Follow their commands, let them hurt your daughter with a flash grenade, and spend the rest of your life getting restitution for the physical and mental scars. :eek:
They got over $3.5 million after a lot less than the rest of their lives. That seems like a reasonable amount, should pay for the child’s medical care and give them a good start in life.
As another example, Maricopa County, where Joe Arpaio was sherrif for so long, has paid out tens of millions in compensation for their illegal actions. It happens regularly, when there’s actual wrongdoing by the police.
I’d still take not having my son injured and disfigured permanently. $1,000,000 will go to medical bills, a portion will go to lawyers, the kid won’t wind up with much. The deputy who lied and screwed things up did no jail time and resigned.
I guess this logic is pretty hard to beat.
But more and more, it’s true.
Tell you what, me ol’ troll, get one of your friends (if you have any) to participate in a little experiment. Select a random shirt and put it on under a hoodie out of sight of your friend. Both of you go in a darkened room. With the lights off, remove the hoodie. Now shine a high intensity flashlight in your friend’s eyes and ask hir to describe the shirt.
As for cops liking going on the raids, you should be troubled by that. Police work isn’t an extreme sport. Getting all excited and adrenalined up leads to bad decision making. Bad decisions can lead to people getting killed…including your precious cops.
That little experiment would tell you almost nothing about how easy it is to recognise a full uniform, when someone’s come into your house, up the stairs, and into your room, breaking through doors and windows to do so.
Ah, another post where someone refuses to acknowledge that cops are human. Almost anyone would be excited and/or scared in that situation, and have high adrenaline.
That doesn’t give them an excuse for making mistakes, it means that procedures need to be robust enough to be accurately followed by people with high adrenaline.
Also, “hir”? Fuck off.
And thinking about this, yes, that’s actually true. It’s part of the social contract. You accept the tiny risk of being mistakenly shot by the police in exchange for living in a much safer place than you would without them. Mistakes, accidents, and so on will happen, both in policing and in many other situations, and people will die.
Which doesn’t mean that risk shouldn’t be reduced further where possible. But we must accept that nothing and nobody is perfect, no system can prevent all errors, and yes, some people are bastards who will deliberately break the rules, and nothing we can do can entirely prevent this. Indeed, if we could, there’s be no need for police in the first place…
I’m willing to start using the forbidden T-word at this point.
Risk is reduced when innocent homeowners with no expectation of a no-knock raid are legally allowed to defend themselves against home invaders. It makes idiot cops think twice if there are consequences to their idiot actions (I’m not labeling all cops idiots; I’m talking about the ones who are idiots).
The whole point of a no-knock raid is that it’s unexpected. If you think they should be banned, say so and move on, as that’s a different discussion.
If you accept that they are a valid policing tool, it’s absolutely ridiculous to say that the cops performing the raids should be treated as home invaders - even if the warrant has the wrong address on it, something that is ultimately the fault of the judge who issued it, not any of the cops performing the raid.
Risk would be reduced if the homeowners (or renters, ownership shouldn’t matter) did as the cops told them, gave them no reason to believe they were threatened, and sorted it out in court later.
I truly don’t understand the objection to the idea that one shouldn’t shoot cops who are doing their jobs. Do you truly not understand that your life is made almost immeasurably better by the existence of a police force?
Life is made immeasurably better by the existence of the garbageman. If he stops showing up, things get ugly almost immediately for everyone.
Cops? I can’t remember the last time I was happy to see one.
I don’t remember crooked garbagemen framing anyone. I don’t remember bad garbagemen building up documented histories of excessive force or shooting the wrong person.
Our problem is NOT with The Police.
Our problem is with the bad ones who get away with serious shit, and get away with it repeatedly. And the “good ones” who go along with that.
Our TROLLS (yes I said it) won’t accept that we should have a problem with that. The answer is always some “just submit and obey” bullshit.
And when the FBI has to get involved, that means your precious system did NOT fucking work. Because if it had, they would not have to get involved.
But no, there are no bad cops and the system works, there are only people who live in the wrong house, or who made the mistake of calling the cops, or SOMETHING.
No, there are bad cops. And they get investigated, fired, and sometimes convicted. And then, as this thread is supposed to be discussing, their unions get them their jobs back. If there’s a true bad guy organisation, it’s the union.
I notice you mention submit and obey, but ignore the bit about challenging it in court later. People are getting millions of dollars by doing that, and rightly so.
You’re lying about people not having a problem with the police in general, the very post you quote has someone saying exactly that. Either they’re a hardcore criminal, or they just hate the police.
There is obviously room for improvement. But that shouldn’t stop you be very fucking thankful you live now and not centuries ago when access to anything resembling justice depended on the whims of some local baron or warlord.
I don’t object to the idea that you shouldn’t shoot cops who are doing their jobs. I merely posit that it’s defensible to shoot cops that negligently put themselves into a position where it’s reasonable to doubt that they are, in fact, cops. If, during a perceived home invasion in a no-knock raid to a wrong address, a cop should happen to be shot, then the negligence falls upon the people who screwed up the warrant, and not the innocent homeowner.
Note: Given the described scenario (intrusion superficially indistinguishable from home invasion), the relevant definition of “you can tell whether or not they’re wearing a police uniform” is “you can distinguish an actual police uniform from a costume-shop police-type outfit”.
After being woken up abruptly in the middle of the night, and they are shining lights towards you.
How having a light shining in your eyes makes it easier to identify the holder of the light, I will leave to steophan to explain, as that seems to be his claim.
The double standard is entirely on your side. You expect homeowners to distinguish between home invaders (possibly wearing fake police colors) and actual police, while absolving police of any responsibility for distinguishing between drawing a weapon and (for example) reaching for one’s wallet after clearly stating that you are doing so.
Please try to keep up with the class:
(Again, is there a way to get blink tags to work here? I emphasized the relevant words all the ways I could find, and yet I expect them to be “overlooked” again.)
Nope. If the doctor saws off your right leg to get rid of the cancer in your left leg, he didn’t do his job. Same for cops.
This is more like a doctor sawing off my right leg in order to get rid of the cancer in your left leg.
And I wasn’t even a patient, I was just sleeping in my bed at home when they wheeled me out and to the operating theater.