• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

No-knock raid foulups #42344

94Deac said:
Nevermind. Sometimes it's just a waste of time trying to discuss something.
Click to expand...

meh - fuck the police. Why was any of this necessary?

I hope the child is all right. At least it hasn't ended up like the case of Aiyana Jones. Yet.
 
The mother wrote a piece for Salon. http://www.salon.com/2014/06/24/a_swat_team_blew_a_hole_in_my_2_year_old_son/

I heard my baby wailing and asked one of the officers to let me hold him. He screamed at me to sit down and shut up and blocked my view, so I couldn’t see my son. I could see a singed crib. And I could see a pool of blood. The officers yelled at me to calm down and told me my son was fine, that he’d just lost a tooth. It was only hours later when they finally let us drive to the hospital that we found out Bou Bou was in the intensive burn unit and that he’d been placed into a medically induced coma.
Click to expand...

That's some fine policing there.
 
Protect and to serve.

The thing that gets me the most about this is that cops and the criminal justice system as a whole just do not care about that child and what that family is going through. Nothing is going to change.
 
Last edited:
Who's kidding who? This is the America that a lot lot lot of Americans want.
Why didn't they have enough insurance when their house burned down to get into a rental? If they didn't have the money and had to put the child and themselves in a home they weren't sure of then oh well, not my problem, drug users and dealers should all be shot.

Guarandamnty you there are millions of Americans who feel that way.
 
No doubt about that, WakeandBake. Many Americans want this police state then they want their guns to protect themselves against that police state.
 
Think of all of the kids from HS that ended up as police officers. Now think about if you want them to have this type of power.
 
ACLU sues for public records for Mass SWAT team
http://aclum.org/news_6.24.14a

BOSTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts today sued the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council (NEMLEC) for records regarding its Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team. The ACLU of Massachusetts seeks public documents including policies guiding the SWAT team's use of deadly force, training materials, incident reports, deployment statistics and equipment contracts.
Click to expand...

NEMLEC, a group of 58 police and sheriff departments in Middlesex and Essex counties, receives government grants and taxpayers' dollars to purchase high-tech equipment, and oversees several operational units.
Click to expand...

NEMLEC operates as a regional law enforcement unit, yet when the ACLU of Massachusetts requested records from NEMLEC, the agency responded that it is a private, non-profit organization, wholly exempt from public records laws.

"NEMLEC can't have it both ways," said ACLU of Massachusetts staff attorney Jessie Rossman. "Either it is a public entity subject to public records laws, or what it is doing is illegal."
Click to expand...
 
PhDeac said:
No doubt about that, WakeandBake. Many Americans want this police state then they want their guns to protect themselves against that police state.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it's that simple. Many? Maybe, but far from anything approaching a majority. The overwhelming number of gun toting conservative types I know are appalled at the militarization of LEO. Sure, there are those who support it, but they are mostly LEO themselves, or connected to LEO and "just want their family/friends to be safe on the job," ignoring that no-knock raids and unjustified use of force are actually what put their family/friends in harm's way. And when it comes to the libertarian gun toting types, well, the answer there is obvious. It's far from scientific, but the overwhelming response to stories about police militarization and fuckups is negative on an AR-15 Owners Group on Facebook that I read, by something like 9 to 1. The 2nd amendment exists for protection from things exactly like this. Anyone who claims to be a big 2nd amendment supporter would find it damn near impossible to support this. On the other hand, I distinctly remember being very surprised at the non-response of my more left leaning friends to the atrocities that occurred in Boston after the bombing.

In the end, gun toter or not, this shit has to end. It's a vast overstepping of the bounds of power that government and law enforcement should be allowed, without any justification considering the falling gun and violent crime rates, not to mention the growing desire to end this absurd "war on drugs."
 
Last edited:
Racer, I think you are correct about what libertarian and gun-rights advocates say, but they overwhelmingly vote for politicians who support the tough on crime, keep up the drug war, throw them all in jail party line.
 
Deacon923 said:
Racer, I think you are correct about what libertarian and gun-rights advocates say, but they overwhelmingly vote for politicians who support the tough on crime, keep up the drug war, throw them all in jail party line.
Click to expand...

As do Dems. We all know there's more to voting than single issues.
 
RacerDeac said:
As do Dems. We all know there's more to voting than single issues.
Click to expand...

All voters on both sides vote that way because all the candidates vote that way on legislation. What are they going to do, run on the 'soft on crime' platform?

Americans who's entire universe is informed by what they see on TV are scared shitless all day long of child molesters, druggies, prostitutes, blacks, immigrants, goths, weirdos etc around every corner and behind every tree and who drive this shit with their fear.

And that's a lot of them.
 
WakeandBake said:
Americans who's entire universe is informed by what they see on TV are scared shitless all day long of child molesters, druggies, prostitutes, blacks, immigrants, goths, weirdos etc around every corner and behind every tree and who drive this shit with their fear.

And that's a lot of them.
Click to expand...

No doubt. I'm guilty myself. I know what the stats say about the world actually being safer now than when I was a kid, and yet the idea of letting my kids hop on a bike at age 10 at 8 AM and not coming home until 8 PM the way that I did seems absolutely absurd to me.
 
And then you have those sympathetic to the plight of this child, and they soothe themselves and absolve the police by saying "all part of God's plan." Those are the worst.
 
RacerDeac said:
The 2nd amendment exists for protection from things exactly like this.
Click to expand...

How, exactly? I get the concept, that an armed population (in theory) keeps the government from over-stepping their bounds, but how would owning a gun have helped the family in this situation?

It seems more like an example that goes against that argument.
 
Well for one, I don't think that militia was well-regulated enough.

WakeandBake said:
And then you have those sympathetic to the plight of this child, and they soothe themselves and absolve the police by saying "all part of God's plan." Those are the worst.
Click to expand...

Saw this exact thing said by a grandparent of a 5 year old who shot and killed his 2 year old sister with the "my first rifle" his parents got him for his birthday.
http://aattp.org/woman-says-it-was-...dentally-shot-2-year-old-granddaughter-video/

And of course, "No charges will be filed."
 
avalon said:
How, exactly? I get the concept, that an armed population (in theory) keeps the government from over-stepping their bounds, but how would owning a gun have helped the family in this situation?
Click to expand...

Is a police force (often riding in armored vehicles these days), dressed in body armor, carrying rifles, knocking down doors without knocking/announcing, and throwing explosives into a child's crib without any guarantee that the person they are there to arrest is even home not over-stepping of government bounds? All to catch someone who is accused of selling drugs and could have been picked up by normal means by simply watching the house and waiting for him to leave? "To Serve and Protect", my ass.

You're projecting the ability to defend against a tyrannical government in general onto a single isolated event. At no point did I claim that owning guns would have protected this one family in this one situation. Hell, owning guns may have gotten them killed due to the ridiculous overstepping of bounds by the police and the "people as the enemy" attitude demonstrated in their actions. There are multiple accounts of innocent citizens waking up to find their house being invaded by similar SWAT actions, attempting to defend themselves, and ending up dead. The point of the 2nd amendment is to prevent these isolated events from becoming the norm. At some point, if this continues happening, people as a whole will either roll over and take it or stand up and say no more. The 2nd amendment gives some teeth to the ability for the people to stand up and say no more when the law, democracy, etc fails to adequately protects them.
 
Last edited:
i feel as though paramilitarization of america's police hurts the "arm americans to keep us safe from our govt" argument; it's not an arms race civs can win
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top