The right house is the one on the warrant, as far as the cops performing the raid are concerned. That the address is a legitimate one to be searched has already been confirmed by a judge.
They were hyperbolic, intentionally ridiculous questions, as all those things should already have been checked before the raid team even knows about the warrant. The warrant will have been signed off by a judge, making it legitimate.
I don’t want cops who should be out there stopping crime having to triple check things that have already been double checked, and neither do most reasonable people.
But you’ve said that we should try to minimize mistakes. Adding additional verifications is a proven method (in quality control for all sorts of industries and operations) of reducing mistakes.
How do you know they’ve been double-checked? Mistakes are already happening. Are you against the concept of ever adding additional checks to try and reduce mistakes, or just in this case?
Do you think it’s wrong that in the Navy we mandate double and even sometimes triple checking for every single operation (aside from the very rare casualties that require immediate action), whether it’s routine or not, that might put someone at risk?
We’ve had reasonable discussions before. What I’m offering really isn’t extreme, or drastic, and really is at the very least reasonable to consider. It doesn’t put anyone at risk. It could really reduce the chance of mistakes. Every time a court clerk or judge makes a mistake, if the cops double checked them, maybe some of the mistakes would be caught before someone got hurt. Why is that beyond the pale for you?
If you’re not willing to consider even reasonable, non-violent, non-extreme suggestions, then I don’t think you’re actually interested in a real exchange of ideas, which is a shame.
If cops are given a warrant to search 123 Fakename Street, it’s their job to search that address, not to start a new investigation into who lives there and what they might have done.
Just as if in your navy days you were ordered to sail to somewhere near North Korea, you made sure to check that you were doing so in the correct manner, you didn’t start debating with your superior officers whether they were a real threat or not.
They can check the name of the suspect to the name of the resident in public records.
No big deal. Isn’t this an entirely reasonable suggestion? It would take very little effort.
We’d make sure the order came through the proper channels. If they gave us the order to launch a missile at London, you can be damn sure we’d double check and make sure this was the intended order.
Well, I suppose we may as well just preemptively open fire on anyone in a police uniform, right? After all, they could be criminals just waiting to rob us, rape us, and kill us, and not necessarily in that order, and we’d better be safe than sorry, right?
We are seriously debating whether or not law enforcement should verify that they have the correct address before requesting and executing a non-knock warrant?
Don’t have any family, don’t have any friends, don’t associate with anyone. Also, don’t somehow ever allow anyone to LIE about it including LYING “INFORMANTS” OR THE COPS WHO MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS TO GET WARRANTS OR DON’T CHECK TO SEE IF THEY ARE CORRECT.
No, my response is that UNLESS you are in that situation, you can’t reasonably believe that it’s impossible for the police to have a warrant to search your house or arrest you.
Try reading for comprehension. What the FUCK is wrong with you that you think it’s reasonable for people to shoot cops if they don’t think they themselves are a criminal?