait for appropriate opportunity to enter and make an arrest. In many cases when these go bad, the police haven't even done the most basic investigatory work to double-check the address, or the residents of the home; they act on the word of a single informant who is trying to save their own skin.

If the police simply quit doing no-knock warrants then they will never be in danger of getting shot that way. If they do have a seriously dangerous arrest to make, go in quietly, clear the neighbors so they aren't shot in crossfire, then pull back outside and use a megaphone.
 

Forum List

Back
Top