# Why cops and their unions don't care about the public **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 5, 2017, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876 "2017-08-05T23:16:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![UCBearcats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/77aa72/32.png) [@UCBearcats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UCBearcats)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/241 "2017-08-10T18:30:42Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > I don’t think anyone has suggested that the police should be doing those things. No-one is disagreeing that the police should follow proper procedures on raids. > > Where there is, incredibly, disagreement is on whether people should shoot cops who are doing their jobs. You continue to say yes, they should, which is indefensible. You’re not even prepared to say that they shouldn’t, but mistakes happen - you have outright said it’s fine to shoot cops because their uniforms are so hard to recognise. > > You don’t know that you’re not wanted. > > If they magically teleport into your bedroom, that might happen. But you’ve heard them smashing the door, climbing the stairs, searching the rest of your house, and so on. > > Correct. Can you cite me a case where the police have shot someone in their bed, who was asleep until they entered the room, threw a grenade _at_ a baby, stabbed a dog who wasn’t threatening them, or ate a kitten? The last is probably the most likely scenario… > > As you well know, that’s not true. Firstly, it’s not stupidity. Secondly, damages are routinely paid - in the case where the baby was accidentally hit by a flash-bang the family received millions of dollars. And again, in that case, the person (correctly) blamed was the deputy who got the warrant issued. > > 1. That would be a reasonable and proportional response. Most people don’t want the millions. They want their health, well being, and life. The cops need to be 100% sure they are in the right place. It doesnt matter who requested the warrant. It doesn’t matter which judge signed the warrant. If you are the cop breaking down the door, you need to be 100% sure you are at the right place. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/242 "2017-08-10T19:29:42Z")
100% certainty is literally impossible. What we need are procedures that reduce the level of mistakes to the lowest amount possible whilst still being able to function, and a system which compensates those few who who suffer due to those mistakes. Even if the cops are mistaken, don’t shoot them. Turning one mistake into two is not advisable. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/243 "2017-08-10T19:38:56Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > 100% certainty is literally impossible. What we need are procedures that reduce the level of mistakes to the lowest amount possible whilst still being able to function, and a system which compensates those few who who suffer due to those mistakes. I’ve suggested such a procedure, which you’ve dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/244 "2017-08-10T20:01:17Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > 100% certainty is literally impossible. What we need are procedures that reduce the level of mistakes to the lowest amount possible whilst still being able to function, and a system which compensates those few who who suffer due to those mistakes. > > Even if the cops are mistaken, don’t shoot them. Turning one mistake into two is not advisable. But, you are insisting on 100% certainty from a civilian, woken up abruptly in the middle of the night to the sounds of someone breaking down his door. Since you insist on 100% certainty before the civilian can defend himself, and you admit that 100% certainly is impossible, the consequences of your policy is that a civilian may not defend himself from home invaders. Of course, you are physically capable of looking out your bedroom door or window in the seconds between the time that your front door is taken down, make 100% certain that those breaking down your door are not the cops, then arm yourself and be prepared to defend yourself before they get to your bedroom? And you have said that you shouldn’t get a gun, as you have defended cops who shot people for merely holding a gun. So, if you get a gun before checking their ID’s to make sure that they are criminals, and the cops burst into your bedroom, there you are, holding a gun. By the logic that you have used, you are now threatening them, and they should shoot you. So, this actually does not mean that you want to have innocent civilians killed by home invading criminals, you also want to put them in a position to be shot by the police. You really do hate people who have done no wrong, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/245 "2017-08-10T20:36:24Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > But, you are insisting on 100% certainty from a civilian, woken up abruptly in the middle of the night to the sounds of someone breaking down his door. Wrong. > [@](#): > > Since you insist on 100% certainty before the civilian can defend himself, and you admit that 100% certainly is impossible, the consequences of your policy is that a civilian may not defend himself from home invaders. The first statement is wrong, and the second statement doesn’t follow from that anyway. > [@](#): > > And you have said that you shouldn’t get a gun, as you have defended cops who shot people for merely holding a gun. So, if you get a gun before checking their ID’s to make sure that they are criminals, and the cops burst into your bedroom, there you are, holding a gun. By the logic that you have used, you are now threatening them, and they should shoot you. Not fro merely holding a gun, no. Once again, a false premise, _and_ a conclusion that doesn’t follow from it. > [@](#): > > So, this actually does not mean that you want to have innocent civilians killed by home invading criminals, you also want to put them in a position to be shot by the police. Wrong again, I want what is safest for everyone - which is to not shoot cops who are doing their jobs. > [@](#): > > You really do hate people who have done no wrong, don’t you? No, I don’t, which is why I want an effective, respected police force to protect them. Sadly most people in this thread are trying to fight against that, and defend the idea of shooting police that you believe, without any actual evidence, don’t have a valid warrant. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/246 "2017-08-10T20:38:09Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ve suggested such a procedure, which you’ve dismissed. Nope, you suggested that there should be a system that makes mistakes impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Crazy\_Canuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crazy_canuck/32/5282_2.png) [@Crazy\_Canuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazy_Canuck)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/247 "2017-08-10T21:19:06Z")
So Steophan, are you going to comment on the real phenomenon of flash blindness I brought up, or are you just planning on ignoring that as it doesn’t fit your pre-determined narrative? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/248 "2017-08-10T21:41:26Z")
> [@Crazy\_Canuck](#): > > So Steophan, are you going to comment on the real phenomenon of flash blindness I brought up, or are you just planning on ignoring that as it doesn’t fit your pre-determined narrative? My comment on it is that it’s not an excuse to shoot cops who are doing their jobs. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/249 "2017-08-10T21:41:30Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nope, you suggested that there should be a system that makes mistakes impossible. No I didn’t. I suggested a specific requirement – that cops check that warrants are for the right house and the right suspect. That shouldn’t take too long for the vast majority of cases. If you’re still concerned about those very rare cases in which they might need a warrant in a matter of minutes, then I’m fine with exceptions granted by judges only for those cases in which the warrant must be executed within an extremely short period of time. Isn’t this a reasonable requirement? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/250 "2017-08-10T21:54:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Isn’t this a reasonable requirement? No. The cops who perform the raid may well not be the same ones involved in the investigation, and it’s not their job to get involved in it. Anyway, there are several cops involved in a raid. Who should check it? Just whoever’s in charge? All of them? In a group or separately? Who checks that they’ve actually checked? Do you expect a whole SWAT team to go re-question an informant who’s told a detective that someone is in a particular house, despite not being formally registered anywhere as living there? That would not be the work of a few minutes, it could potentially be days. It’s clear you are not actually thinking this through, you have decided on a set outcome and are determined to find a way to reach it no matter the consequences. The only way to guarantee no innocent people are killed by the police is to disband the police. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/251 "2017-08-10T22:05:13Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > I don’t think anyone has suggested that the police should be doing those things. No-one is disagreeing that the police should follow proper procedures on raids. > > Where there is, incredibly, disagreement is on whether people should shoot cops who are doing their jobs. You continue to say yes, they should, which is indefensible. You’re not even prepared to say that they shouldn’t, but mistakes happen - you have outright said it’s fine to shoot cops because their uniforms are so hard to recognise. > > You don’t know that you’re not wanted. > > If they magically teleport into your bedroom, that might happen. But you’ve heard them smashing the door, climbing the stairs, searching the rest of your house, and so on. > > Correct. Can you cite me a case where the police have shot someone in their bed, who was asleep until they entered the room, threw a grenade _at_ a baby, stabbed a dog who wasn’t threatening them, or ate a kitten? The last is probably the most likely scenario… > > As you well know, that’s not true. Firstly, it’s not stupidity. Secondly, damages are routinely paid - in the case where the baby was accidentally hit by a flash-bang the family received millions of dollars. And again, in that case, the person (correctly) blamed was the deputy who got the warrant issued. > > 1. That would be a reasonable and proportional response. 1. I never said shoot the cops. 2. I should know if I am wanted, since I have not done any crimes. I don’t rob, steal, smoke pot, jaywalk, anything. 3. There are documented cases where “they” did say there would be no reparations… UNTIL the FEDS got involved. Basically you are either ignoring what has already happened and been cited, or you are a liar and a troll. I vote for all the above. > **[No indictments for Georgia SWAT team that burned baby with stun grenade | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/07/us/georgia-toddler-stun-grenade-no-indictment/)** > > Feds to review case of a Georgia SWAT team that threw a flash-bang grenade into a playpen after a grand jury did not return an indictment, prosecutor says. > [@](#): > > A **federal** prosecutor will review the case of a Georgia SWAT team that **threw a flash-bang grenade into a playpen** , according to a Tuesday statement. > > The news comes a day after a state grand jury declined to return an indictment. … > “ **Federal authorities** have been participating in the investigation of this terrible incident, and now that a state grand jury has **declined to return an indictment** , we will review the matter for possible **federal charges** ,” said U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia Sally Quillian Yates. > **[Ex-Georgia deputy sheriff indicted in flash-bang raid that maimed toddler | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/us/georgia-indictment-flash-bang-case/index.html)** > > An ex-deputy sheriff’s lies to a Habersham County, Georgia, judge set in motion events that led to a boy’s critical injury, a federal indictment says. > [@](#): > > A former Habersham County, Georgia, **deputy sheriff’s false statements to a judge** last year set in motion a chain of events that led to the critical injury of a toddler, according to a **federal** indictment filed Wednesday in district court. > > In May 2014, Nikki Autry and a team of special agents and informants from the local Narcotics Criminal Investigation and Suppression Team were “attempting undercover narcotics buys.” Autry presented an affidavit to a magistrate judge **falsely swearing** that a “true and reliable informant” had bought a small amount of methamphetamine at a residence. … > The federal indictment concludes the raid **should not have happened**. > > “Without her false statements, there was no probable cause to search the premises for drugs or to make the arrests,” acting U.S. Attorney John Horn said in a release. …According to the indictment, Autry is charged with four counts of civil rights violations for “ **willfully depriving the occupants of the residence of their right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures**.” > > Autry is also charged with depriving the man suspected of selling drugs, Wanis Thonetheva, of “his right to be free from arrest without **probable cause**.” … > In October, a state grand jury called the drug investigation “hurried” and “sloppy,” but found no criminal intent by any of the officers involved and declined to return any indictments. Autry resigned after the grand jury findings were released. Following the raid, the child was rushed to the Grady Memorial Hospital where he was put into a medically induced coma. In the wake of the incident, \*\*Habersham County attorneys said that “the board of commissioners concluded that it would be in violation of the law” to pay for Bou Bou’s medical bills. \*\* The parents of a baby injured by a flash-bang grenade during a no-knock multi-agency task force raid in Georgia, will be awarded $3.6 million after a **federal judge** ’s decision. So, here is a summary. The cops fucked up, terrorized the wrong people, maimed a baby, and the refused to pay. The FEDS got involved, filed FEDERAL charges, and a FEDERAL judge found in favor of the family, after the CITY had told them to fuck off. But according to the FEDS, the police do NOT have unlimited rights to bust into houses as you seem to think, and if they fuck up (or when they fuck up) they will have to answer for it. However, the fact that it took federal intervention says the system did NOT work, and the local yokels had no interest in getting the system to work. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/252 "2017-08-10T22:16:34Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Wrong. Oh, so you don’t need to be 100% sure that they are not cops? I am surprised. How sure do yo need to be then, 90%, 75%, better than 50%? If that is your standard, that you need to be reasonable sure that they aren’t cops before you defend your home, then I’m in agreement. > [@](#): > > The first statement is wrong, and the second statement doesn’t follow from that anyway. Well, yeah, I didn’t realize at the time that you only needed to be reasonably certain, not 100% certain that it was not the cops before you defended yourself. > [@](#): > > Not fro merely holding a gun, no. Once again, a false premise, _and_ a conclusion that doesn’t follow from it. So, you are saying that cops have never shot anyone for holding a gun? (In their own home, during a no-knock warrant on an innocent civilian) > [@](#): > > Wrong again, I want what is safest for everyone - which is to not shoot cops who are doing their jobs. Assuming that you are saying that you only need to be reasonably sure that they are not cops, then I would agree. If you have a good reason to believe they are cops, you shouldn’t shoot them. But, if you have no reason to believe that you would be subject to a no-knock warrant, then you are about 80% sure it’s not the cops the moment your door breaks in. > [@](#): > > No, I don’t, which is why I want an effective, respected police force to protect them. Sadly most people in this thread are trying to fight against that, and defend the idea of shooting police that you believe, without any actual evidence, don’t have a valid warrant. If you want a respected police force, then they should start acting respectable. If you want a respectable police force, then you should hold them to account, rather than make excuses for them left and right. If you want them to be respectable, then you would be against them impersonating home invaders. And you also lie when you say you want effective, you don’t even want them to have to double check the name and address of a no-knock warrant they are about to serve. No, what you want is for us to respect the police as much as you do, to lick and scrape and toady about with a “Oh, I’m so sorry that I made you shoot me for following your instructions” as the only response appropriate. To see them as paragons of virtue, that can do no wrong. And if they do wong, it is the victim’s fault. You’re an authoritarian who likes having police oppression because you believe that you will always be in the group that is not being oppressed. Not only is that disgusting, it is also incorrect, because oppressors never get tired of oppressing more people, and their most ardent supporters are usually some of the earliest and easiest to turn on. Just admit that you want to see a police state that oppresses the groups that you don’t like, and this will actually be much easier. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/253 "2017-08-10T22:19:46Z")
And as far as shooting people in their beds… > **[Man mistakenly shot by police: 'Sometimes they make mistakes'](https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/16-gunshots-55-million-settlement-for-puyallup-man/)** > > A Puyallup man who won a $5.5 million settlement after he was shot 16 times in his bed by officers serving an arrest warrant on another person says he bears no ill will to police in general or the officers... > [@](#): > > Man mistakenly shot by police: ‘Sometimes they make mistakes’… > A Puyallup man who won a $5.5 million settlement after **he was shot 16 times in his bed by officers serving an arrest warrant on another person** … > In Theoharis’ case, the mistake was made by a King County sheriff’s deputy and state Department of Corrections officer who said they believed he was reaching for a gun after he was awakened. They riddled his body with bullets, only to learn later that Theoharis was not armed… > The officers had already taken Harrison’s son into custody and were interviewing other people in the house when Thompson and Rongen entered Theoharis’ room. > > “ **I woke up and there were two guys standing at the door,” Theoharis recalled. “They asked me for ID and I went to grab for it and that’s when I was shot.** ” > **[Police at wrong address shoot, kill unarmed man inside home, lawyer says](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lawyer-police-at-wrong-address-shoot-kill-unarmed-man-inside-his-home/)** > > Officials in Southaven, Mississippi say officers may have been at the wrong home when they killed Ismael Lopez, but say he pointed a gun -- his family disputes that > [@](#): > > Police at wrong address shoot, kill unarmed man inside home, lawyer says… > Police in northern Mississippi shot and killed a man inside his home Sunday while attempting to serve an arrest warrant intended for a person who lived **across the street** , a family lawyer said Wednesday. > > Ismael Lopez, 41, was sleeping at his home at 5881 Surrey Lane in Southaven just before midnight Sunday when officers with the Southaven Police Department responded to the neighborhood to arrest a suspect in a domestic violence incident. > … > The arrest warrant, obtained by CBS affiliate WREG-TV, names Samuel Pearman the target. Pearman lives at 5878 Surrey Lane, **across the street** from Lopez. … > Champion reportedly said a man pointed a gun at officers through the open door, and the officers repeatedly warned him to put the gun down before one of them opened fire. > > Wednesday, however, Lopez family attorney Murray Wells painted a starkly different picture of the events leading up to Lopez’s death. In an interview with CBS News’ Crimesider, Wells said Lopez’s wife was **in the bedroom** with Lopez and insists her husband did not have a gun when he walked towards the door. She says a handgun he normally kept in the bedroom was still there after he was shot. > > Wells said she never heard any verbal commands or instructions before the officer opened fire, and **two neighbors his office interviewed also said they didn’t hear any commands from police**. Wells said Lopez’s body fell “many feet” from the door, and the shots were **fired through the door while it was closed**. > > “They should have **never been on the property in the first place** ,” Wells said. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/254 "2017-08-10T22:26:57Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > And as far as shooting people in their beds… > > [http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/16-gunshots-55-million-settlement-for-puyallup-man/](http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/16-gunshots-55-million-settlement-for-puyallup-man/) > > [Police at wrong address shoot, kill unarmed man inside home, lawyer says - CBS News](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lawyer-police-at-wrong-address-shoot-kill-unarmed-man-inside-his-home/) Beds and doors, you should stay away from them if you don’t want to threaten the police. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/255 "2017-08-10T22:27:40Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It’s clear you are not actually thinking this through, you have decided on a set outcome and are determined to find a way to reach it no matter the consequences. The Smithsonian IMAX theater doesn’t have this much projection. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/256 "2017-08-10T22:32:38Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, I don’t, which is why I want an effective, respected police force to protect them. Behaving respectably is a prerequisite for receiving resepct. > [@](#): > > Sadly most people in this thread are trying to fight against that, and defend the idea of shooting police that you believe, without any actual evidence, don’t have a valid warrant. As has been repeatedly explained, an ordinary citizen has ironclad evidence (i.e. the fact that he knows perfectly well that he has no association whatsoever with the sort of crimes invoked to justify no-knock raid tactics) that the only people with a reason to forcibly invade his home are common criminals, not police. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/257 "2017-08-10T22:56:54Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No. The cops who perform the raid may well not be the same ones involved in the investigation, and it’s not their job to get involved in it. They care about doing it right. They don’t want to raid the wrong house. Why wouldn’t they want to just make a tiny effort to make sure to reduce the risk of hurting innocent people? “Not their job” is a ridiculous and bullshit concern. Of course raiding the right house is their job! > [@](#): > > Anyway, there are several cops involved in a raid. Who should check it? Just whoever’s in charge? All of them? In a group or separately? Who checks that they’ve actually checked? Do you expect a whole SWAT team to go re-question an informant who’s told a detective that someone is in a particular house, despite not being formally registered anywhere as living there? Reasonable questions! Who should check? Why don’t we actually talk about it. This is a good question. How about the supervising officer and the 2nd most senior one involved? Two checks, independent of each other. As to how they check, no, they don’t have to go re-question an informant. But they should check the files of the case, and the names on public records, and make sure that the name of the suspect in the case files matches the name of the resident in public records, and similar correlations. But sure, that’s a good question. Good questions like this are how good policy can be made. > [@](#): > > It’s clear you are not actually thinking this through, you have decided on a set outcome and are determined to find a way to reach it no matter the consequences. The only way to guarantee no innocent people are killed by the police is to disband the police. You asked some good questions and I offered some possible answers. That’s how we “think this through” – and it’s even more clear to me that some sort of policy like this could be appropriate and implemented and reduce the risk to innocent people without reducing the capability of the police to do their job. By all means, ask more good questions – discussion like this is how risks and dangers are minimized. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/258 "2017-08-10T23:02:20Z")
I have a sea story about “not my job”: during that same collision I’ve reference before, there was an experienced officer in the position of Navigation Supervisor (Nav Sup). The Nav Sup is in charge of the nav team running the paper and electronic charts (maps) and ensuring our course is sticking to the track determined by the Captain. The Nav Sup was aware that there was something wrong with the way the Contact Coordination (CC) team (responsible for making sure the ship avoids collisions with other ships) was handling the approaching freighter, but didn’t speak up because it “wasn’t his job”. That didn’t fly with the investigators, and he received a very significant reprimand on his permanent record that probably kept him from ever commanding a submarine. It was definitely his job – it’s the job of everyone on watch to do everything they can to keep the submarine safe. Similarly, it is, or should be, the job of every cop involved to make sure they’re raiding the right house, and putting the “right” people at serious risk of harm. ---
**Author:** ![Crazy\_Canuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crazy_canuck/32/5282_2.png) [@Crazy\_Canuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazy_Canuck)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/259 "2017-08-10T23:02:23Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > My comment on it is that it’s not an excuse to shoot cops who are doing their jobs. So if a person is physiologically unable to see, how are they are supposed to know that the person is a cop? Magic? The whole point of no-knock warrants is that the police don’t announce themselves. Also, I should point out that depending on your jurisdiction, people have been found not guilty of killing police officers who entered unannounced during a no-knock warrant. Google Henry McGee for an example. So in some cases it seems the courts have found **it is** a valid excuse to shoot cops who are doing their jobs. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2017, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876/260 "2017-08-10T23:15:06Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > As has been repeatedly explained, an ordinary citizen has ironclad evidence (i.e. the fact that he knows perfectly well that he has no association whatsoever with the sort of crimes invoked to justify no-knock raid tactics) that the only people with a reason to forcibly invade his home are common criminals, not police. Of course they don’t. There have been many cases where parents don’t know their kids is a drug dealer, or spouses don’t know their partner is a fraudster or child pornography user. The only way you could be correct is if you live alone, no one else has ever lived in your house, and no one could have lied when giving your name or address to the police. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-cops-and-their-unions-dont-care-about-the-public/792876.md?page=14)