Can't wait to see the comments on this

[Guest 6.8 AR]

http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Indiana_First_State_to_Allow_Citizens_to_Shoot_Law_Enforcement_Officers_120611

A response to the Indiana State Supreme Court ruling.

[Steelharp]

"The service is unavailable."

No comment.

[E4 No More]

LEO's are pissy as expected. As a former LEO I see the rub. A average citizen wouldn't know a lawful entry of a LEO from an unlawful entry: therefore, lawful entries have just become extremely dangerous for all parties concerned. The old addage that you don't win an argument with a LEO on the scene is more important to keep in mind in Indiana. The LEO's tend to be better armed when they enter a home, and most assuredly will be from now on.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I see the danger, too. I think the moral of the story could end up where making sure that warrant is properly served.

I was rather surprised to hear of the law being passed.

That Sheriff in Indiana pissed off a lot of folks after that ruling. I think this is a response to that arrogant Sheriff, more than

anything.

Steelharp. It took me a while to pull the link up from Drudge this morning.

[mcurrier]

Everything is Quid pro quo now. Police can shoot citizens, citizens can shoot police. Maybe both had better be a little more cautious in what they do then. Making sure you're raiding the correct house could save a lot of lives, including your own.

[Chucktshoes]

It could have the positive side effect of effectively ending the "no knock" warrants in Indiana.

[mikegideon]

It could have the positive side effect of effectively ending the "no knock" warrants in Indiana.

I can't get into the site either, but I think you're onto something. Maybe they'll start knocking on the door instead of launching a full military operation.

[BrasilNuts]

Like a lot of people here I've had dangerous jobs before. When you're on a job and there are potential dangers there are always safety procedures that you follow. Those procedures are in place for good reason... to keep you from being injured or killed. Some of the jobs I've done would have three or four pages of checks to go through before work could begin and then constant monitoring while anyone was working.

A zoo keeper isn't going to go into the gorilla house without double or triple checking to make sure all safety procedures have been followed.

LEOs in Indiana better make sure they've checked everything twice before kicking in that door.

The street name and house number would be a good place to start.

[mikegideon]

i know that no knock warrants are an absolute necessity sometimes. Just seems like they are over-used in some places.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

It is a baby and bathwater thang. Entering quick enough to keep a hippy from flushing a bag of pot, is not a big enough reward for the consequences of innocents (and misdemeanor minor criminals who otherwise might not have even gone to jail for their minor possession crime) getting blown away when police kick down the door with a surprise invasion.

Knock. Show ID and warrant thru the peep hole if that is what is required for cooperation. Then kick down the door if the perp is uncooperative. If the perp appears too dangerous to kick down the door after being warned, and he doesn't have hostages, just starve him out or shoot teargas thru the windows or whatever. I'm ignerant and maybe wrong, but not too many people will stay holed up indefinitely after you cut power, water, cable and internet. Bring out the military tactics on the hard-core and the emergency situations. Leave everybody else the heck alone.

[Chucktshoes]

Although there are plenty of justifications (excuses) made by .gov for no knock entries, the track record of innocent deaths due to errors are inexcusable. Even more inexcusable is the overuse (abuse) of no knocks and the total disregard for 4th amendment rights that cannot be separated from their use.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Have there been any cases of serious injury with "almost no knock" warrants? They knock, the occupant is near the door, gets up and has his hand on the doorknob, then they shoot the lock with a breaching round? Sounds like a good way to mess up a hand but am ignorant of it.

[Caster]

As far as these "no knock" warrants are concerned, there's an easy solution that will serve you well in other ways also. SECURE YOUR HOME!

There's a lot a hollywood BS as far as door breaching is concerned. Door breaching rounds only work IF they know where the hinges and locks are. Get creative! That little two man ram you see in the movies will not knock down a properly secured security door. And even if it could, it would take several licks thereby negating the "NO KNOCK" part. Double pane storm windows, high off the ground as possible. Lot's of lighting and a camera set up too.

If they were to mistakenly come here, 911 would get a call long before they get in.....well provided I'm actually IN for the night.

Edited June 12, 2012 by Caster

[Dolomite_supafly]

No knocks warrants are used for everything now. And that comes from the departments trying to justify the existence and additional costs of having full time SWAT officers. I am also sure there is some sort of additional federal funding if the departments are doing a lot of "high risk" entries.

I don't think that this is going to curb the liberal use of no knock warrants but I do belive it will make the officer exercise due dilligence in their research and planning of the operation.

I would also like the laws to go a bit farther and allow someone who has been wronged to sue the officer(s) personally and not the department. Afterall if a person sues the department and wins then it is the citizens of the county that pays, not the officers that are actually responsible. Also, make it illegal for public funds to be used to defend an officer accused of committing a crime while on duty. An officer will think twice about abusing others if the victim might win a judgement against them and take everything they own.

No knocks should only be justified in those cases where they can prove a felony has been committed and the suspect has a history of violence. We have all read about a full blown military operation against a person who bought some marijuana from a CI. If they are worried about a suspect flushing evidence turn the water off 12 hours prior to the knock on the door. By that time there is not going to be any water left in any toilets and most suspects are not going to put 2 and 2 together.

Dolomite

[DaveTN]

I’ve long contended that there should be legislation and regulations involving forced entry by the Police. And it’s sad they should be required because only one person is accountable for the department’s policies; the Chief or Sherriff.

First and foremost an Officer that has been to the house, or is involved in the investigation should be required to be with the entry team and identify the house.

Subdued clothing and masks should be outlawed. The uniform that citizens are used to seeing needs to be what the entry team is wearing. If an Officer or a Chief thinks they should be dressed like a tactical Ninja for a common raid; they need step aside and let the real cops handle it.

I was watching cops one night and they had cops in plain clothes wearing masks jumping out on cars because they had picked up hookers. I thought “Oh my God, how can a Chief allow this?â€

If there is Officer Safety concerns kill power and water to the house, make contact and order the people out of the house. If destroying drugs is a concern, pass legislation that allows for the maximum penalties if there evidence of drugs being flushed or destroyed.

What Indiana is doing is non-sense and shows legislators disrespect for the Police and the Citizens.

The uninformed that think the cops need a warrant to search their car are the same ones that will be threating the cops with force if they don’t think the entry is lawful. Shooting at cops or threatening them with deadly force is suicide. If the cops are there they must think are there lawfully, if someone shoots at them they will shoot back.

Are laws like this necessary in Tennessee? If the guy in Lebanon that the cops killed (because he shot at them) when they had the wrong house would have shot a cop and survived, would he have been put on trial? The warrant was no good, the entry was unlawful, he had no idea what was going on.

[BigK]

I always wondered what would happen if a citizen shot an LEO during a no-knock.. Even if they had the right house, he might think it's robbers and shoot first.

Worse is that case where they kill a law-abiding citizen like the case DaveTN mentioned. It's tragic, really.

[TrickyNicky]

I along with probably most here can't count the times I'd have been killed in a mistaken no knock situation, and who could blame the individual PO? Think about it, he comes in and the very first thing he sees is a coffe table full of "dangerous firearms capable of firing multiple shots in succession" with some angry/surprised half nekkid guy sitting behind said table "brandishing" yet another

" dangerous" weapon?

I don't know how to feel about the In legislation, I do believe no knock=no good.

[tnhawk]

This new law is a disaster waiting to happen - for citizens and LEO.

[Guest cardcutter]

I have often wondered the base logic used in the leo community. Some how they think that their life and safety is more important than mine,the law abiding citizen. They have no mandate to protect me or prevent harm coming to me yet I am to bend to their every whim. I must obey their every command and the courts have said so. Just how are their rights more important than mine? They can gun me down for no other reason than they felt threatened. they can truss me up and detain me for no cause what so ever and then claim suspicion? What ever happened to our right to be left the hell alone when we are not breaking the law?

I have long thought that the Leo community is too militarized. Why does an urban police officer need to wear camouflage? Some of the larger cities are even investing in armor. Why?

This only leads to an us against them attitude. I find that very dangerous.

All that being said I do support the Leo community. My Uncle retired as a Sergeant of Detectives from the Birmingham PD.

[DaveTN]

I have often wondered the base logic used in the leo community. Some how they think that their life and safety is more important than mine,the law abiding citizen. They have no mandate to protect me or prevent harm coming to me yet I am to bend to their every whim. I must obey their every command and the courts have said so. Just how are their rights more important than mine? They can gun me down for no other reason than they felt threatened. they can truss me up and detain me for no cause what so ever and then claim suspicion? What ever happened to our right to be left the hell alone when we are not breaking the law?

I have long thought that the Leo community is too militarized. Why does an urban police officer need to wear camouflage? Some of the larger cities are even investing in armor. Why?

This only leads to an us against them attitude. I find that very dangerous.

All that being said I do support the Leo community. My Uncle retired as a Sergeant of Detectives from the Birmingham PD.

With all due respect I would love to sit down with you and your Uncle and let you ask those questions.

[Dolomite_supafly]

The LE community has gone from a point of being there to help like most officers were doing 30+ years ago to a "us" vs "them" mentality we see today.

The reason this has happened is because there was a shift about 20-30 years ago, maybe longer, to hire prior military over those who had no military experience. Along with those military personnel came the military mindset that many had. And then with the influx of military personnel came the influx of military tactics, ways of training as well as the "us" vs "them" mentality. This is the reason there has been a militarization of most police departments as well. That and a lot of the same equipment used by officers while in the military are now being provided to LE as part a program that supplies LE with surplus military hardware. So in essence LE is now just a civillian extension of the military in both mindset as well as equipment.

And now those same soldiers who joined the LE community are now in senior positions. It is those same senior officers that are now making changes to training and department policies. And that training and regulations are going to mirror what they knew in the military.

Also, the "us" vs "them" mentality is how the military always trains. There is always an enemy in the military and then when the soldiers transition to civilian jobs, especially LE, they keep the same "us" vs "them" mentality except those that are not in law enforcement are now the "enemy". This is why they no longer want to help, it is because those that are not LE are now their new "enemy".

Dolomite

[DaveTN]

So you are saying that Police Departments should turn their backs on all those that made a choice to serve their country and did so honorably? And that you, after having been a Police Officer, believe there is an “Us vs. Them†mentality that was caused by Military service?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No, it appears he is saying it is where the mindset came from. And it can be a dangerous thing

with the wrong leadership.

[Chucktshoes]

The changes you describe Dolomite were not accidental or incidental to the hiring of more veterans. I'll gladly wear my tinfoil hat on this one, but I think these moves were made intentionally to foster distance between LE and their communities. Personal liberties and constitutional rights are easier to bypass when those whose rights you are violating are "them" and not "us". When it comes time to really go all out, the Feds won't have any problems following those orders and more and more local LE won't either.

I'll wear my tin foil hat with pride as at this point, I think 2 of the 3 branches of our government have proven themselves as enemies of the people. Yet still, most of the population of this country will be willingly led to slaughter with the promise of bread and circuses.

[Guest cardcutter]

With all due respect I would love to sit down with you and your Uncle and let you ask those questions.

Dave

My attitude and opinions on this subject stem from many long talks with my dad and uncle Charley. He was against the militarization of the police. He felt that a beat cop with a personal relationship with and a respect for those who lived on his beat was the best of all possible crime deterrents. He understood the necessity of the SWAT teams but did not want to see the entire force become one.I have heard him" Vent " more than once about some "Badge heavy Bozo" (his words) that overreacted and made a situation much worse than it had to be.

He always said it should be the good guys against the bad guys not the police against everyone else.

BTW I would love to sit down with him and Papa again .They have both been gone for quite a few years now.