SWAT invades innocent man's home - Burns it down with a flashbang - Father killed

[88GT]

The possible tweaking of (ir)relevant facts doesn't change the reality that a man is dead because law enforcement has assumed new powers of force it once rightly eschewed.

Perhaps I wear my tinfoil too tightly or just a little bit too much of it, but claims of meth in the system after the fact by a coroner paid by the same system that created this boondoggle isn't exactly going to wipe the slate clean. And we don't know that they were actually planning to arrest him on those two outstanding warrants. They only said that....after the fact. I would very much like to know how long those two arrest warrants had been floating around. Anything over a week and their case gets weaker in my mind.

This man's life was taken without due process and without sufficient exigent circumstances to excuse it. All other details are moot and irrelevant.

 

[jsharmon7]

Personal attacks, and ignoring the point of the thread again.

He was high? Really?? OMG! In that case its okay to use troops against citizens.

Well what IS the point of the thread? The title makes me think it's about an innocent father being killed by the police. The innocent man part has been debunked, now it's about the police dressing like the military? I've read through this and really I don't know at this point what you're upset about. He was holed up in a house, hiding from the cops, screwed up on meth, and refusing to cooperate with an investigation into his connection with a shooting. The cops tried for hours to get him to come out peacefully. When that didn't work they tried a distraction device that apparently caught something on fire. It's tragic that a man was killed and that the flashbang apparently didn't work as designed. I'm also unclear as to why the man didn't come out of the fire, and why nobody tried to go in to help him. Is that what you're so angry about? If so, I agree. If you're upset that the cops dress like the military, well who cares how they dress?

 

[esrice]

You lied and I called you a liar.

Let's get back to civil discussion and leave the personal disrespect out of it.

Everyone can consider this their official warning. Continuing the disrespect will result in temp bans for the offenders.

 

[E5RANGER375]

im out, just in case

 

[public servant]

im out, just in case

Come on...take one for the team.

 

[hornadylnl]

The possible tweaking of (ir)relevant facts doesn't change the reality that a man is dead because law enforcement has assumed new powers of force it once rightly eschewed.

Perhaps I wear my tinfoil too tightly or just a little bit too much of it, but claims of meth in the system after the fact by a coroner paid by the same system that created this boondoggle isn't exactly going to wipe the slate clean. And we don't know that they were actually planning to arrest him on those two outstanding warrants. They only said that....after the fact. I would very much like to know how long those two arrest warrants had been floating around. Anything over a week and their case gets weaker in my mind.

This man's life was taken without due process and without sufficient exigent circumstances to excuse it. All other details are moot and irrelevant.

This 1000%.

Does anyone see the similarities of this case to Weaver? They all got what they had coming to them, I guess.

 

[88GT]

Well what IS the point of the thread? The title makes me think it's about an innocent father being killed by the police. The innocent man part has been debunked, now it's about the police dressing like the military? I've read through this and really I don't know at this point what you're upset about. He was holed up in a house, hiding from the cops, screwed up on meth, and refusing to cooperate with an investigation into his connection with a shooting. The cops tried for hours to get him to come out peacefully. When that didn't work they tried a distraction device that apparently caught something on fire. It's tragic that a man was killed and that the flashbang apparently didn't work as designed. I'm also unclear as to why the man didn't come out of the fire, and why nobody tried to go in to help him. Is that what you're so angry about? If so, I agree. If you're upset that the cops dress like the military, well who cares how they dress?

Has it? Does his guilt for unrelated crimes justify the action taken against him simply for being the associate of a murder suspect?

 

[Benny]

Let's get back to civil discussion and leave the personal disrespect out of it.

Everyone can consider this their official warning. Continuing the disrespect will result in temp bans for the offenders.

OK, I don't want to make a big stink out of this, but I need some clarification...

Was the disrespect the actual act of calling him a liar or does it extend to me point out his lies?

If I can't point out the lies, then I guess there's really nothing left to discuss because I completely agree with him that an innocent father of 4 was brutally murdered while taking a nap and something drastic needs to be done.

But if I'm allowed to point out the fact that he was wanted for warrants and questioning about a stabbing(or was it a shooting?), he was high and he was hiding in his home and refused to come out after a lengthy stand-off...Well, there's not a whole lot to discuss on that end either. He should have come out.

What if someone is at work and doesn't trust clicking on random links and has to rely on his commentary for the story?

 

[rambone]

Well what IS the point of the thread?

The point is that we are seeing the rise of an authoritarian police state right under our noses, and people are in hopeless denial about it.

First the state tells you what you aren't allowed to possess or put in your own body.

Then they issue arrest warrants for these nonviolent "criminals" and waste hundreds of billions of tax-dollars fighting a war on citizens.

Then they roll out paramilitary soldiers in APVs and burn down a residence using their little toys that they buy with our money.

Its not just that they are dressing like soldiers... they are equipped like soldiers and they are treating us like the enemy. This is not good law enforcement. This is the road to the United Soviet States of America.

 

[jsharmon7]

Has it? Does his guilt for unrelated crimes justify the action taken against him simply for being the associate of a murder suspect?

Well let me ask you this. Do you think this man was intentionally killed? Do you think the police knew the flashbang was going to kill him and they intentionally did it?

 

[coltaceguy]

Well..I'll put my money where my mouth is

I've got $100 to the family for a lawyer who will go after every cop associated with this event. This "we were just doing our job" **** stops now.

You do harm to me and mine, I make it my life goal to make your life HELL.

 

[jsharmon7]

The point is that we are seeing the rise of an authoritarian police state right under our noses, and people are in hopeless denial about it.

First the state tells you what you aren't allowed to possess or put in your own body.

Then they issue arrest warrants for these nonviolent "criminals" and waste hundreds of billions of tax-dollars fighting a war on citizens.

Then they roll out paramilitary soldiers in APVs and burn down a residence using their little toys that they buy with our money.

Its not just that they are dressing like soldiers... they are equipped like soldiers and they are treating us like the enemy. This is not good law enforcement. This is the road to the United Soviet States of America.

On your "First" point, that has nothing to do with this thread. He wasn't being investigated for drugs, nor did they kill him over drugs. The mention of the drugs has been noted to show maybe he wasn't in his right mind, and that he certainly wasn't a law-abiding citizen.

On the second point, the warrant was a search warrant to investigate his possible involvement in a shooting. Again, nothing to do with drugs.

On your third point, does it really matter what they wear? So if the officers involved in this had been wearing traditional uniforms and driven traditional police cars, would you have been bothered? And the flashbang has been used for a while now as a distraction device. I see no evidence here that the police used the device because they thought it would kill him and they intended to kill him. They had asked him nicely for hours to come out of the house and he refused, for whatever reason. Rather than storming the house and getting into a shootout, they must have felt that distracting and disorienting him with the flashbang was safer. In this case it didn't work out, and that's tragic. But, I see no intent to kill the man.

 

[jsharmon7]

I just wanted to pose this question:

If the police have reason to believe someone was involved in a crime, they obtain a search warrant as mandated in the Constitution, and the person then denies them access to serve the search warrant, what should the police then do? The police knock on the door and explain the situation and the person denies entry and slams the door in their face, what should be the next step?

Edit: I'd like to ask that people keep their suggestions serious. Please no "apparently burn their house down," or anything similar. I'd like to get some honest opinions on what you'd do if you were a law enforcement policy maker.

 

[phil]

I just wanted to pose this question:

If the police have reason to believe someone was involved in a crime, they obtain a search warrant as mandated in the Constitution, and the person then denies them access to serve the search warrant, what should the police then do? The police knock on the door and explain the situation and the person denies entry and slams the door in their face, what should be the next step?

Burn the house down...DUH!!!!!

Edit: I see what you did there.....sneaky editing!!!LOL

 

[Lex Concord]

Well let me ask you this. Do you think this man was intentionally killed? Do you think the police knew the flashbang was going to kill him and they intentionally did it?

Intent is not the point.

The paramilitary stance of the police force who were supposedly only interested in questioning this man is.

When you go commando, the risk of unintended negative outcomes rises (watch that zipper! - no, that's not what I meant by go commando ).

Once upon a time in America, police officers were often referred to as peace officers. While there may still be many for whom the moniker still fits, this gang isn't one of them.

 

[level.eleven]

Several states have banned/discontinued the use of incendiary devices in the execution of warrants. Come on American, leave the grenades on the battlefield.

These aren't "isolated incidents" either. If you follow the news you see this pop up with increasing frequency. The most recent incursion that pops into my head is the 7 year old girl burnt to death on her couch after her living room was deemed such a war zone that incendiary devices were necessary.

Detroit Girl, 7, Killed in SWAT Raid - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

 

[jsharmon7]

Intent is not the point.

The paramilitary stance of the police force who were supposedly only interested in questioning this man is.

When you go commando, the risk of unintended negative outcomes rises (watch that zipper! - no, that's not what I meant by go commando ).

Once upon a time in America, police officers were often referred to as peace officers. While there may still be many for whom the moniker still fits, this gang isn't one of them.

Intent does not lessen the tragedy. Intent does matter in this case in that the police didn't intentionally kill this man as some here are implying. It wasn't that he refused to cooperate so they decided to burn his house down and kill him. I posted the question above to try and get some input on how folks here think it should be handled. If you're a peace officer and you are trying to serve a legal search warrant, what do you do when they slam the door in your face and tell you no? People are getting awful caught up on the paramilitary aspect of this, but if they were in traditional vehicles and uniforms what would they have done differently? They must have honestly thought that the safest approach would be to distract and disorient with the flashbang. How would you have handled it?

 

[22lr]

Several states have banned/discontinued the use of incendiary devices in the execution of warrants. Come on American, leave the grenades on the battlefield.

Flashbangs save lives, and I don't care if 50 houses get burned to the ground. If we can save a single officers life then it was worth it.

Edit: I mean that a house is a material possession. An officers life is worth more than a pile of possessions. Civil rights are still king, but taking away a tool designed to protect the officer is not the answer in my opinion.

 

[phil]

Flashbangs save lives, and I don't care if 50 houses get burned to the ground. If we can save a single officers life then it was worth it.

Yeah...who cares about the 50 civilians that may lose there lives in the process. If it saves JUST ONE LEO, it's worth it!

 

[LPMan59]

Flashbangs save lives, and I don't care if 50 houses get burned to the ground. If we can save a single officers life then it was worth it.

this comment wont go over well.