Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by wright35633:

Capt., analytically speaking, based on news of increasing drug activity and the documented increase in street violence, would you agree that the increase in no knock warrants may bee a result of the times? No just the need of jack booted thugs to violate rights? With that said, a no knock warrant should, by policy and law, require extensive  research, surveillance, and reliability. And the primary purpose should be for the safety of the officers and not the prevention of the destruction of evidence.

 

Personally, I think the no knock warrant, in many cases, is easier for the department to execute, so they use it whenever they can find a way to justify it.  I agree that it should be used for LEO protection only when there is no other way to execute the warrant safely.  I don't think its the proliferation of drugs as much as it is the want by the government to eradicate drugs through their so called 'war on drugs.'  When you declare a 'war on drugs,' I guess you give the impression that wartime tactics are a fact of life. 

 

One solution might be to require departments to get the judge to sign off on the no knock raid when the warrant is applied for, so the department would have to justify the reasoning behind the use of the tactic. 

 

As for seized property, Im all for giving it to the departments.  I don't see how it can breed corruption, corrupt officers will 'skim' the seized property regardless.  Im all of anything to lower my tax burden and shift it to criminal enterprises 

 

 

===============================

Why do you think a "no knock" warrant is easier to execute?

If an investigator wants to execute a search warrant after dark than he must explain to the judge why and the judge must stipulate this in the warrant IF he grants the request.

Originally Posted by smokey1:

Why do you think a "no knock" warrant is easier to execute?

If an investigator wants to execute a search warrant after dark than he must explain to the judge why and the judge must stipulate this in the warrant IF he grants the request.

Because a no knock warrant gives the officers the element of surprise, making it easier to execute the warrant over having to announce their arrival.  Problem is, they (no knock warrants) don't give the innocent the time to answer the door and allow them in peacefully either.

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by smokey1:

Why do you think a "no knock" warrant is easier to execute?

If an investigator wants to execute a search warrant after dark than he must explain to the judge why and the judge must stipulate this in the warrant IF he grants the request.

Because a no knock warrant gives the officers the element of surprise, making it easier to execute the warrant over having to announce their arrival.  Problem is, they (no knock warrants) don't give the innocent the time to answer the door and allow them in peacefully either.

=====================

No knock warrants are not easier to execute. They are more difficult and dangerous than a day time warrant. 

Originally Posted by smokey1:

No knock warrants are not easier to execute. They are more difficult and dangerous than a day time warrant. 

I don't see any reference to the time of day in the legal definition of a 'no knock warrant.'

 

No Knock Warrant - A no-knock warrant is a warrant issued by a judge which allows law enforcement to enter a premises without knocking or identifying themselves as police first.  It is a warrant authorizing officers to enter certain premises to execute a warrant without first knocking or otherwise announcing their presence where circumstances (such as a known risk of serious harm to the officers or the likelihood that evidence of crime will be destroyed) justify such an entry.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/n/no-knock-warrant/

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/no-knock_warrant

Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by smokey1:

No knock warrants are not easier to execute. They are more difficult and dangerous than a day time warrant. 

I don't see any reference to the time of day in the legal definition of a 'no knock warrant.'

 

No Knock Warrant - A no-knock warrant is a warrant issued by a judge which allows law enforcement to enter a premises without knocking or identifying themselves as police first.  It is a warrant authorizing officers to enter certain premises to execute a warrant without first knocking or otherwise announcing their presence where circumstances (such as a known risk of serious harm to the officers or the likelihood that evidence of crime will be destroyed) justify such an entry.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/n/no-knock-warrant/

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/no-knock_warrant

What he means, if I read it correctly, is that a judge must approve the No Knock Warrant, just as he or she does a nighttime search warrant. Granted, if the officers get there and determine knocking would create substantial risk, they may proceed without knocking and announcing from what I understand. The inherent danger involved in both no knock and night time warrants are usually synonymous.

Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

Unless, there is imminent danger to people, night time no knock search warrants should not be issued. Too much danger to everyone involved. 

Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

===========

And yet, they have gone from 3000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005.
Although it would seem that the people who were wrongly killed are just considered to be an occupational necessity , IMHO, one single innocent person killed in one of these "no knock raids" is an atrocity in what is supposed to be a country where a person is supposed to be safe inside their own home. How has our country come to this point ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant

 

Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by smokey1:

No knock warrants are not easier to execute. They are more difficult and dangerous than a day time warrant. 

I don't see any reference to the time of day in the legal definition of a 'no knock warrant.'

 

No Knock Warrant - A no-knock warrant is a warrant issued by a judge which allows law enforcement to enter a premises without knocking or identifying themselves as police first.  It is a warrant authorizing officers to enter certain premises to execute a warrant without first knocking or otherwise announcing their presence where circumstances (such as a known risk of serious harm to the officers or the likelihood that evidence of crime will be destroyed) justify such an entry.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/n/no-knock-warrant/

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/no-knock_warrant

=======================

The stories cited in the original post describe them as occuring at night.

Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

===========

And yet, they have gone from 3000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005.
Although it would seem that the people who were wrongly killed are just considered to be an occupational necessity , IMHO, one single innocent person killed in one of these "no knock raids" is an atrocity in what is supposed to be a country where a person is supposed to be safe inside their own home. How has our country come to this point ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant

 

There you go again supposing. No one wants to "wrongly kill" someone. It is not a necessity. Your bias really intervenes in your rational thought process. What I meant was that wrong addresses are far less frequent than successful no knock warrants. Officers typically take every measure to prevent such an incident from happening.

Originally Posted by seeweed:

A lot of city police cars in several places I have seen lately have a sign on the back that I believe tells the entire tale of all these raids.
"This Car paid for by Dug Money": (or something very similar)

When it became legal for police departments to utilize the assets gained by drug raids etc, we started hearing about this. Drug seized assets, ie: houses, cars , cash etc, should NOT be avaliable to local police departments. That breads greed and greed breads corruption.

___

I saw one of those signs this past Sunday in the Atlanta area, seeweed.  The exact words were, "This car paid for by your local drug dealer."

 

This incentive for law enforcement agencies to seize cash and property is undoubtedly responsible for some of the gone-bad  no-knock raids and other excesses we read about all too often.  There are, however, situations in which it is legitimate to  use such tactics.  Unfortunately, in too many cases, those deciding how to proceed err on the side of excess force and incomplete information.

Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

===========

And yet, they have gone from 3000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005.
Although it would seem that the people who were wrongly killed are just considered to be an occupational necessity , IMHO, one single innocent person killed in one of these "no knock raids" is an atrocity in what is supposed to be a country where a person is supposed to be safe inside their own home. How has our country come to this point ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant

 

There you go again supposing. No one wants to "wrongly kill" someone. It is not a necessity. Your bias really intervenes in your rational thought process. What I meant was that wrong addresses are far less frequent than successful no knock warrants. Officers typically take every measure to prevent such an incident from happening.

========

Well, I do agree on that , but still, like I said, one innocent person who is killed by a mistake whether it be a bad address, or whatever is too much.
While I harbor no love for drug dealers, I do have a great love of our Constitution , and I believe breaking into someone's house and shooting them in their bed is just Constitutionally wrong. Scum that they may be, they are entitled by the Constitution to a fair trial .
Just like police high speed chases in the case that they know who they are chasing, I believe innocent people are put in harm's way unnecessarily . There are times where those things may be necessary, but I tend to think it is far less than it is practiced.

(BTW, I don't always blame the individual cop - I think a lot of this is institutional and the cop is just following orders, with the exception of the jerk we saw the video of at that DWI stop - that was just a jerk being a jerk)

Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

===========

And yet, they have gone from 3000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005.
Although it would seem that the people who were wrongly killed are just considered to be an occupational necessity , IMHO, one single innocent person killed in one of these "no knock raids" is an atrocity in what is supposed to be a country where a person is supposed to be safe inside their own home. How has our country come to this point ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant

 

There you go again supposing. No one wants to "wrongly kill" someone. It is not a necessity. Your bias really intervenes in your rational thought process. What I meant was that wrong addresses are far less frequent than successful no knock warrants. Officers typically take every measure to prevent such an incident from happening.

========

Well, I do agree on that , but still, like I said, one innocent person who is killed by a mistake whether it be a bad address, or whatever is too much.
While I harbor no love for drug dealers, I do have a great love of our Constitution , and I believe breaking into someone's house and shooting them in their bed is just Constitutionally wrong. Scum that they may be, they are entitled by the Constitution to a fair trial .
Just like police high speed chases in the case that they know who they are chasing, I believe innocent people are put in harm's way unnecessarily . There are times where those things may be necessary, but I tend to think it is far less than it is practiced.

(BTW, I don't always blame the individual cop - I think a lot of this is institutional and the cop is just following orders, with the exception of the jerk we saw the video of at that DWI stop - that was just a jerk being a jerk)

===============

 

How is a search warrant signed by a judge unconstitutional? And the police don't execute search warrants just to shoot someone in their bed.

Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

 

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

 

I dont see how they could convict you if they made the mistake on which house they were raiding.

 

 On the subject of having a gun for personal protection - what do you think has a better chance of happening - a raid on your house by mistake or a criminal breaking into your home? Id say, in the bigger scheme of things, the chances of a criminal breaking in are much higher.  

 

Not owning a gun for fear of an accidental police raid is about like not owning a gun for fear that it might not fire when you shoot it (there is probably a better chance of that happening......)

 

No knock tactics vs. "military" operations.

 

Military Operations Urban Terrain [MOUT] tactics differs significantly in several ways from no-knock entry tactics.

 

Consider

 

In MOUT, methods of breaching may use kinds of force with little regard to human life on the other side.  Shoulder fired missiles for instance.

 

No knock has the ability to use shaped charges but use a battering ram when they aren’t actually kicking the door.  I can imagine what some folks would say if LE actually blew down a door.  OMG!

 

Following breaching, the MOUT team may deploy a fragmentation grenade or a flash/bang at a minimum into any space if they so much as "suspect" a hostile within.

 

No knock teams use flash bangs as a distraction at a maximum only in targeted areas.

 

MOUT breaching teams may not be as concerned with target identification as with target acquisition.

 

No knock emphasizes target identification.

 

Utilizing enhanced NVGs, MOUT nighttime entries are preferred over daytime usually around 0200 local.  OBL for example.

 

No knocks that use daytime are likely to lose the element of surprise.

 

MOUT rarely knows the floorplan of the structure they are clearing.

 

No knocks may not know the specifics, but there is usually a working knowledge of a floor plan.

 

It’s usually shoot first in MOUT.  Very little "negotiation" takes place.  Occasionally you might hear a MOUT team member holler "DROP THE WEAPON!" in whatever dialect, but this usually draws unnecessary and unwanted attention from other sectors.

 

No knock make entry encouraging dialog by first verbally announcing their presence and giving verbal orders to the occupants.  They talk first.

 

No knock are bound by the US Constitution.

 

MOUT is bound by the Geneva Convention Rules of War.

 

One more thing.  When our Reserve and Guard SWAT guys headed off to get their MOUT training prior to deployment, it was clear to us the military was heavily dependent on our training and adopted tactics from their civilian counterparts ... probably none more so than LAPD SWAT because up till we started kicking doors in Iraq, no one had better training in forced entry than US law enforcement.  Better AND safer, I might add.

 

No google links to give you.  Just personal observations FWIW.

Originally Posted by smokey1:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by seeweed:

James T is all about everybody having a gun for personal protection,  consider this:

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house 

you get your gun and shoot them., Alabama law states you can do that.

the intruder is shot , maybe killed and you are a hero to your family and the community at large.

OR

you wake up in the middle of the night and people are coming into your house

you get your gun and shoot them , Alabama law states you can do that,

The intruder is a cop - or group of cops misdirected to your address. you kill one or two.

If you live after being shot in your bed , you will be put on trial for killing a cop, convicted and sent to prison for life if you are lucky, given the needle if not.

 

The question I pose, is how, in the middle of the night when you are sound asleep, and someone is coming into your house are you suppose to make that judgement call ?

Something here seems to be missing.

 

Keep in mind that not all are mistaken addresses. In fact, that happens a small percentage of the time. There are real situations where knocking before making entry would result in the loss of life for police. It isn't a good situation either way. Would you be surprised that most police officers do not want that to happen and take measures to prevent it?

===========

And yet, they have gone from 3000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005.
Although it would seem that the people who were wrongly killed are just considered to be an occupational necessity , IMHO, one single innocent person killed in one of these "no knock raids" is an atrocity in what is supposed to be a country where a person is supposed to be safe inside their own home. How has our country come to this point ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant

 

There you go again supposing. No one wants to "wrongly kill" someone. It is not a necessity. Your bias really intervenes in your rational thought process. What I meant was that wrong addresses are far less frequent than successful no knock warrants. Officers typically take every measure to prevent such an incident from happening.

========

Well, I do agree on that , but still, like I said, one innocent person who is killed by a mistake whether it be a bad address, or whatever is too much.
While I harbor no love for drug dealers, I do have a great love of our Constitution , and I believe breaking into someone's house and shooting them in their bed is just Constitutionally wrong. Scum that they may be, they are entitled by the Constitution to a fair trial .
Just like police high speed chases in the case that they know who they are chasing, I believe innocent people are put in harm's way unnecessarily . There are times where those things may be necessary, but I tend to think it is far less than it is practiced.

(BTW, I don't always blame the individual cop - I think a lot of this is institutional and the cop is just following orders, with the exception of the jerk we saw the video of at that DWI stop - that was just a jerk being a jerk)

===============

 

How is a search warrant signed by a judge unconstitutional? And the police don't execute search warrants just to shoot someone in their bed.

=========

Not referring to search warrents, referring to the semingly increasing incidence of a police raid that just comes in and shoots people in their bed. 
Sorry, but I got a real problem with that being Constitutional.

 

Yes, i agree, there is a difference between the two.  The increased use of the no knock warrant is just another example of why many people feel that Law Enforcement in general are becoming less concerned with the rights of the citizen.  Dont get me wrong, im not referring to the officer on the street, but the policy and policy writers in the offices.

 

Another good example is my recent post about the TSA - why do we need the TSA at sporting events with their heavy handed random searches?

Add Reply

Post

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×