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

[phil]

Do we want to live in a society where the cops never pursue?

I dont.

Now who's putting words in someone's mouth????

I never said not to persue, did I???

 

[88GT]

This is why I continue to mention the intent of the officers. The "force exhibited" was to gain control in order to serve a search warrant. The "force" of using a flashbang to disorient and distract an uncooperative subject barricaded in a house was not excessive. It's tragic that the device caused the fire and the man was killed and thereby denied due process of law, but the officers had no way of knowing or expecting that would be the outcome. I still would like to know why the man died in the fire rather than coming out or being rescued. The point is, the level of force intended to gain compliance was acceptable in my opinion, the outcome though was not.

And this is where we may never see eye to eye. I refuse to accept the premise that any and all actions are acceptable for the sole purpose of serving a warrant. Control of what? The man was essentially caught anyway. The house was presumably surrounded. His escape would have been nearly impossible. What was so damn important that they couldn't wait it out? That they had to have him RFN? They lost control the minute they resorted to that level of force/violence because they could no longer direct the course of action.

I don't know why he died. If he truly was under the influence of meth, perhaps he was simply unconscious and/or physically unable to escape. Perhaps he just refused to "be taken alive." Who knows? Doesn't seem pertinent, though it is a point of curiosity.

Would you be willing to answer my question though? What would you have done if you were in the officers' shoes trying to serve a valid search warrant and the man refused to cooperate?

Tear gas? Wait him out? I don't really know what options are available, so I can't fully answer the question.

But here's a point to consider: We don't go in guns blazing with hostages because the loss of their life is considered unacceptable collateral damage for the mere apprehension of a suspect. I think the loss of the life of the suspect, no matter how rotten he may be, should be considered equally unacceptable as a matter of law. His rights are still intact. Or should be. This and similar methods presume a disregard for his life and a disregard for his right to due process. "Eh, it's okay. He was a criminal anyway. Shouldn't have fought the law and he'd still be alive."

When we as a society accept the premise that rights are conditional and dependent on our adherence to the law, we open a big whole can of worms that I don't even want to contemplate.

 

[lashicoN]

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?

LOL yeah, police usually send you a letter, two phone calls, and an e-mail before they roll up to your house, announce themselves on a bullhorn as they calmly walk up to your door bell to give it a ring to serve you a search warrant and have you arrested.

I've seen so many videos on YouTube titled Fooled the cops by Staying Inside LOL They Can't Get In!!! You're lucky to get a knock these days before they bust down your down to toss in a flashbang for dinner.

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.

Completely honest question. Are you willing to offer your house that you paid/are probably still paying for up for the local PD to test out their grenades. The training could save lives. You willing to cover the cost of those 50 houses?

There is no reason to have a knee jerk reaction and ban a lifesaving technology. For those who dont believe me, get paintball gear and go clear a building. Hide a single bad guy in a random room and see how many guys he can take out before you get him. Now throw a flashbang before you breech, all of a sudden the point man actually has a good chance of going home to his family at the end of the day.

Unfortunately the home he was going to was burned down by the police. They accidentally flash banged the wrong house and killed his family. Mind control technology could probably save a ton of lives. How should we, as supposedly free people, react to that when it comes to the table?

 

[E5RANGER375]

search warrant and arrest warrants arent congressional declarations of war. potentially burning down a whole city block or potentially shooting innocent people directly or indirectly, or dying yourself, cannot seriously be acceptable to us as a society is it? follow the bad guy, go in if you have too, but not as a military force, or at least not for low level offenders, etc. yeah, i know what all you SWAT guys are thinking, "well he doesnt know all of the story, what we do is necessary" well its up for debate. I dont think a lot is necessary. sometimes maybe. its hard looking from the inside in. I've been there on stuff. better to step back and really think it over. I know not all SWAT teams are alike. I think we have a couple members here that are on SWAT and pretty laid back guys not looking to violate rights or harm anyone innocent, and thats the guys we need telling this younger generation to stand down and take a breath.
a lot of people are scared of the cops. (and everytime I see stories like this, im ****ing scared too!) especially lower income people exposed to more crime. you have to understand that the reason sometimes they dont come out it because they dont wanna get shot. maybe if only a couple cops had knocked on the door they would have. or if a couple cops showed up and arrested them at the store then it would go smooth. save lives and money too maybe.

i think sometimes SWAT instigates stuff. you throw a flashbang in my house accidently and even scratch my daughter and maybe I will become a criminal in a second too! i mean what is a person supposed to say? "oh thats ok that you blew my daughters ear drums out and burnt her even though it was the wrong house. you guys do an important job. take care" are you serious? im gonna try to **** you as hard as I can in your eye sockets if you hurt my daughter no matter who you are. honestly, you have to sympathize some with people. maybe this guy was a criminal, maybe he wasnt. he probly was, and probly a waste of air, but let the court decide. you have to keep suspects alive for that.

 

[22lr]

Completely honest question. Are you willing to offer your house that you paid/are probably still paying for up for the local PD to test out their grenades. The training could save lives. You willing to cover the cost of those 50 houses?



Unfortunately the home he was going to was burned down by the police. They accidentally flash banged the wrong house and killed his family. Mind control technology could probably save a ton of lives. How should we, as supposedly free people, react to that when it comes to the table?

Actually if LEOs wanted to use my house for training id let em. They have to train somehow (talking about a real training situation). Much like people donate cars and homes to the local FD for practice why cant we let the LEOs train with real world situations.

We should react by enacting training that makes sure this doesn't happen again. Honestly im surprised these kind of mistakes are still being made. You train to fight, and fight so you can come home and train some more.

A single accidental death is to many, but there is a reason its called accidental.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Actually if LEOs wanted to use my house for training id let em. They have to train somehow (talking about a real training situation). Much like people donate cars and homes to the local FD for practice why cant we let the LEOs train with real world situations.

We should react by enacting training that makes sure this doesn't happen again. Honestly im surprised these kind of mistakes are still being made. You train to fight, and fight so you can come home and train some more.

A single accidental death is to many, but there is a reason its called accidental.

can i potty train my dog in your house? all the stains will be accidental i promise. does it make it any easier to look at or smell?

 

[phil]

Actually if LEOs wanted to use my house for training id let em. They have to train somehow (talking about a real training situation). Much like people donate cars and homes to the local FD for practice why cant we let the LEOs train with real world situations.

We should react by enacting training that makes sure this doesn't happen again. Honestly im surprised these kind of mistakes are still being made. You train to fight, and fight so you can come home and train some more.

A single accidental death is to many, but there is a reason its called accidental.

I'm of the mindset that there's no such thing as accidents. "Accidents" happen because people have faulted. Too many people want to hide be hind that word because it takes fault off of them.

 

[22lr]

maybe if only a couple cops had knocked on the door they would have. or if a couple cops showed up and arrested them at the store then it would go smooth. save lives and money too maybe.

Ill be 100% honest. I agree 100% with that statement if this was a perfect world. But be honest if you serving a warrant on a person wanted in question to a murder would you knock on the door and give him the opportunity to grab a gun?


I honestly dont like no knock warrants, but what alternative is there? If the arrest is in public then you risk bystanderes getting shot, at least the home is a controlled enviroment were you can mitigate some of the treats to the innocent bystanders. And the vast majority of these warrants are served safely and without anyone else getting hurt.

 

[88GT]

A single accidental death is to many, but there is a reason its called accidental.

It was preventable. That makes it negligent.

 

[lashicoN]

Actually if LEOs wanted to use my house for training id let em. They have to train somehow (talking about a real training situation). Much like people donate cars and homes to the local FD for practice why cant we let the LEOs train with real world situations.

You're a great citizen...of a place that I don't want to live in.

 

[loony1]

you have a point, but our state and federal governments ran as they should be could handle it I think. as of now. no, your right. it would be a cluster ****. thanks for the reply.

 

[22lr]

It was preventable. That makes it negligent.

Ok true. But it still was not intentional, and that is very important.

Edit: Not excusing the mistake or negligence, just saying it still wasnt intentional. For me that is a huge difference.

 

[Benny]

LOL yeah, police usually send you a letter, two phone calls, and an e-mail before they roll up to your house, announce themselves on a bullhorn as they calmly walk up to your door bell to give it a ring to serve you a search warrant and have you arrested.

Except the scenario Jsharmon is talking about actually happened in the story this thread was created for.

They did get on a bullhorn for "hours" to get him to come out and he refused.

I agree that tear gas would have been a better option, but the fact of the matter is if he would have come out of his house to answer questions, he would still be alive...Instead, this methhead barricaded himself in the house and refused to come out.

I don't think he deserved to die, but it's pretty tough to feel sorry for him.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Ill be 100% honest. I agree 100% with that statement if this was a perfect world. But be honest if you serving a warrant on a person wanted in question to a murder would you knock on the door and give him the opportunity to grab a gun?


I honestly dont like no knock warrants, but what alternative is there? If the arrest is in public then you risk bystanderes getting shot, at least the home is a controlled enviroment were you can mitigate some of the treats to the innocent bystanders. And the vast majority of these warrants are served safely and without anyone else getting hurt.

not to do it. you know, most of the time when you see an event happen that turns out bad and people are asked why they didnt just "say no" or "stop the person" or "think before they acted" or "take a breath" or "step away" or "call a taxi" etc, the person has no idea why they didnt? or they think they were fine.

the only reason we dont see 2 man teams going and serving more warrants is because the citizens have just accepted the polices answer of "we need this for OUR safety to keep you safe" see how that word twist went? WE THE PEOPLE have the right and DUTY to say NO! NO, your not going to do it that way. I value myself and my neighbors more than that, so NO! If we all would rally together and say no, i bet you the results would be suprisingly good for not just us, but the police too.

 

[jsharmon7]

LOL yeah, police usually send you a letter, two phone calls, and an e-mail before they roll up to your house, announce themselves on a bullhorn as they calmly walk up to your door bell to give it a ring to serve you a search warrant and have you arrested.

I've seen so many videos on YouTube titled Fooled the cops by Staying Inside LOL They Can't Get In!!! You're lucky to get a knock these days before they bust down your down to toss in a flashbang for dinner.

If you want to argue against no-knock warrants, that's fine. That wasn't the stated concern here though. Would you care to share your suggestions for how the police should handle search warrants?

 

[loony1]

can i potty train my dog in your house? all the stains will be accidental i promise. does it make it any easier to look at or smell?

You beat me to it Ranger

 

[22lr]

not to do it. you know, most of the time when you see an event happen that turns out bad and people are asked why they didnt just "say no" or "stop the person" or "think before they acted" or "take a breath" or "step away" or "call a taxi" etc, the person has no idea why they didnt? or they think they were fine.

the only reason we dont see 2 man teams going and serving more warrants is because the citizens have just accepted the polices answer of "we need this for OUR safety to keep you safe" see how that word twist went? WE THE PEOPLE have the right and DUTY to say NO! NO, your not going to do it that way. I value myself and my neighbors more than that, so NO! If we all would rally together and say no, i bet you the results would be suprisingly good for not just us, but the police too.

Honestly you have a very legit point. If people stood for there rights we could solve a lot of problems. And for those who dont believe what ranger is saying, ya I think it makes things easier.

But from my point of view I tend to side with the officer because he has to go about day to day life knowing that the next car he pulls over for speeding could get him killed. I honestly hate that some LEOs have a "us v them" attitude, but I understand it 100%. Doesnt mean I like it, but I can fully understand why they like to protect themselves first. That and I just cant envision a world were enough citizens will peacefully accept a lawful arrest to ever justify not having a full SWAT entry for some warrants. Maybe I just dont have faith in fellow man, but I honestly dont have faith in my fellow civilians to act in a peaceable manner.

 

[jsharmon7]

So far I've seen "wait him out" and "tear gas" mentioned as alternatives. Tear gas may be a viable option, but what happens when a few people die because of pre-existing breathing conditions that cause them to choke to death? Besides, it's still a use of force to execute a search warrant, which is one of the things that has everyone so upset. Waiting them out could work, but how long do we wait? Do we just let them destroy all the potential evidence we're looking for? How about if they are like some of the folks here on INGO who have weeks or months worth of supplies and we waste millions in tax dollars setting siege to neighborhoods? What if they starve to death? Or die of dehydration? The fact is, flashbangs have been used thousands of times to safely end these types of situations. This is just a kneejerk reaction to this story. It doesn't make it less tragic, but it certainly doesn't mean that flashbangs are wildly dangerous and will burn houses down and kill everyone.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Honestly you have a very legit point. If people stood for there rights we could solve a lot of problems. And for those who dont believe what ranger is saying, ya I think it makes things easier.

But from my point of view I tend to side with the officer because he has to go about day to day life knowing that the next car he pulls over for speeding could get him killed. I honestly hate that some LEOs have a "us v them" attitude, but I understand it 100%. Doesnt mean I like it, but I can fully understand why they like to protect themselves first. That and I just cant envision a world were enough citizens will peacefully accept a lawful arrest to ever justify not having a full SWAT entry for some warrants. Maybe I just dont have faith in fellow man, but I honestly dont have faith in my fellow civilians to act in a peaceable manner.

give them the tools they need to stay safe. also give them backup. if you approach a car that has false plates or stolen, or a driver comes back with warrants then call for backup and dont approach until they arrive, and then if that guy trys to harm you then the guys watching your back can light that mother ****er up and kill his ass. I have no problem with police killing real bad guys who try to harm them. no problem at all. saves tax money too.
if we could stop having people sue the city for these stupid mistakes then we could afford to give more $$ to police for more backup and the best body armor and computers, etc. but there will always be a level of danger. its the way it is. trampling of one innocent persons rights is never acceptable to me. never. Im not out to "get" any good cops that try their best in a flawed system. im out to change the system and the way the game is played. If there are bad cops, then lets get them and help and praise the good ones. i believe there are other ways to do things that are better than what we have now. im no profit, i dont always know the answers, i wish i did so i could help the world. really i do. but until we try and fail, learn, then get up and try again something new, we can never succeed by progressing.

 

[E5RANGER375]

So far I've seen "wait him out" and "tear gas" mentioned as alternatives. Tear gas may be a viable option, but what happens when a few people die because of pre-existing breathing conditions that cause them to choke to death? Besides, it's still a use of force to execute a search warrant, which is one of the things that has everyone so upset. Waiting them out could work, but how long do we wait? Do we just let them destroy all the potential evidence we're looking for? How about if they are like some of the folks here on INGO who have weeks or months worth of supplies and we waste millions in tax dollars setting siege to neighborhoods? What if they starve to death? Or die of dehydration? The fact is, flashbangs have been used thousands of times to safely end these types of situations. This is just a kneejerk reaction to this story. It doesn't make it less tragic, but it certainly doesn't mean that flashbangs are wildly dangerous and will burn houses down and kill everyone.

the, catch them somewhere else option is on the table too.