Let it fly.....SWAT cleared.

[USMC_0311]

if i was a resident of that city, i would be protesting and petitioning the law makers to start building a gallows for after the trial.

They would probably shoot me.

I just don't have the patience for petitioning.

 

[youngda9]

Alright, seems this has disentegrated to making up stories about planted evidence with no proof to back it up...then claiming that it must be so because victim was a Marine. This is all it takes to solidifying an opinion. Awesome.

 

[japartridge]

OK, I can buy that to a point... won't get started on the whole JBT/Nazi obeying orders thing, BUT... the SWAT team IS responsible for denying EMT's to treat Jose, until after he was dead!!!

I think everyone is missing the big picture here. We all claim we would open fire on anyone comming in our home like the swat members did. On the other side of the coin the swat team did the same thing we say we would have done. They opened fire on an armed suspect. They reacted just as we say we would had we seen a man with a gun in our home. Swat is doing their very dangerous job in very dangerous times. They may be wanna be commandos, and even arrogant jerks, however they are doing a job. They should not be convicted in this case.
The ones who should be prosecuted and convicted here are the ones who requested the warrant. The ones who did the craptactular investigation. The ones who did not verify every little detail. They are the ones responsible, the ones that put everyone in harms way and caused every part of this.
Swat got screwed on this and the family got destroyed because of others, not each other!!! Each person after the pisspoor information given, the warrent issued and door kicked in did what they thought was right and were trained to do with the split seconds given them.
I pray this never happens to me, my family, friends or others. I pray I never have to look at a gun pointed at me in my own home and fire first. We have to stop going after people doing their jobs and people defending what they hold dear. We need to start holding the people who start the chain reaction accountable.

 

[orange]

These questions are now leaps to planting guns, gotcha.

You are saying that since they are liars that they:
(1) Opened fire on an un-armed man
(2) Shot that un-armed man 20+(?) times
(3) planted a gun
(4) with the safety off
(5) while the wife is not claiming that it isn't his gun or that it was planted

Rock on

I am? Just out of curiosity, where are you getting that?

Ok, but can you say 100% that they are lying in this case?

Here's my entire message: their record of repeatedly lying and running a smear campaign on the victim ranks their credibility slightly lower than whale crap on the bottom of the ocean. Now the pressure should be on them to show they're truthful. They should have proof he was armed and dangerous.

 

[USMC_0311]

This is all it takes to solidifying an opinion. Awesome.

Whos opinion?

 

[youngda9]

Alright, seems this has disentegrated to making up stories about planted evidence with no proof to back it up...then claiming that it must be so because victim was a Marine. This is all it takes to solidifying an opinion. Awesome.

Whos opinion?

See posts # 90, 88, 85, 83...you can go back in time further if you want to take the time.

Each of these posts either claim a planted weapon or that Jose must have been in the right becase he is a Marine as a basis upon which the poster is forming their opinion.

 

[ckcollins2003]

See posts # 90, 88, 85, 83...you can go back in time further if you want to take the time.

Each of these posts either claim a planted weapon or that Jose must have been in the right becase he is a Marine as a basis upon which the poster is forming their opinion.

I think we're mostly saying he was in the right because his house was clean, weapon was on safe, he was denied medical treatment, there were over 70 shots fired in the report, and cops lie to save their own asses.

Did I miss anything?

 

[USMC_0311]

I think we're mostly saying he was in the right because his house was clean, weapon was on safe, he was denied medical treatment, there were over 70 shots fired in the report, and cops lie to save their own asses.

Did I miss anything?

just this

I agree COMPLETELY with the part above. The best thing to do would have been to pick him up on his way to/from work.

The whole raid was unnecessary...cops playing commando with tragic outcomes.

Why or what are we debating? youngda9 I am confused.

 

[youngda9]

Why or what are we debating? youngda9 I am confused.

We are debating what happened once inside the house...there ya go.

 

[USMC_0311]

We are debating what happened once inside the house...there ya go.

Why would we do that when we don't know?

 

[youngda9]

I think we're mostly saying he was in the right because his house was clean, weapon was on safe, he was denied medical treatment, there were over 70 shots fired in the report, and cops lie to save their own asses.

Did I miss anything?

Not really, but also

Apparently we all must believe the cops should wait until fired upon when confrunted with a guy with a rifle(unless you are a conspiracy theorist who believes it was planted there).

If you also believe that you must think there is time to tell him to put it down before getting shot in the head yourself...this is not true. (see arsoft drills, disarm drills where armed guy doesn't shoot disarmer, etc.)

This whole thing stinks. I can't seem to jump on the bandwagon of all the theories of what happened inside the house...and form an opinion based on how dirty we must think these people are...I guess I'm not like that. There were excessive shots fired, YES. We don't know why (weapon pointed or not). Some assume all of these shots were set off at an unarmed man...I highly doubt that. We don't know if Jose knew it was the cops entering. We don't know how he would react waking up from sound sleep. We don't know at what point he actually woke up(police announcement from outside, door breaking open, will never know).

We don't know a lot of things. All I know is if that if cops break down your door, justified or not, that if they see you with a firearm you can expect to get shot. They don't have time to re-act if you decide to point it at them withouth them getting shot. So I understand why he got shot. I don't understand why so many shots were fired.

 

[youngda9]

Why would we do that when we don't know?

Because people are claiming planted weapons, weather he had a weapon, weather it was pointed at the cops...all of which things happened INSIDE the house. Are you seriously not following this?

 

[USMC_0311]

Because people are claiming planted weapons, weather he had a weapon, weather it was pointed at the cops...all of which things happened INSIDE the house. Are you seriously not following this?

We should wait for the helmet cam but if you want to take the SWAT teams word as gosple thats your progative.

I am seriously not following you. Did you try to change the original intent of the OP with a made up premise? The OP just wanted to eat popcorn he did not lay out any ground rules for us to debate the **** we cannot see.
Any time someone lies I no longer give them the benefit of the doubt. The first thing I would say if I had to shoot somebody is "he pointed a weapon at me". That is the world we live in and I do hold each SWAT member responsible for Jose death. How many shooters do you think had a clear sight picture? They spazed out, one guy tripped had a ND, the rest emptied their magazines.

 

[ckcollins2003]

We don't know a lot of things. All I know is if that if cops break down your door, justified or not, that if they see you with a firearm you can expect to get shot. They don't have time to re-act if you decide to point it at them withouth them getting shot. So I understand why he got shot. I don't understand why so many shots were fired.

So you're saying it's justified to shoot an innocent man as long as you are an officer of the law serving a warrant?

That's the problem with this entire controversy. They killed an innocent man while breaking down his door with no punishment in the end for the officers who fired the shots.

There should be no debate over what happened during the raid, but rather afterwards when no drugs were found.

They broke into the mans house. They fired an excessive amount of shots. They denied him medical treatment for his wounds. They found no drugs. His weapon was on safe.

The real debate is what should happen to the officers since there were multiple things wrong with the situation. Not what happened inside the house.

 

[youngda9]

So you're saying it's justified to shoot an innocent man as long as you are an officer of the law serving a warrant?

It is not the job of the raid team to take out their crystal ball and know if the guy they are raiding is innocent or not.

Do you not think that a team entering a home should shoot someone they come across with a rifle? Should they wait until shot upon first or something...really? Is that standard police protocol?

 

[youngda9]

We should wait for the helmet cam but if you want to take the SWAT teams word as gosple thats your progative.

Don't hold your breath...seems that if there was a functioning helmet cam on the guys going inside that it isn't being shown to the public. The video seems to show one guy had a camera on his helmet possibly...not sure.

I am seriously not following you. Did you try to change the original intent of the OP with a made up premise?

No we are talking about what went on once entering the home. They entered the home, this is a fact. There is no other premise being discussed.

Any time someone lies I no longer give them the benefit of the doubt.

Me neither. Nor am I going to leap the entire other direction and claim that EVERYTHING that went on was dirty. (Planted guns, unarmed man, etc)

 

[ckcollins2003]

It is not the job of the raid team to take out their crystal ball and know if the guy they are raiding is innocent or not.

Do you not think that a team entering a home should shoot someone they come across with a rifle? Should they wait until shot upon first or something...really? Is that standard police protocol?

You're completely right. It's not their job to decide if he is innocent or guilty, however that doesn't justify them denying him medical treatment. Or does it? I've never been a police officer, maybe somewhere in the unwritten rules of conduct it states that...

I formally believe they should have at least told him to drop the weapon and identify themselves as police upon entering the house.

I'm sure he would have dropped the weapon and surrendered had they done so. If not, then they have every right to fire.

 

[youngda9]

You're completely right. It's not their job to decide if he is innocent or guilty, however that doesn't justify them denying him medical treatment. Or does it?

I agree...and if that is the case then it was completely unethical and immoral.

I formally believe they should have at least told him to drop the weapon and identify themselves as police upon entering the house.

Do you have anything to cite showint what the standard operating procedure of these raids typically is?

I am claiming in the amount of time it would take for the person to open their mouth to begin to say those words that the gun could be off safe and bullets flying in the direction of the cops. I don't see how there is any time to do this. I don't think these raids happen as seen on TV where you tell the presumed BG to drop his rifle and he does. If they enter and see a gun they are going to shoot, right or wrong, I think that's the way it is in most cases. There just isn't time to react faster than some guy who decides to start shooting...and get a clean central nervous system hit to stop him instantly before he hits you with a fatal shot.

I'm sure he would have dropped the weapon and surrendered had they done so.

I agree with you, I bet he would have if it was made clear to him that it was the police, seems the guy would have no reason to take on multiple armed men with helmets and body armor on his own since he seemed to be clean(knowing that after the fact is too late).

If not, then they have every right to fire.

I agree. But I don't think they even attempt to ask the guy to disarm in these situations. They shoot the guy with a gun.

It sucks all around.

 

[USMC_0311]

You're a cop entering the house on a raid...you know the suspect is an Iraq war veterain Marine. You bust through the door with your firearm at the ready position. Next thing you see is Jose coming around the corner with his rifle in hand at the low-ready position(hypothetically speaking since many doubt he ever pointed the rifle at the cops).

What is your move? Do you check to see if the safety is on/off? Do you hope he doesn't raise the weapon and shoot you in the blink of an eye...because he will before you can even get a shot back(action beats re-action). You might kill him shooting back, but he might already have killed you as well. Do you shout for him to drop the weapon, because as you're saying drop...you might be catching bullets in the teeth.

So armchair quarterbacks, what say you?

If you're answer is anything but shoot the guy with a rifle then you might just be dead.

I am claiming the fact that the rifle was on-safe is COMPLETELY IRRELEVENT. All of you guys puffing out your chest and shouting "Marine", "trained Marine", "United States Marine", "need I say more", etc. are not facing the realities that this "trained Marine" could raise the gun while flipping off the safety and put round(s) into your head before you could react fast enough to shoot back.

If the police come through the door and the gun isn't falling or already on the ground...expect to get shot.

You tried to change the premise

and

Sorry, but that's not the premise...you've just breeched the door.

It is obvious we are not looking at the same video.

 

[youngda9]

You tried to change the premise

HOW, specifically.

I said you are the guy who goes throgh the front door(as shown in the video), and are presented with an armed man(in the report). How do you respond to that? I was asking for you to step into the shoes of the guy entering the door to be greeted by a guy with a rifle.

How on earth do you think that is changing the premise?

It is obvious we are not looking at the same video.

Are you claiming that they didn't go through the door?

34 seconds into the video the door is open and they are walking through it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnYV4nrNdjA&feature=player_embedded