SWAT Team invades home and kills dog for a joint.

[Phil502]

They shot the Pit that was being a good dog and defending the family, it sucks but should the officers get bit by the dog instead? I don't think so.

The warrant was served 8 days later, big mistake by management, no doubt.

Maybe the guy sold 10 lbs of pot to some high school kids, is he a bad guy now? He was a known dealer, probably not some guy with a few joints in his house to smoke on Friday night after the kid is in bed.

I think the only thing wrong here is the delay in time from warrant issued to warrant served. Unless of course the information used to obtain the warrant is bogus but thats not been brought up yet.

 

[downzero]

They shot the Pit that was being a good dog and defending the family, it sucks but should the officers get bit by the dog instead? I don't think so.

This mistakenly assumes that the only way to serve that warrant was with a violent, dynamic entry of police officers.

The fact is that this entire situation could have been avoided if they police had just sent a uniformed officer to the door, banged on the door, called everyone out of the house, and executed their warrant.

There is no reason to believe that a guy, even if he is selling marijuana, is high risk to officers or anyone else for that matter.

They used a sledge hammer to drive a finishing nail, and it ended in disaster. This happens all the time, and it is among the consequences of allowing police departments to have these heavily armed, paramilitary units. The justification for such officers/units is for incidents like active shooters, high risk warrants for violent felons, hostage situations, etc. Once the units are available, they're used to enforce, "Narcotics search warrants" for drugs that aren't even "narcotics."

All of this exists because nobody asks why they are using so much force to find a gram of marijuana while the officers hide behind qualified immunity so even if they are sued, they will pay nothing and it's all passed onto the taxpayers.

The interesting thing is that if the drug war ended tomorrow, I think I'd even consider becoming a police officer. The problem, as I see it, is that instead of acting like public servants, police officers these days are stuck acting like a bunch of tyrants.

I'm sure there are plenty of officers out there who respect the fourth amendment, don't serve on police checkpoints or act like bullies and tyrants. I also suspect that 30-40 years ago, there were a lot more of them. Why or how police work ever went from "serve and protect" to proactive policing where everyone is treated like a criminal is beyond me.

The question we should be asking ourselves is, "Why do we elect people and encourage them to 'enforce' these laws in this manner?"

In the end, it's costing us money out of our pockets. 5% of the earth's population now has 25% of the prison population. And you can bet that won't change, because tens of thousands of people need to staff these prisons at our expense.

And so the cycle continues....

 

[jeremy]

Law Enforcement Agencies should stick to what they are supposed to do.
Law Enforcement.

Leave the Military tactics to the Military. You just make us look bad when you attempt Military style operations...

 

[Jack Ryan]

I've got a better headline for this thread.

"Dumb dopeheads put home and family at risk of invasion and get their dog killed for a joint!"

 

[ATOMonkey]

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

I completely disagree with the no-knock warrant in all ways possible. Unless the guy is Agoraphobic, they probably had ample opportunity to arrest him outside of his home, and to search it later.

 

[MinuteMan47]

DownZero, I tried to rep you, but I can't...I will try again later.

Over 25% of all prison inmates in the US are incarcerated due to drug related offenses...! That is a big number. 1 in 4 for those who aren't good with math. The number of inmates incarcerated on drug charges has increased by 550% over the last 20 years. Prisons & Drug Offenders | Drug War Facts


Not only are we paying to "fight" these "criminals" ($40 Billion/year) , but we are also paying to KEEP THEM IN JAIL. $67.55 PER INMATE, PER DAY to be exact, or approx $6.5 Billion (again with a "B") dollars a year TOTAL, and those numbers are just for the drug offenders.

If the number of inmates incarcerated on drug related charges has increased by 550% in 20 years, then IMO it seems our government is becoming a little "trigger happy" (and it shows in this case).

 

[Phil502]

This mistakenly assumes that the only way to serve that warrant was with a violent, dynamic entry of police officers.

The fact is that this entire situation could have been avoided if they police had just sent a uniformed officer to the door, banged on the door, called everyone out of the house, and executed their warrant.

There is no reason to believe that a guy, even if he is selling marijuana, is high risk to officers or anyone else for that matter.

They used a sledge hammer to drive a finishing nail, and it ended in disaster. This happens all the time, and it is among the consequences of allowing police departments to have these heavily armed, paramilitary units. The justification for such officers/units is for incidents like active shooters, high risk warrants for violent felons, hostage situations, etc. Once the units are available, they're used to enforce, "Narcotics search warrants" for drugs that aren't even "narcotics."

All of this exists because nobody asks why they are using so much force to find a gram of marijuana while the officers hide behind qualified immunity so even if they are sued, they will pay nothing and it's all passed onto the taxpayers.

The interesting thing is that if the drug war ended tomorrow, I think I'd even consider becoming a police officer. The problem, as I see it, is that instead of acting like public servants, police officers these days are stuck acting like a bunch of tyrants.

I'm sure there are plenty of officers out there who respect the fourth amendment, don't serve on police checkpoints or act like bullies and tyrants. I also suspect that 30-40 years ago, there were a lot more of them. Why or how police work ever went from "serve and protect" to proactive policing where everyone is treated like a criminal is beyond me.

The question we should be asking ourselves is, "Why do we elect people and encourage them to 'enforce' these laws in this manner?"

In the end, it's costing us money out of our pockets. 5% of the earth's population now has 25% of the prison population. And you can bet that won't change, because tens of thousands of people need to staff these prisons at our expense.

And so the cycle continues....

Do you think that warrants served for similar offenses never meet with a man that will take a shot at the police? I am not LEO and don't know why they have to go in with SWAT or even what they thought of this particular felon. Just because they did not catch him with the goods does not mean he did not have them before, we don't know that either way. Even if they grabbed him up at the 7/11, how do they know thats safe to the general public?

I just don't think that the Police are supposed to take chances everytime they bust a guy. Who could make 20 or 30 years of catching bad guys by not taking advantage of the situation.

I am not defending the cops in this case, particularly, I would like to know more about why they choose the SWAT method though.

 

[downzero]

Over 25% of all prison inmates in the US are incarcerated due to drug related offenses...!

This is true but doesn't even begin to cover it. 60% of the people in Federal prison are there on "drug related offenses."

http://courses.atlas.uiuc.edu/ECON/ECON484/LectureOutlines/Chapter12.PDF

(from my law and economics class).

5% of the world's population
25% of the world's prison population
1 out of every 143 people in our country are imprisoned

This is absolutely appalling to anyone with any sense.

Do you think that warrants served for similar offenses never meet with a man that will take a shot at the police? I am not LEO and don't know why they have to go in with SWAT or even what they thought of this particular felon. Just because they did not catch him with the goods does not mean he did not have them before, we don't know that either way. Even if they grabbed him up at the 7/11, how do they know thats safe to the general public?

I just don't think that the Police are supposed to take chances everytime they bust a guy. Who could make 20 or 30 years of catching bad guys by not taking advantage of the situation.

I am not defending the cops in this case, particularly, I would like to know more about why they choose the SWAT method though.

Police work is not a dangerous job. It gets that reputation in the media and in movies. The empirical reality is that it's more dangerous to be a commercial fisherman or a construction worker than a police officer. I'm not suggesting that they should take unnecessary risk, but taking some risk is part of their job, and they are actually less likely to be harmed than many other jobs, some of which we wouldn't even realize were so dangerous.

The police choose SWAT because they have it available. The federal government has issued large grants and huge amounts of money to local law enforcement agencies to train and equip these teams. Of course, they couldn't justify the expense of maintaining these teams to the taxpayers unless they were used for something. So, why not have them doing warrant service? I'm sure search warrants are executed every day. Why have them go to the door in a uniform when they can kick the door in and raid the house?

Once the warrant is issued, there's basically no restriction. And since they've been getting away with it for 20 years, why use less force? After all, the media and the apologists will just err on the side of "officer safety" anyway, even though police work is not that dangerous in the aggregate.

 

[Gamez235]

I could care less about the drugs, the warrant, or the situation period. I have a problem with the LEO entering the house in the manner they did with a child present. If they thought the show of force was required it should have been done when the kid wasn't present. If they expected a criminal similar to this guy to be armed and confrontational, to start a gunfight this could have gone way worse than a few dogs being killed...

The poor kid now has to deal with the traumatic nature of his fathers arrest and death of a family pet. Not mention the long term impression of this kids perception of law enforcement in general.

I am sure there is a reason why it was carried out in the way it was and we don't know all the details, so I will just leave it at this...

 

[IndyMonkey]

I could care less about the drugs, the warrant, or the situation period. I have a problem with the LEO entering the house in the manner they did with a child present. If they thought the show of force was required it should have been done when the kid wasn't present. If they expected a criminal similar to this guy to be armed and confrontational, to start a gunfight this could have gone way worse than a few dogs being killed...

The poor kid now has to deal with the traumatic nature of his fathers arrest and death of a family pet. Not mention the long term impression of this kids perception of law enforcement in general.

I am sure there is a reason why it was carried out in the way it was and we don't know all the details, so I will just leave it at this...

The fact that the dad is a felon and drug dealer will be a longer lasting memory than the police busting in the door and shooting fido.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The fact that the dad is a felon and drug dealer will be a longer lasting memory than the police busting in the door and shooting fido.

hhhhmmm.... Can't say I agree with you there.

While having a drug dealing daddy isn't a great influence, that kind of violence is indellibly etched onto your psyche.

This is a double whammy, IMO. Now the kid is going to have the wrong idea about following the law and the enforcement of it.

 

[flightsimmer]

An ambush? Heh, sounds fair to me. I'm still shaking with anger. There is NO! justification for what the police did.

 

[radonc73]

That kid will take the side of the dad. Especially when he gets older and sees what jackasses the cops were. I am sure the law enforcement will be high on his list of priorities.
Just b/c he was selling drugs before doesn't mean he was doing it NOW!! Anyone here ever drive drunk when they were younger and get a DUI? Does that mean you do now?

 

[MinuteMan47]

Just b/c he was selling drugs before doesn't mean he was doing it NOW!! Anyone here ever drive drunk when they were younger and get a DUI? Does that mean you do now?

Once "the system" gets a grip on you it holds on tight and doesn't let go...

 

[Thumper]

If they do this more the crime rate will drop and people will wise up.Just stay away from drugs is that hard to understand?

 

[MinuteMan47]

If they do this more the crime rate will drop and people will wise up.Just stay away from drugs is that hard to understand?

Really...??? So that way they can take more money out of my paycheck each week, and raise taxes....because of what someone else chooses to put in their own body?

 

[christman]

That dog shouldn't have been smokin the sheiba. He'll think twice next time...Oh wait.I forgot....Let that be a lesson to all party animals out there!

 

[ghunter]

You can't stop people from getting high, no matter how many machine guns you bring into their homes. We need to ask ourselves if the war on drugs is worth fighting.

 

[christman]

You can't stop people from getting high, no matter how many machine guns you bring into their homes. We need to ask ourselves if the war on drugs is worth fighting.

I completely disagree. One "machine gun" would stop anyone from getting high ever again in their home. Just saying. But your not kidding. War on drugs is such a waste. Just like the drugs themselves. Take some of that money and start stimulating the economy by paying off peoples mortgages and freeing up some paychecks.

 

[Thumper]

Really...??? So that way they can take more money out of my paycheck each week, and raise taxes....because of what someone else chooses to put in their own body?

OK I give up.There must be alot of people on INGO that use illegal drugs.If not why do you stand behind dopeheads?Would you sell this guy a gun when he gets out?I just don't understand.Sorry if anyone is offended.