USAF Airman Killed in Wrong Address Police Incident

[Leadeye]

I ask this question out of curiosity, if you are inside your house, get the knock and shouts of "police, open up" etc. Can you ask for something more reassuring like turning on the lights on the police car?

 

[Cameramonkey]

I ask this question out of curiosity, if you are inside your house, get the knock and shouts of "police, open up" etc. Can you ask for something more reassuring like turning on the lights on the police car?

call 911 and ask if they have an officer there. They'll know.

And the bonus? If they say no you're already a minute ahead of the curve to get the real cops there.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

MiLiTaRiZaTiOn Of PoLiCe.

What the heck does "militarization of police" mean anyways? Best I can tell, it's just a phrase invented to sell the idea that we'll somehow better off if we don't let police have more effective tools to do their job.

 

[Route 45]

The explanations there seem strange to me. This implies if I randomly shot someone for no reason, and they died, it would be involuntary manslaughter.

https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-law-basics/mens-rea-a-defendant-s-mental-state.html

 

[Creedmoor]

Once again, a reasonable response.

Would be nice if we could all approach situation like the officers faced with less trepidation and maybe a phone call to the address first. Shame that things have gotten so dangerous that we have to approach every call with SWAT like preparation and nerves keyed up to fight or flight levels. Only long term solution is more personal contact between people in a community and caring about and for each other. Tough to swim upstream against the current though.

You mean like how the workers act while working in the 21 industries that are more dangerous than LE?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What I saw was not good for the police. Wait and see what FDLE and then HCSA do.

Unless there is more to this, I saw Manslaughter in the BWC but can reserve final judgment until all is out.

 

[ghuns]

What the heck does "militarization of police" mean anyways? Best I can tell, it's just a phrase invented to sell the idea that we'll somehow better off if we don't let police have more effective tools to do their job.

Well, traditionally, if you need an MRAP to do your job, you are in the military.

Then the .gov started handing out MRAPs to PDs like Oprah handing out Pontiacs.

It's hard to look at this and not call it "militarization of police".

You know if you give a bunch of boys toys like this, they are gonna find a reason play with them.

 

[Rookie]

I ask this question out of curiosity, if you are inside your house, get the knock and shouts of "police, open up" etc. Can you ask for something more reassuring like turning on the lights on the police car?

There is no law requiring you to ever open your door. Again, if police have the authority to enter your home, a locked door is simply an inconvenience for them.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

What the heck does "militarization of police" mean anyways? Best I can tell, it's just a phrase invented to sell the idea that we'll somehow better off if we don't let police have more effective tools to do their job.

To me, militarization of the police is the further arming of departments with surplus military hardware and then using said hardware and tactics in situations where it's not warranted either to send a message, or because policy calls for its use more than it should be used.

Anecdote: I once witnessed a drug bust when I was living at my grandma's. We woke to super loud explosion at zero dark thirty and saw what looked like marines surrounding the neighbors house. In the driveway was one of those MRAP's that Chris Kyle drove around in the movie, and was still sandbox tan. They then exited the house and stacked up in front of a small shed barely big enough to hold a push mower. I didn't get my camera out in time to get a picture, however this image pretty much shows what we saw.

Now this image is of a different situation and not at all related to my story other than giving an analogue. I am not exaggerating at all when I say that's how many there were. Every one of them had nods, ballistic helmets, suppressed ARs, and were wearing a MARPAT Woodland style camo. I talked with my uncle, who is in the same department though didn't participate in the raid, who said they were there to confiscate a pound of weed and the suspects were considered low risk. They were there for only two minutes tops, and left leaving the regular deputies to clean up the mess.

Here's the deal, you got some armed dangerous illegal alien who murdered someone out in the woods like the image above? Ok I would say that force is justified, however using the same force to confiscate a pound of weed is ridiculous. Or look at the Roger Stone raid (even though that was federal agents), where they used as much hardware as a raid against some ISIS bigshot against someone who's most dangerous weapons were two pint sized ankle biters.

I don't have the statistics currently on hand, but the amount of SWAT teams and the use of raids has risen exponentially vs. 30 years ago. That mixed with some of the attitudes and tactics from the War on Terror (soldiers coming back home and becoming officers) is creating situations that are sometimes more dangerous to the public than the suspect. I've personally talked to some of the graduating class of 2022 from the police academy (graduating year of one of my best friends by the way) who said they couldn't wait to kick people's doors down.

I have even more anecdotes than this, however in summary I disagree with the aspect of that there is no militarization of police. I'm not talking about regular beat cops getting issued AR's. I'm talking about the overuse of surplus hardware and tactics in situations where it's not needed. And keep in mind, some departments see you as a threat if you are a gun owner and believe in the constitution. There was a famous news interview where a SWAT guy was showing the news lady one of those MRAPs, and she asked why they needed a vehicle that could survive rockets. He said it's because we have a lot of gun owning constitutionalists out there. As we go further into the dark ages, when they start coming after more benign stuff, like owning guns or Lord forbid things like homeschooling your kids, these weapons will eventually start to be used against us.

Now I'm certain some prolific individuals in the community are probably overusing the "militarization" statement (especially in the situation the thread is devoted to).

 

[Quiet Observer]

Well, traditionally, if you need an MRAP to do your job, you are in the military.

Then the .gov started handing out MRAPs to PDs like Oprah handing out Pontiacs.

It's hard to look at this and not call it "militarization of police".

You know if you give a bunch of boys toys like this, they are gonna find a reason play with them.

Is not your logic similar to the left that would take away our ARs and similar guns because they are "weapons of war"?
Should the police be denied vehicles that provide protection from ambush?

There are civilian versions of MRAPs. They cost between $100,00 and $180,000.

Buying a Civilian MRAP: Everything You Need to Know

Are you thinking about buying a civilian MRAP? Learn all the most critical information to make an informed purchasing decision.

armormax.com

 

[AndreusMaximus]

Is not your logic similar to the left that would take away our ARs and similar guns because they are "weapons of war"?
Should the police be denied vehicles that provide protection from ambush?

There are civilian versions of MRAPs. They cost between $100,00 and $180,000.

Buying a Civilian MRAP: Everything You Need to Know

Are you thinking about buying a civilian MRAP? Learn all the most critical information to make an informed purchasing decision.

armormax.com

I think I see what he's saying after all, though. There's a very wide middle ground that lies between saying it should be illegal for police departments to own and use AR's and MRAP's (which I don't think is his position), vs. handing out old military hardware like candy to departments that might not really need it, and will basically have to invent excuses to ever use it.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

I think I see what he's saying after all, though. There's a very wide middle ground that lies between saying it should be illegal for police departments to own and use AR's and MRAP's (which I don't think is his position), vs. handing out old military hardware like candy to departments that might not really need it, and will basically have to invent excuses to ever use it.

Exactly, its a solution looking for a problem. How many times do you hear SWAT teams getting ambushed in general, let alone by thugs with anti-material rifles and RPG's. Beat cops in their cruisers are far more likely to get ambushed than even an armored van full of door kickers ready to go. We do however hear stories of police literally demolishing exterior walls of people's houses with these MRAP's. You get issued a bunch of hammers, a lot of things start to look like nails.

Might as well go all the way and issue M2's and M240B's.

 

[Route 45]

You mean like how the workers act while working in the 21 industries that are more dangerous than LE?

Which of those industries deals with the danger of possible violent assault on a daily basis?

I'm thinking that falling off of a scaffolding or getting caught in the gears of a combine probably is not really relevant with reference to the unique danger faced by LE. Mitigating against known risks in other dangerous professions is quite a bit less challenging than dealing with the unknown risks of working with the public.

Comparing the danger between different professions by looking at fatality rates is simplistic. There are other factors in play when taking "danger" into account.

If you think there is no difference, please tell me how you would feel about a loved one dying in an accident vs being murdered by an illegal alien.

 

[ghuns]

I think I see what he's saying after all, though. There's a very wide middle ground that lies between saying it should be illegal for police departments to own and use AR's and MRAP's (which I don't think is his position), vs. handing out old military hardware like candy to departments that might not really need it, and will basically have to invent excuses to ever use it.

Yeah. What he said.

We the People have a right to own ARs, and probably MRAPs, for that matter.

Equipping PDs as if they are a SEAL team kicking doors in Fallujah just doesn't give me warm fuzzy feelings.

We see far too much news of no knock raids gone wrong, wrong address raids, raids on homes and businesses for non violent crimes gone wrong, etc.

I am all for officer safety, but I think the degree of militarization we're seeing can give police a sense of invulnerability. Craving that sense of invulnerability leads to rolling the SWAT team out in an MRAP for tasks that used to be considered normal day to day police work.

Of course if it all goes according to plan, and everybody is well trained, and good at their job, nothing bad happens. But how often is that case?

I don't expect police to be perfect 100% of the time. But the heavier they roll into any given situation, the closer to perfect we should demand that they be.

 

[Creedmoor]

Which of those industries deals with the danger of possible violent assault on a daily basis?

I'm thinking that falling off of a scaffolding or getting caught in the gears of a combine probably is not really relevant with reference to the unique danger faced by LE. Mitigating against known risks in other dangerous professions is quite a bit less challenging than dealing with the unknown risks of working with the public.

Comparing the danger between different professions by looking at fatality rates is simplistic. There are other factors in play when taking "danger" into account.

If you think there is no difference, please tell me how you would feel about a loved one dying in an accident vs being murdered by an illegal alien.

I happen to have a sister that did almost 30 years in Jacksonville, two sons that carry automatic

Which of those industries deals with the danger of possible violent assault on a daily basis?

I'm thinking that falling off of a scaffolding or getting caught in the gears of a combine probably is not really relevant with reference to the unique danger faced by LE. Mitigating against known risks in other dangerous professions is quite a bit less challenging than dealing with the unknown risks of working with the public.

Comparing the danger between different professions by looking at fatality rates is simplistic. There are other factors in play when taking "danger" into account.

If you think there is no difference, please tell me how you would feel about a loved one dying in an accident vs being murdered by an illegal alien.

Danger is Danger, it either is or it isn't a Danger.

Do you want to break it down even more than statistics?
A whole lot of LE tend to die at their own hands and making poor decisions.
Its an easy statistic to cut in half with a few changes.
Maybe OSHA should write some of the protocols that will save LEO's lives?

 

[Route 45]

I happen to have a sister that did almost 30 years in Jacksonville, two sons that carry automatic

Danger is Danger, it either is or it isn't a Danger.

Do you want to break it down even more than statistics?
A whole lot of LE tend to die at their own hands and making poor decisions.
Its an easy statistic to cut in half with a few changes.
Maybe OSHA should write some of the protocols that will save LEO's lives?

 

[Creedmoor]

View attachment 351891

Thats the response I expected from you. Its an easy field to cut at least half of the deaths from happening.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Guys, guys, guys. No MRAP for the latest Acorn County shooting.

This is about the training the cops are receiving with all the force fed death porn that they get but let's do the Reckless Homicide/Manslaughter/Murder we just witnessed first.

 

[Denny347]

See below. Continue to do stupid stuff like this, I'll stand by what I said.

I saw. Saying "F" ALL police because you don't like what 1, 2, 3, or even a dozen officers have done is childish. But go ahead, write ALL 300k off...

Just watched the body cam.

So they yelled "police", "sheriffs office", "open the door", and moved to the side so they couldn't be seen through the peephole.

I get it, officer safety. But what's to look stop a criminal from doing the same and shouting that?

It is indeed an officer safety issue but it has nothing to do with the peep hole and everything to do with getting shot. Standing in front of a door will get you killed...PERIOD.

Is it safe to assume a reasonable person would answer the door armed? Is the correct response to "light them up" over "officer safety" when they open the door?

"Officer safety" doesn't meet the reasonableness test as set out in the SCOTUS decision Graham v. Connor decision.

Everyone is quick to jump on the officer safety bandwagon, yet I still see so many poorly positioned traffic stops where officer safety couldn't have been further from their minds when they activated their lights, initiated the stop and/or stopped the car and positioned theirs. Honestly surprised more aren't hit during traffic stops, but I think ISP has had many cars hit this year doing just that.

Officer safety isn't a bandwagon, it's a real thing that needs to be adhered to. Just because there are officers that don't follow it doesn't mean it's not important. Officers are human and when nothing bad happens to them, they become complacent.

 

[Denny347]

The issue is the precedence.

The precedence that possessing a firearm means you are fair game to be shot by a police officer.

I think you will find that most Circuit Courts have ruled against this type of situation. I say MOST as I'm not sure what the 9th says about it, they are usually always the outlier. Here in the 7th, possession alone is NOT PC for deadly force. Now, it doesn't take much more to establish PC as it's actually not a very high bar to reach in the first place...like 30% likely.