Okay, I think that Scumpup’s post revealed a bigoted attitude.
I am certainly being coy. Because insults aren’t allowed in Great Debates, and I have so little respect for the kind of post that says that "a few [police officers] getting killed here and there makes no difference that it isn’t worth an actual response. I do think your reading is much more broad and intelligent than the one whatshisname’s post, which clearly was much more about not being concerned about dead police officers than a comment about the costs of no-knock warrants.
That’s not at all how I interpreted Post #66. I would have probably framed the statement more along the lines of the cost of the raids, which would include dead officers, dead raid targets, dead innocents, dead folks in general, property damage, civil rights violations, trampling of the 4th amendment, lawsuits against police, loss of support of the populace, etc. These costs currently do not outweigh the perceived benefit of these raids by police on the ground and the leadership of each department. If the scale ever tips so that these costs are sufficiently high, the calculus will change.
I hope that decreasing public support and lawsuits would be sufficient among that list to achieve that change, but I’m not optimistic.
A few cops getting killed doesn’t matter to the decision makers as long as there is a ready supply of replacements who are willing to strap on the gear and carry out these raids. There is a ready supply, too. Lots of people want the gun, the badge, and the power that goes with them.
Until enough cops get killed carrying out these raids that they collectively, through their unions or otherwise, demand change, the raids will continue and people will continue to die in them. Cops are trigger men and targets both in this foolishness. Self-preservation, if not respect for the lives and safety of others, should have them demanding a halt. Alas, though, too many cops enjoy the adrenaline rush of serving such warrants. I personally have known several.
Why don’t those of you being coy or throwing around vague charges of bigotry man up and post what you have to say where you can say it, rather than hiding behind rules here?
Bone, Hamlet, Scumpup, and anyone else with an urge to get into it:
take the personal remarks to The BBQ Pit. Such comments do not move the discussion forward.
Knock it off.
[ /Moderating ]
I didn’t make any personal remarks.
It’s not even the procedure itself as its overuse. No Knock Warrants are highly risky, both for the police and the resident. It makes sense to use a NKW when the alternative is MORE risky, you’re tracking down Bonnie and Clyde, and don’t want a double shotgun blast through the door after you say “Open up, it’s the Police!”
Trying to arrest some guy peddling a little coke out of his apartment? If it’s not worth waiting outside his place to catch him when the apartment is empty, it’s not worth the risk of a No Knock Warrant.
I would say the only time a no-knock warrant would be justified is when no warrant is necessary for police to enter.
Do you know how many people a criminal would have to rob to get $30?!
One, I guess.
Being Marvin Guy, he should’ve asked “What’s going on?” before opening fire.
No doubt, he’s now asking “Can I Get a Witness?”
Maybe he thought his dad was breaking in.
I’ll take this to another level. Unless they have a solid reason to believe the suspect poses a direct threat to society that warrants such an entry then I don’t see the justification for it.
So that narrows it down to a kidnapping event, someone hanging out the window shooting people, or a weapon of mass destruction that could be detonated with advanced warning.
Or failing that, at least make it so that it is not as routine as vomiting out “officer believes that firearms are present on the premises” on the warrant application before issuing one.