Texas deputy dies serving no-knock, no-announce SWAT raid for marijuana

[Tombs]

The police and military in this country are certainly part of "the people" but they make up what? 5% of the population?

Our system is set up with many layers of involvement from different levels which are used to create legislation, determine its legality and implement appropriate punishment for violators. Many of those people are much better educated and prepared for those duties than I am. However, if you want to eliminate them and leave the entire decision on what is legal and what isn't in the hands of the police go right ahead but I don't think you'd be too pleased with the resulting police state.

If the majority of the people in this country disagreed with the majority of the criminal laws in this country the prisons would be empty from all of the acquittals handed down by the juries.

Whether people disagree with the law is irrelevant to its enforcement. How many people do you know who want to pay their taxes when they can barely afford to pay for their child's school lunches?

As for believing that enforcing the law results in a police state... No, if you can go send a violent criminal to jail now, sending a seditious politician to jail is no different. We simply fill their seat with someone else. We are not talking about a coup, we are talking about ENFORCING THE LAW.
Working as a politician to subvert the publics' liberty is about the highest crime any human being is capable of.

A rag tag group of poverty stricken rabble rousers in a foreign land is of little to no threat to the publics' freedom. A politician who is actively plotting and funding efforts to remove those freedoms is a HUGE threat to the public. Where are the police, the military, those who took an oath to stop such things from happening? Oh right, they're off saying if ordered to they will violate the publics' constitutional rights. Please tell me how this deserves respect?

You people keep bringing up "Well if the majority says this..." you know what? The majority doesn't have the right to oppress, we have a republic, not a direct democracy, because when the majority is given power bad things tend to happen. I mean, what happens when all the media works for the same organization? What happens when the public is brainwashed to want to throw away their rights? What happens when the public is so brainwashed they demand that we lose our sovereignty? Do you not understand why your logic is so fundamentally wrong? It's your duty to know these things.

 

[phylodog]

What if there were no police? What if you just wanted to see justice served?

Would I see you kicking down doors to confiscate plants and lock up plant ingesters? Do you feel that justice is served by this? Do these people deserve to have their doors kicked down and their lives risked?

Makes no difference what I think. I don't make the laws nor am I paid to be king.

A would prefer a world where police officers would use their own moral compass to say "No" when a superior asked them to lock someone in a cage for owning a plant.

What if I felt there was nothing wrong with a man beating his wife and refused to arrest anyone for it?

 

[Bunnykid68]

What if I felt there was nothing wrong with a man beating his wife and refused to arrest anyone for it?

At least with your scenario, there is clearly an injured party having their rights violated by another

 

[phylodog]

Whether people disagree with the law is irrelevant to its enforcement. How many people do you know who want to pay their taxes when they can barely afford to pay for their child's school lunches?

As for believing that enforcing the law results in a police state... No, if you can go send a violent criminal to jail now, sending a seditious politician to jail is no different. We simply fill their seat with someone else. We are not talking about a coup, we are talking about ENFORCING THE LAW.
Working as a politician to subvert the publics' liberty is about the highest crime any human being is capable of.

A rag tag group of poverty stricken rabble rousers in a foreign land is of little to no threat to the publics' freedom. A politician who is actively plotting and funding efforts to remove those freedoms is a HUGE threat to the public. Where are the police, the military, those who took an oath to stop such things from happening? Oh right, they're off saying if ordered to they will violate the publics' constitutional rights. Please tell me how this deserves respect?

You people keep bringing up "Well if the majority says this..." you know what? The majority doesn't have the right to oppress, we have a republic, not a direct democracy, because when the majority is given power bad things tend to happen. I mean, what happens when all the media works for the same organization? What happens when the public is brainwashed to want to throw away their rights? What happens when the public is so brainwashed they demand that we lose our sovereignty? Do you not understand why your logic is so fundamentally wrong? It's your duty to know these things.

As I said, if you want the police to be the end all-be all decision makers about what is right or wrong and give them the ultimate authority to run this country how they see fit, be my guest. Eliminate all of the lawyers, lobbyists, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and politicians all the way up.

 

[Bunnykid68]

As I said, if you want the police to be the end all-be all decision makers about what is right or wrong and give them the ultimate authority to run this country how they see fit, be my guest. Eliminate all of the lawyers, lobbyists, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and politicians all the way up.

Phylo is correct here. You start letting cops be Judge Dredd then you have to worry about 1000's of individuals moral compass

 

[Tombs]

What if I felt there was nothing wrong with a man beating his wife and refused to arrest anyone for it?

Morals can be summed up simply dude...

Non-aggression principle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's all anyone needs to know to become a civilized human being. And those who go against that are the only ones who need placed in a cage. Anyone who advocates jailing of another individual when that individual did not break that moral code also belongs in a cage.

As I said, if you want the police to be the end all-be all decision makers about what is right or wrong and give them the ultimate authority to run this country how they see fit, be my guest. Eliminate all of the lawyers, lobbyists, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and politicians all the way up.

You didn't read my post.

I simply advocated enforcing the law against politicians.

 

[actaeon277]

North Hollywood shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I disagree.
No police ran during this incident.
One of the longest law enforcement gun fights.
Pistols and shotguns and 2nd chance vests against rifles and body armor.

I didn't insult any ONE...I stand by most words that most American cops would walk away then to take on the real drug dealers. This thread is about a guy that killed a deputy that was on a no-knock for some pot plants. If he was a high level drug dealer more than one would have been killed. My opinion is that cops are doing more no-knocks now because they are too afraid to do it the way it was done for a century or more.

 

[Tired of Lies]

It is easy to be a badass vicariously through your husband, especially on the internet. Does he know about/approve of all the bull**** you are talking?

You and Phylo would make bad ass dectectives. Only ONE point was my husband. You have no idea what I have seen or done.

And, when it came down to it I would bet neither of you would get in my cabin in the middle of the night and I bet you couldn't even say why.

But, what I do know is both my husband and I turned downed nice paychecks in order to not sell out our souls.

Phylo was the one who prompted 'most'..and yes 'most' would not take on the really bad guys....if they could or would they wouldn't need special tasks force divisions to do it. But, if you are so inclined to be a solo bad ass yourself by all means be my guest.

 

[actaeon277]

Maybe eveyone should step back and take a breath.

 

[Tired of Lies]

If a person morally objects to enforcing a particular law, then they need to quit being a law enforcer and find something else they are morally ok with.

Gunner

Morally correct but very hard to do in reality and you have to be prepared to pay a heavy personal price. I found that out. The vast majority of people will turn a blind eye when everything they own is on the line...just ask everyone from Jesus Christ to all the "non-Nazi" Germans in 1946 or so.

 

[steveh_131]

Makes no difference what I think. I don't make the laws nor am I paid to be king.

This is an important point. Any action that is morally just will remain morally just whether you are wearing or uniform or not.

If you wouldn't be morally willing to knock down the same door on your own time in your own clothes then you shouldn't do it while you're on duty either.

What if I felt there was nothing wrong with a man beating his wife and refused to arrest anyone for it?

I would question your stance in the wife-beating situation and applaud your stance against what you believed to be an unjust arrest.

Phylo is correct here. You start letting cops be Judge Dredd then you have to worry about 1000's of individuals moral compass

I'm not suggesting that the police enforce laws that aren't on the books. I am suggesting that the police refuse to act as the enforcement arm of an oppressive government.

 

[maxmayhem]

what does this post even mean?....you dont have the facts right...and who is the "Him" in "God bless Him and his family"...the raid was deemed to be illegal or at best negligent because they did not announce themselves...sorry the officer died but it was the swat teams fault....and tell me that they could not have caught this guy in the street in broad daylight then entered the home with him in custody or what.....

Am I missing something? A criminal killed a SWAT team member who was legally performing a no knock raid in which illegally possessed controlled substances were found.

God Bless Him and his family.

 

[phylodog]

[/I][/FONT][/COLOR]
This is an important point. Any action that is morally just will remain morally just whether you are wearing or uniform or not.

If you wouldn't be morally willing to knock down the same door on your own time in your own clothes then you shouldn't do it while you're on duty either.

Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. Laws do not equal morals in this country. I don't enforce the law off duty unless someone's safety is at risk.

 

[maxmayhem]

this site has gotten to be a waste of time

 

[steveh_131]

Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. Laws do not equal morals in this country. I don't enforce the law off duty unless someone's safety is at risk.

Let me give you some examples.

Criminal A: I watch a man murder someone in cold blood.

Criminal B: I see a man walk into his home holding a large bag of marijuana and a bong.

I would feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal A and locking him in a cage, or shooting him if he refused.

I would not feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal B so that I could confiscate his marijuana or lock him in a cage. I would not feel morally comfortable shooting him if he refused.

This is a simple way to judge your actions as a law enforcement officer. If your actions would be immoral out of uniform then they are equally immoral in uniform.

 

[Tombs]

this site has gotten to be a waste of time

Takes patience to show people morals. After the ~5000 years of human history still only a hand full of people on this planet even know what morals are.
Can't change that in a day but it is becoming more wide spread.

 

[Tired of Lies]

Let me give you some examples.

Criminal A: I watch a man murder someone in cold blood.

Criminal B: I see a man walk into his home holding a large bag of marijuana and a bong.

I would feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal A and locking him in a cage, or shooting him if he refused.

I would not feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal B so that I could confiscate his marijuana or lock him in a cage. I would not feel morally comfortable shooting him if he refused.

This is a simple way to judge your actions as a law enforcement officer. If your actions would be immoral out of uniform then they are equally immoral in uniform.

I would think that A alone is a moral judge for everyone. Especially those of us that may be armed. No cop around...you are armed...do you let him go or hold for the police?

Let him go and he may be on a spree and others may die. You could die and it isn't your "job" but morally should you stop him?

 

[steveh_131]

Criminal C: I am driving the speed limit on a highway and I see someone pass me at roughly 15 over the speed limit.

I would not feel morally comfortable pulling him over by threat of force and taking $150 from him and raising his car insurance rates.

 

[Tombs]

I would think that A alone is a moral judge for everyone. Especially those of us that may be armed. No cop around...you are armed...do you let him go or hold for the police?

Let him go and he may be on a spree and others may die. You could die and it isn't your "job" but morally should you stop him?

Morally, you are no different than the police, you have an obligation as a human being to do something about it if you are able.

Criminal C: I am driving the speed limit on a highway and I see someone pass me at roughly 15 over the speed limit.

I would not feel morally comfortable pulling him over by threat of force and taking $150 from him and raising his car insurance rates.

Who is he actually hurting?

All the answers to that are based on pre-crime. Thus morally wrong to enforce.

People generally drive in packs, like schools of fish. Without laws, they'd likely drive even more cautiously of the world around them.
A study in europe confirmed that result. http://www.spiegel.de/international...ties-do-away-with-traffic-signs-a-448747.html

In fact in california I noticed that police have a different approach to speed enforcement. They will drive ahead of the pack and swing across lanes with their lights on, slowing traffic back down to the speed limit.

 

[phylodog]

Let me give you some examples.

Criminal A: I watch a man murder someone in cold blood.

Criminal B: I see a man walk into his home holding a large bag of marijuana and a bong.

I would feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal A and locking him in a cage, or shooting him if he refused.

I would not feel comfortable kicking down the door of Criminal B so that I could confiscate his marijuana or lock him in a cage. I would not feel morally comfortable shooting him if he refused.

This is a simple way to judge your actions as a law enforcement officer. If your actions would be immoral out of uniform then they are equally immoral in uniform.

Again, we are a nation of laws. While you may not agree with all of the laws, abiding by them is a condition of enjoying the freedoms this country offers. If you don't like them there are ways to get them changed but your attempts to place that responsibility with me is flawed.