13
   

Ending Qualified Immunity for Cops

 
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 04:07 pm
@engineer,
Yeah that doesn't sound good. I don't think our police forces use their SWAT equivalent anywhere near as much (that's just an impression - the stats would be interesting). I can't recall there ever being news about our equivalent shooting someone at a raid.

I'm only using 'our equivalent' because their name changes from State to State.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 04:10 pm
@oralloy,
Why would you not want police to conduct raids on high risk targets? A high risk raid by police, by definition, would be a raid on dangerous people conducting illegal activities. Aren't these the most vital criminals for police to target?

Or am I missing something?
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 06:14 pm
@vikorr,
If there is reason to suspect that a place is full of armed criminals, it is reasonable for police to be heavily armed when they visit.

But if there is no immediate risk of death or serious injury inside, there is no need for police to burst in without warning. They should knock at the door and calmly present a search warrant, giving the people inside the opportunity to surrender peacefully. If the people inside refuse to surrender, maybe then the police can consider charging in by force.
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 06:56 pm
@oralloy,
Fair enough.
0 Replies
 
freedom76
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2019 11:16 am
@edgarblythe,
This is exactly the opinion I have formed over the years, that they are basically the same people, the criminal element. Much worse they are supported and enabled by a cabal of crooked politicians and a soulless and largely corrupted legal system that invariably exonerates them of assault and murder. How many of us have witnessed this firsthand, and know for a certain that a life could get real hard real fast for speaking out. The mafia has more honor.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2019 11:36 pm
Nuts! It looks like we just gained another one.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jan, 2019 11:41 pm
@freedom76,
freedom76 wrote:

This is exactly the opinion I have formed over the years, that they are basically the same people, the criminal element. Much worse they are supported and enabled by a cabal of crooked politicians and a soulless and largely corrupted legal system that invariably exonerates them of assault and murder. How many of us have witnessed this firsthand, and know for a certain that a life could get real hard real fast for speaking out. The mafia has more honor.


Thanks. Hope you stick around for a long spell.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 10:46 am
The real reason 4 cops got shot in Houston last week

Quote:
We are sick and tired of having dirtbags try to take our lives when all we are trying to do is protect this community and protect our families…

Well just know, we all got your number now.

We are going to be keeping track of all of ya’ll, and we’re going to make sure we hold you accountable. Every time you stir the pot on our police officers. We’ve had enough, folks.

We’re out there doing our jobs every day, putting our lives on the line for our families. Enough is enough. Now please, keep these officers in your prayers.




That was the Houston Police Officer’s Union President Joe Gimaldi.

He made the comments after 5 cops were injured while serving a warrant.

He thinks that rhetoric critical of police officers is responsible for, what he claims is an increase in police being targeted.

All the headlines would have you believe these cops were ambushed, attacked just for being cops while minding their own business.

But when you look deeper at the case, you realize these cops didn’t get shot because of anti-police rhetoric.

They got shot because they invaded an innocent couple’s home without announcing themselves.

That means that instead of knocking on the door and announcing themselves, police barge into a home with a battering ram.

These SWAT-style raids have increased exponentially over the years. And they are used for less and less serious accusations.

In this case, a couple in their late 50s, with no criminal history, was accused of selling heroin out of the home they lived in for 20 years.

The cops got a warrant to search the home after they claim someone sold a confidential informant heroin at the couple’s home.

(...)

thedailybell

vikorr
 
  0  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 12:49 pm
@hightor,
Umm...wow....that article was the biggest load of crap that I have seen for a while.

"They got shot because they invaded an innocent persons home"

Ignoring apparently the possession of a legal search warrant, then using an emotive work combination like 'invaded' and 'innocent peron'.

Left out completely from the nutbag that posted this was - likely well aftr hearing them yell police / seeing the police uniforms, the offender opened fire not once in surprise, but multiple times, with the direct intention of killing police officers.

....yep, only an innocent person does that.

Lovely article supporting criminals / murderers.

I'm quite disgusted.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 01:04 pm
@vikorr,
I'm not familiar with the case that you guys are talking about, but tactics where police burst into homes from out of the blue do cause real problems.

Most often when an innocent person is killed it is the homeowner. But there have been a few cases over the years where police officers were killed by a homeowner who thought he was being attacked by criminals. Either way, the tactics cause way too many innocent deaths.

If the police were trying to end a standoff with hostage takers or something, that would be one thing. But warrants should be served with a polite knock at the door instead of busting in guns blazing.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 01:04 pm
@vikorr,
Quote:
That means that instead of knocking on the door and announcing themselves, police barge into a home with a battering ram.

Police busted down the door and shot the couple’s dog. The man responded by firing his handgun at the officers.

According to the police chief, narcotics officers “don’t show up in uniform,” when executing search warrants.

So did this guy even know it was police who just invaded his home and shot his dog?
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 01:08 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
I'm not familiar with the case that you guys are talking about, but tactics where police burst into homes from out of the blue do cause real problems.
No doubt it does. Quite likely it evolved that way after multiple police getting shot in doorways while knocking?

Quote:
Most often when an innocent person is killed it is the homeowner. But there have been a few cases over the years where police officers were killed by a homeowner who thought he was being attacked by criminals. Either way, the tactics cause way too many innocent deaths.
I have quite a bit of time for such a viewpoint. That gist of the above article was quite different.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 01:10 pm
@hightor,
Rolling Eyes so being plain clothes, they didn't yell anything at all like 'police officers'

Not far different from supporting terrorists in my eyes - ie supporting the ideology that supports terrorism. That's what this article is. Ideology.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 01:21 pm
@vikorr,
Quote:
so being plain clothes, they didn't yell anything at all like 'police officers'

Weren't you there? Anyway, anyone can yell "police officers!" — it's commonly done to confuse victims.
Quote:

... supporting the ideology that supports terrorism.

What ideology is that? The right to bear arms? Stand your ground?
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 04:49 pm
@hightor,
Or the Castle Doctrine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 07:00 pm
@hightor,
This has been a clusterfuck and a half. One of the officers involved has been suspended so far as the investigation continues.

Gamaldi has stepped into a pile of **** with his comments.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 10:23 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
Weren't you there?
Rolling Eyes
- Do you believe they didn't shout 'police' as they were entering?
- What about when the murderer pulled a gun? Did none of them yell they were police officers then?
- What about when he started shooting, do you believe none of them shouted police officer?
- what about when any of them he was shooting at ducked for cover. You think that one wouldn't yell 'we're ******* police officers!' ?

Apparently from your perspective they are stupid beyond belief, piss poorly trained, and don't care at all for their own survival.


Quote:
Anyway, anyone can yell "police officers!" — it's commonly done to confuse victims
Love to see some sources saying it's common. Shouldn't be hard for you to find evidence of your claim, seeing it is common.

Quote:
What ideology is that? The right to bear arms? Stand your ground?
Anyone contesting the right to bear arms here? Does stand your ground apply to dealings with police officers acting under search warrant?

The ideology by the way - is the ideology that chooses to use words to paint matters in a way that turns the law on its head, and paints police acting under lawful search warrant as 'invaders' and the murderers as 'innocent' and 'victims', and that it is the dead police that should be under suspicion until proven otherwise.

You ask 'were you there?' and then have the gumption to take just one side - the side of the murderer.

As I said, absolutely disgusting.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2019 03:38 am
@vikorr,
Quote:
The ideology by the way - is the ideology that chooses to use words to paint matters in a way that turns the law on its head, and paints police acting under lawful search warrant as 'invaders' and the murderers as 'innocent' and 'victims', and that it is the dead police that should be under suspicion until proven otherwise.


Sorry buddy. Someone breaks down my door with a battering ram and shoots my dog, they can expect a hostile response. Right? I don't know what kind of snowflake world you live in, but real Americans won't stand for that sort of intimidation. Right? Absolutely disgusting that you automatically take the side of the dog-killing storm troopers. Right?
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2019 03:48 am
@hightor,
Yet again engaging in ideology and demonisation to proudly support murderers slaughtering people who were engaging in a lawful process.

No different in essence to those who support terrorists.

hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Feb, 2019 03:50 am
@vikorr,
You support state-sponsored terrorism, the murder of innocent citizens, the destruction of private property, and killing pets.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/12/2021 at 08:54:34