Shooting police who enter illegally

Great Debates
81

Maybe I’m ignorant on what the procedures for executing a warrant are - is it your understanding that each an every officer on scene reviews the warrant prior to following their orders to proceed? If not, then that first guy through the door whose chances of getting shot increase by laws like these, hasn’t made a deliberate choice to act with disregard for the danger to other people as you claim.

I assume you are also referring to the Meserle case where Oscar Grant was killed. You’ll have to explain why you think Meserle sole purpose was to torture Grant - otherwise this is a non sequitur.

The correct response to an officer making a mistake is redress through the courts. Of course people and officers will be injured or killed during mistaken raids, more often than not it will be the residents and not the officers. These are tragedies for sure - but an attempt to mitigate or reduce these instances by sanctioning the killing of police who make or are party to these mistakes is severely misguided.

Second link on a google search. Home invasion while pretending to be police. Not common for sure, but it happens enough that I wouldn’t open a door to someone claiming to be police unless I called them, or I see the vehicle outside with lights flashing. Even then I may call the police station to verify. They can show me the warrant through the peephole.

82

Are you interpreting the law to mean that if an officer knocks at the door and says, “Police! We have an arrest warrant/ search warrant. Please open up, the building is surrounded, but we do have doughnuts and coffee. Hello!”, that it’s legal for the resident to say, “Let me see that warrant … slip it under the door; if it looks invalid, I’m a-comin’ out shootin’”, and the to actually shoot at the cop?

83

We don’t have any cases of someone knowingly killing a police officer.

We have cases of people knowingly killing an armed invader who is put on a blue outfit and perhaps yelled “POLICE!” while breaking in. Inasmuch as 99% of humanity is capable of performing those acts, their evidentiary value is rather weak.

84

Yes it is hard, because if the police have a legal warrant to go after someone they believe to be dangerous, they’re not going to knock and ask the guy to come out. It is proper and right for them to bust through a door given the information they believe on who’s inside. How do you think they should approached armed drug smugglers? Send one guy to the door and wait for them to come out? Of course they have to bust in!

85

And this police tactic gives the (unofficial) criminals a perfect opportunity:

Home invasion began with shout of ‘police’ at door

Robbery Crew Member Who Impersonated Law Enforcement Sentenced

86

My 90 year old neighbor is shot down by the po-pos

87

I was thinking more along the lines of,

“This is the police. We have a warrant to search your house.”

“That warrant’s invalid! I’m not letting you in!”

“Well, we’re coming in anyway!”

<guns>

Is that not the case?

88

I don’t think they do. The tactics of the paramilitary security forces we call “Police” are not the only way to deal with social pathology and unlawful behavior. They say they have to bust in, so you say they have to bust in. I don’t believe they do.

89

How would you recommend they go about arresting a house with suspected violent criminals?

90

I’m a musician, not a security specialist, but until I learn more on the subject, I’d be inclined to watch the backdoor, fire teargas into the windows, shut off the electrical, gas and water, and wait them out. I don’t see that as substantially more dangerous than rushing presumably armed violent criminals. Until a Swat Team member comes along and explains how that’s a bad idea … and I don’t mean the cost factor, I mean the tactical end of it … that’s my answer for now. If there are any down sides to my plan, they’d have to be worse than occasionally killing innocent residents and their dogs for me to change my mind.

91

I’m not a security specialist either, but you’ve got to define “violent” first, YogSosoth. Most criminals you’d send a dynamic entry team for have been to jail or prison. Doesn’t mean they want to go back, but they know what it means to be arrested for dope, and it also means they probably don’t want to add an attempted capital murder charge to whatever they’re facing. Which they’ll get if they start throwing lead at the cops. This ain’t Mexico. Yet.

The ones that do—kidnapping, mad bomber types, fugitives wanted for murder, etc—sure, send the door kickers. Just keep in mind that you’re also running the risk of causing an innocent-ish homeowner to think you’re a home invader, or a small time dealer to think you’re a rival robbing his stash. Neither of which is conducive to promoting officer safety or deescalating potential violence. And if you fuck up, you’ll lose your house. Hopefully.

I mean, what’s easier and safer for the police: take the guy down outside while he goes to the 7-11 for a hot dog—“Hello, Mr. Koresh”—or barge into his home ground, where there’s God-knows how many people, weapons, obstacles, traps, and you don’t know the layout? I do want a chilling effect on law enforcement. I want them to be sure they’ve got the right people,. before they start kicking in doors, breaking stuff, and killing the homeowners’ pets. I want them to have some skin in the game beyond feeling guilty and a paid vacation. If that causes them to reevaluate their tactics, great! Their safety is not the most important goal.

Let me repeat that. The safety of law enforcement is not the most important goal. That’s not their job. The safety of the citizenry is. If they don’t like it, and it is an onerous, sordid, unthanked task a lot of the time, then get another job.

But let’s be honest here, these types of entries are primarily for dope arrests, not for the Tsarnaev brothers, and are primarily intended to prevent evidence spoliation. Again, who needs to add attempted capital murder to their charges? They “probably” won’t respond with gunplay if they know you’re the cops. They might however, if they think you’re a rival trying to rob them.

My thought is that, if there’s so little dope that you can dump it in the ten minutes it takes to show up with lots of cars with flashing lights, a loudhailer informing them the cops are here in true '30s police drama fashion, and a knock on the door: you shouldn’t be kicking in their door anyway. Make it so '72 year old grandpa’ doesn’t think you’re a burglar, since you look like one sneaking around in black kit with guns in the dark.

Yank the police’s qualified immunity, make them get malpractice insurance like every other professional, and a bit of this goes away. Especially if they’re individually liable. No need to endorse shooting cops. As long as we’re dreaming, really rein in the War on Some Drugs.

For cryin’ out loud, Iraq/AfPak veterans mention that our rules of engagement were more restrictive there, than the ones domestic law enforcement operates under. That doesn’t strike you as something wrong?

92

Guys, it’s called “QUALIFIED IMMUNITY”. You can’t sue the police (at least not in the wrong-address type situations being discussed here).

Depends on what you mean by “mistake”. If it’s “sorry, wrong address”, then it’s definitely better for everyone if no shots are fired. If it’s “raping your wife”, then blow his head off, I won’t mind.

93

Knock first and identify yourself as the police. Say you have a warrant. If they refuse to let you in, then kick down the door.

That whole process can’t take more than a few seconds, so even the “destruction of evidence” excuse doesn’t make any sense.

Why is this so difficult? You’d think people would want to avoid the chance of being mistakenly shot to death. But apparently not?