How to serve a warrant: 1972 versus today

[KG1]

To find answers we should look at the crime statics in the city/area where this "militarization" is taking place. That way we can compare equipment to need.

This is just like the argument some make for the need of "stop and frisk" in areas of NYC. They state that stop and frisk is an effective tool to combat illegal guns and drugs and the reason it is being "proportionately" employed against minorities is because that is the population demographics of the areas where the highest instances of violent crimes occur.

 

[mrjarrell]

It's not just the kicking down of doors and killing of pets. It's the small things that point to the standing army we were warned about.

Cop Tells Children Not to Buy Lemonade! - YouTube

 

[Denny347]

This is just like the argument some make for the need of "stop and frisk" in areas of NYC. They state that stop and frisk is an effective tool to combat illegal guns and drugs and the reason it is being "proportionately" employed against minorities is because that is the population demographics of the areas where the highest instances of violent crimes occur.

Not even close.

 

[Gabriel]

Not even close.

I still can't figure out why you guys bother replying to threads like this.

 

[wally05]

Ah yes, good ol UCR. Crime rates for the entire USA. Murders, rapes, robberies could be skyrocketing in one area but since UCR states otherwise, who cares? All I know is in the 15yrs that I have worked in the same area, the criminals have changed, shootings are up, and burglaries are through the roof. My view is not "skewed", that would suggest it is distorted. Rather it is relevant to where I work/live. UCR stats are really rather useless because if one city sees a dramatic decrease in crime while another sees a dramatic increase, UCR will say crime is steady. Well, it will be FAR from steady in the city getting more crime. Hell, we haven't given our UCR data to the FBI in a while and when we do, nothing like playing word games to make murders into assaults.

Yep. From what I've gathered, compiling data for the UCR is kind of a nightmare. We would need to break this down into areas and compare with how tactical teams are being used to really see if the complaints are founded. Throwing out a few articles and quoting the CATO institute won't do anything.

 

[j706]

Not as many cops die today compared to days past. One thing the LE community is good at is learning from fatal mistakes and such. Training today is top notch as far as weapons and tactics. I am not on a swat team like my good friend Gabriel and others on here.

Nearly every single squad car now has the tools to deal with most anything we encounter. We have select fire weapons in all cars (the horror!) We have sniper rifles in many cars along with regular road officers with at least the basic training on how and when to use them. Modern police officers have better training in the more advanced methods of this job, something that was once reserved for specialty units. Some places may go overboard on swat type tactics. I know of none first hand that do. I think the percentage of those that do is very very small.

As a matter of routine we get sent to training that is at or near swat level. In the area I work we are the swat team...at least for quite a while until they can be notified and respond. And you get bet your a-- that we have the tools, training and drive to hold just about any given situation until the specialists arrive.

As for anyone that claims knocking on a probable armed and dangerous persons door makes any sense at all...well you have something wrong with you. That is plain stupidity. No one cares how it used to be done.




*** SORRY BUT MY TABLET WILL NOT LET ME RESPOND VERY WELL. IT CHANGES MY CURSER

 

[buckwacker]

Boys, the fact of the matter is you need to public's support and you are losing it over issues like this. So, you can maintain your closemindedness about these issues, circle the wagons, and declare everyone who is critical of the mis-use of these tatics a "cop hater/basher/ect", but all that does is drive the wedge deeper. A little introspection may be in order.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Boys, the fact of the matter is you need to public's support and you are losing it over issues like this. So, you can maintain your closemindedness about these issues, circle the wagons, and declare everyone who is critical of the mis-use of these tatics a "cop hater/basher/ect", but all that does is drive the wedge deeper. A little introspection may be in order.

For our LEOs, I have a few questions:

1. How many innocent deaths are acceptable?
2. How many wrong address raids, with or without casualties are acceptable?
3. How many family pets killed for existing are acceptable?
4. How many officers walking away with impunity and/or reward for the above are acceptable?
5. How many incidents of theft of money and/or property with absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing are acceptable?
6. How many innocent children terrorized in raids are acceptable?
7. If you consider 'sacrificing' citizens (like me, for example) for the greater good, generally in form of the war on proscribed substances, why should your life mean anything to me? Seriously, by defending relatively indiscriminate military-style raids, you are communicating that you consider me (along with most other people) expendable. Now explain again please why I am expected to cheer you on while you do so.

I understand that you have a unique and serious set of occupational hazards and that the above issues do not happen every time or with every department, but they are becoming increasingly prevalent. Further, my observation is that if you consider what a person defends contrary to conventional principles (like that the police are supposed to defend the citizens, not be a threat to them), you see what that person will do given the opportunity.

In responding, please receive my criticisms only to the extent they are applicable personally as they are only intended in that regard. Specifically, it is easy to interpret any and all general criticism in a personal way which is not the case, unless of course you are one of those individuals terrorizing the innocent (which I am satisfied is not the case with those of you likely to be reading this).

 

[Denny347]

I still can't figure out why you guys bother replying to threads like this.

It's sickness I think. I've gotten better about it but I need to still work on it.

 

[Denny347]

For our LEOs, I have a few questions:

1. How many innocent deaths are acceptable? I dono
2. How many wrong address raids, with or without casualties are acceptable?
3. How many family pets killed for existing are acceptable?
4. How many officers walking away with impunity and/or reward for the above are acceptable?
5. How many incidents of theft of money and/or property with absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing are acceptable?
6. How many innocent children terrorized in raids are acceptable?
7. If you consider 'sacrificing' citizens (like me, for example) for the greater good, generally in form of the war on proscribed substances, why should your life mean anything to me? Seriously, by defending relatively indiscriminate military-style raids, you are communicating that you consider me (along with most other people) expendable. Now explain again please why I am expected to cheer you on while you do so.

I dono.

 

[j706]

For our LEOs, I have a few questions:

1. How many innocent deaths are acceptable?
2. How many wrong address raids, with or without casualties are acceptable?
3. How many family pets killed for existing are acceptable?
4. How many officers walking away with impunity and/or reward for the above are acceptable?
5. How many incidents of theft of money and/or property with absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing are acceptable?
6. How many innocent children terrorized in raids are acceptable?
7. If you consider 'sacrificing' citizens (like me, for example) for the greater good, generally in form of the war on proscribed substances, why should your life mean anything to me? Seriously, by defending relatively indiscriminate military-style raids, you are communicating that you consider me (along with most other people) expendable. Now explain again please why I am expected to cheer you on while you do so.

I understand that you have a unique and serious set of occupational hazards and that the above issues do not happen every time or with every department, but they are becoming increasingly prevalent. Further, my observation is that if you consider what a person defends contrary to conventional principles (like that the police are supposed to defend the citizens, not be a threat to them), you see what that person will do given the opportunity.

In responding, please receive my criticisms only to the extent they are applicable personally as they are only intended in that regard. Specifically, it is easy to interpret any and all general criticism in a personal way which is not the case, unless of course you are one of those individuals terrorizing the innocent (which I am satisfied is not the case with those of you likely to be reading this).

None of the above is acceptable. FWIW I have never been on or anywhere around where any of the above has happened. I think it is vary rare event when it does. And when those very rare events do happen the haters will get a lot of traction out of them while attempting to get folks to think that are daily occurrences. But they are not daily occurrences.

I also do not know why people always attempt to make a botched warrant service with asset seizure. They are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. No knock warrant service is a necessary option that needs to remain on the table. Trust me when I say there are many homes with folks in them that you do not want to meet on their terms. They are best dealt with by being hit in a way that they never saw anything coming until they are in custody or worse. Heck I would bet there are some right here on this very website.

Just so that everyone knows when a warrant is applied for one of the main requirements is a detailed description of the place (home) to be searched. And when I say detailed I mean detailed like a two story wooden structure home sitting on the corner of such and such streets. I have went as far as talking pics of four sides of the place to submit with the warrant request. Here is an example}NYSHA Sample Affidavit Search Warrant for Animal Cruelty

I am sure there are times when faulty information is gained (through lies and deceit) about a certain place resulting in the place being hit. However I have a very hard time thinking many places are hit just because LEO got the wrong house or address.....I ain't buying into that one bit. Has it happened? Maybe but it don't happen much.

 

[wally05]

None of the above is acceptable. FWIW I have never been on or anywhere around where any of the above has happened. I think it is vary rare event when it does. And when those very rare events do happen the haters will get a lot of traction out of them while attempting to get folks to think that are daily occurrences. But they are not daily occurrences.

I also do not know why people always attempt to make a botched warrant service with asset seizure. They are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. No knock warrant service is a necessary option that needs to remain on the table. Trust me when I say there are many homes with folks in them that you do not want to meet on their terms. They are best dealt with by being hit in a way that they never saw anything coming until they are in custody or worse. Heck I would bet there are some right here on this very website.

Just so that everyone knows when a warrant is applied for one of the main requirements is a detailed description of the place (home) to be searched. And when I say detailed I mean detailed like a two story wooden structure home sitting on the corner of such and such streets. I have went as far as talking pics of four sides of the place to submit with the warrant request. Here is an example}NYSHA Sample Affidavit Search Warrant for Animal Cruelty

I am sure there are times when faulty information is gained (through lies and deceit) about a certain place resulting in the place being hit. However I have a very hard time thinking many places are hit just because LEO got the wrong house or address.....I ain't buying into that one bit. Has it happened? Maybe but it don't happen much.

Big +1. If a botched warrant service happens, there are a some things to look at in order to figure out what went wrong and fix it for the future. Just completely pulling tactical warrant services altogether is not a realistic option and it puts officers at risk.

I think some folks on here think you just submit some paper and voila, you can serve a warrant. There is a process for doing it that is supposed to help keep bad stuff from happening.

 

[IndyDave1776]

None of the above is acceptable. FWIW I have never been on or anywhere around where any of the above has happened. I think it is vary rare event when it does. And when those very rare events do happen the haters will get a lot of traction out of them while attempting to get folks to think that are daily occurrences. But they are not daily occurrences.

Among those of us here, I would consider this thoroughly accurate. The 'problem' with this perspective is that in many ways, we tend to live in a bubble. Indiana tends to be more friendly to liberty than average, although the state is home to some problem departments. That said, if an unacceptable method of operation is allowed to take root anywhere, like cancer, it will spread. Just look at the crap that is born in California or on the east coast and migrates, initially in diluted form, nationwide. I would speculate that a lot of people in times past wrote off a lot of things that happened elsewhere in the country on account of them not happening here. I am afraid of the same thing happening with this, especially with federal participation. Also significant is that you will tend to measure any tool or procedure you are allowed to use by the way in which you personally would use it. If everyone were as honorable as you are, I would not be nearly so concerned about it.

I also do not know why people always attempt to make a botched warrant service with asset seizure. They are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. No knock warrant service is a necessary option that needs to remain on the table. Trust me when I say there are many homes with folks in them that you do not want to meet on their terms. They are best dealt with by being hit in a way that they never saw anything coming until they are in custody or worse. Heck I would bet there are some right here on this very website.

I see your point so far as the two being two entire different things operationally and technically, but the reason we tend to put them in the same basket is that we see them from the perspective of threats to us and not as technical phenomena, much in the same way that a zookeeper sees venomous snakes and wolves as being entirely different, but the traveling layman sees them as the same thing (i.e., threats) in two different forms. I would agree that there are plenty of people with whom knocking on the door and saying 'walk with me please' would not end well for the officer serving the warrant, but then again, I would accept extreme methods for extreme circumstances. The problem is that it seems to have become far too commonplace, again, with other areas of the country harboring the worst problems with no-knock raids becoming near standard or standard procedure. From the outside perspective, the scary part is wondering just how many LEOs who behave nicely under actual or implied public pressure to do so would go Nazi on us if they were left to their own devices. Some would, some wouldn't, and the numbers from my perspective are a matter of speculation. I consider it reasonable for planning purposes to prepare for worst- or near-worst case conditions and be happy if things turn out better. Unfortunately this in combination with the quality of a majority of police I have met in my travels does not encourage trust as a default position. Even more unfortunately, my experiences indicate that the police are a more significant threat to my personal well-being than are criminals. I hesitate to bring this up given that I would be quite content living in a neighborhood full of you and the other officers here and that this criticism doesn't apply to you personally, but it is still an issue in the larger context.

Just so that everyone knows when a warrant is applied for one of the main requirements is a detailed description of the place (home) to be searched. And when I say detailed I mean detailed like a two story wooden structure home sitting on the corner of such and such streets. I have went as far as talking pics of four sides of the place to submit with the warrant request. Here is an example}NYSHA Sample Affidavit Search Warrant for Animal Cruelty

I am sure there are times when faulty information is gained (through lies and deceit) about a certain place resulting in the place being hit. However I have a very hard time thinking many places are hit just because LEO got the wrong house or address.....I ain't buying into that one bit. Has it happened? Maybe but it don't happen much.

Again, this is true inside our bubble. The problems are keeping it that way here and living as citizens of the republic and being treated as such while traveling elsewhere.

As I see it the challenges we have are respecting the rights of citizens in general while effectively combating crime. I understand that a large part of the problem is found in form of being required to enforce laws that are in many ways impossible to actually enforce and that those making the decisions often do so with motives not necessarily founded on the motive of fostering public safety. It comes down to finding ways to effectively enforce the law without trampling on rights and also without sending our police on suicide missions. I feel that most everyone in this conversation understands this and that the argument is about outsiders with some internal difference of perspective. In a way it is much like protecting the Second Amendment while preventing misuse of arms.

That said I appreciate very much that we have good officers who put their utmost effort into effectively protecting the community without infringing on the rights, property, and physical safety of the innocent.

 

[wally05]

Boys, the fact of the matter is you need to public's support and you are losing it over issues like this. So, you can maintain your closemindedness about these issues, circle the wagons, and declare everyone who is critical of the mis-use of these tatics a "cop hater/basher/ect", but all that does is drive the wedge deeper. A little introspection may be in order.

The problem is, the animosity seems to really come from the side that has no idea how this career-field functions. That's a major source irritation for those that do this job day in and day out. I've worked outside of the LE field a bit before coming into it. I can understand how the other side feels. But, there seems to be a real lack of understanding from many on here how the LE field operates. A lot of it is based on what someone sees on TV or "heard from a friend of a friend who is a LEO". Has anyone taken the time to ride with an officer to get an understanding of his/her day? I don't tell a plumber or an auto mechanic how he or she needs to do her job b/c I don't have any knowledge about how it is done. If someone showed me, then maybe I could give some useful advice.

On top of that, every municipality is different. Officers in my podunk hometown don't deal with the stress/risk that IMPD guys deal with. They both handle situations differently. I've recently heard administrators say that six shooters still suffice these days because they didn't feel like they needed semi-autos where they worked "back in the day". It's laughable, but they said it and believed it.

It's sickness I think. I've gotten better about it but I need to still work on it.

Yup... probably just need to stop altogether. It never goes anywhere.

As for IndyDave's post that is pretty much just there to incite something... None of it is acceptable. But, when mistakes occur, you don't go overboard with emotions and make snap judgement calls. You go after the actual source of the problem... corrupt police, corrupt/inept judge that signed the warrant, policies/procedures that are unacceptable. No one that I know in the LE field wants to "sacrifice" citizens. As I've said in the past. You can complain all you want, but none of it is useful without solutions/ideas to combat the problems. I've rarely if ever seen any ideas to fix the problems. I just see these threads turn into LE bashfests.

You're doing exactly what Libs do when one concealed carrier screws up... they want all legalized carry abolished or handguns banned. Doesn't that also annoy you?

Anyways, my following of this thread is done.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Big +1. If a botched warrant service happens, there are a some things to look at in order to figure out what went wrong and fix it for the future. Just completely pulling tactical warrant services altogether is not a realistic option and it puts officers at risk.

I think some folks on here think you just submit some paper and voila, you can serve a warrant. There is a process for doing it that is supposed to help keep bad stuff from happening.

I agree completely within the context at hand. The problem, again, is that there are dirty officers and departments and judges who make Roy Bean look honorable by comparison. Within the context of us here, that isn't a problem. The problem I see is that if too much latitude is allowed, either a corrupt (or careless) local department could cause problems and also we have to remember that people change over time. California was a conservative state prior to the amnesty program under Reagan, and we see how that worked out. Unfortunately, it could happen here and a corrupt government turned loose with less than ideal standards for employing methods appropriate for the most extreme circumstances could be a disaster.

One of the most important elements of the solution is that we don't run around in circles at each other's throats via our keyboards while largely agreeing ourselves as we argue about what others outside our group and generally outside our state are doing.

As for IndyDave's post that is pretty much just there to incite something... None of it is acceptable. But, when mistakes occur, you don't go overboard with emotions and make snap judgement calls. You go after the actual source of the problem... corrupt police, corrupt/inept judge that signed the warrant, policies/procedures that are unacceptable. No one that I know in the LE field wants to "sacrifice" citizens. As I've said in the past. You can complain all you want, but none of it is useful without solutions/ideas to combat the problems. I've rarely if ever seen any ideas to fix the problems. I just see these threads turn into LE bashfests.

Yes, it is to incite something. It is to incite you to think about the fact that how you use methods which push the outside of the envelope and how others do so are not necessarily even close in the standards implied and that I and others like me, not you but us, have to catch the fallout. When the argument is made that bad encounters are 'rare' and do not justify elimination of certain tactics (which they are relatively rare here and extremely rare with the departments home to most of our officers) it often sounds as presented like those making the argument see us as being like the corn at the end of the row that gets run over by the combine rather than harvested. If my assertion of willingness to sacrifice the innocent to expedience is wrong, then explain the LAPD opening fire on anyone who had as much in common with Chris Dorner as walking erect. If you weren't standing behind the badge it would be much more likely to worry you. A lot. Knowing that there are people who can completely f**k up and or dramatically shorten the rest of your life often with impunity is NOT a comforting thought.

Now, since you brought up solutions and you are the person on the 'giving' end of this arrangement, I have a right not to be harmed by you in the course of doing the things you do. I will make the assumption that you personally have not caused an incident of this type, but how do you engineer procedures to see to it that it doesn't happen and to mitigate the damage when/if it does? Also, given that while Indiana is still relatively tame in this regard, it is trending the way of militarization albeit more slowly than some other states. How do you propose containing this within acceptable levels, or even defining acceptable levels?

FYI, no, I do not enjoy 'bashing' but rather want police I can trust and solutions that trend me in the way of a free citizen of a republic and not a subject of an authoritarian government which, in case you haven't noticed, is the prevailing trend, and unless you wish to change careers, you necessarily will be the sharp end of that trend.

 

[wally05]

I agree completely within the context at hand. The problem, again, is that there are dirty officers and departments and judges who make Roy Bean look honorable by comparison. Within the context of us here, that isn't a problem. The problem I see is that if too much latitude is allowed, either a corrupt (or careless) local department could cause problems and also we have to remember that people change over time. California was a conservative state prior to the amnesty program under Reagan, and we see how that worked out. Unfortunately, it could happen here and a corrupt government turned loose with less than ideal standards for employing methods appropriate for the most extreme circumstances could be a disaster.

One of the most important elements of the solution is that we don't run around in circles at each other's throats via our keyboards while largely agreeing ourselves as we argue about what others outside our group and generally outside our state are doing.

I can see what you're saying.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I can see what you're saying.

Thanks. I know I can be a little abrasive at times. I definitely want an orderly society and don't expect you to take on well-armed criminals with a revolver and a stick, but also have concerns about larger implications. Again, I am most concerned about keeping things more or less as they are here and not like they are with the NYPD, CPD, or LAPD and others like them, and that I am not always as clear as I might be that my critical thoughts are aimed solely at the guilty and not at all officers.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Thanks. I know I can be a little abrasive at times. .

So many things I could say about that one little sentence there.

But I like you Dave, so I won't. Not now at least.

 

[IndyDave1776]

So many things I could say about that one little sentence there.

But I like you Dave, so I won't. Not now at least.

 

[Dauvis]

If it looks like a military force, gears up like a military force, trains like a military force, and operates like a military force; what else could it be? Therein lies the crux of the criticism. When people are seeing military style raids being used to kill Bambi, they are naturally going to ask questions and criticize. Some of these raids that I see on SWAT based shows similar to Cops, I am left wondering why was such a raid is necessary.