SWAT Team Honored For Raid On Wrong House

[Pharmakon]

Originally Posted by Alaskapopo

Sorry but your example is not even close. Also I did not say it should be overlooked. People need to be accountable for their screw ups. But certain anti leo types are making a mountain out of a pin head here. It's akin to saying we need to disband the armed forces because of the atrocities committed a few US soldiers in Iraq.
Pat

There is no comparison between holding police accountable for their actions instead of lobbing softballs at them and disarming the military in a warzone because of collateral damage (a product of war). Innocent deaths should never be a product of law enforcement, and if it is; what's good for the goose...

Militarized police get shot at by a scared and innocent American in his own home and they are heros for enduring the horror of returned fire and get medals for their bravery (whoa wait. They shoot back!?). Soldiers get shot at every day because in war it's not a crime to shoot someone who is armed and shooting at you like it is here when your door gets kicked in by the state because you may posses an illegal substance.

[Yuppicide]

Originally Posted by eric_t12

In the declaration of independence, they made a point of condemning the actions of the king, and the king's army, for aggressions against the people.

But what they meant to say was:

"Yes, they quartered themselves in our homes, confiscated our arms, impressed our people into their army, and imprisoned those who spoke against it, but it's not the Red Coats fault...they were just doing their job using the information they were given. I understand the initial concern that most people have about the Red Coats becoming too "overzelous" when it starts to oppress the public with illegal actions......But we do have a court system in place that can address those issues through criminal/civil judgments against them 'Coats.....and if you don't like it, take it up with the king....But to suggest disbanding the Red Coats..is just ridiculous!"
-Gen. George Alaskapopo Washington


LOL! JK!!!

.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Yuppicide

But what they meant to say was:

"Yes, they quartered themselves in our homes, confiscated our arms, impressed our people into their army, and imprisoned those who spoke against it, but it's not the Red Coats fault...they were just doing their job using the information they were given. I understand the initial concern that most people have about the Red Coats becoming too "overzelous" when it starts to oppress the public with illegal actions......But we do have a court system in place that can address those issues through criminal/civil judgments against them 'Coats.....and if you don't like it, take it up with the king....But to suggest disbanding the Red Coats..is just ridiculous!"
-Gen. George Alaskapopo Washington


LOL! JK!!!

.

[Alaskapopo]

Originally Posted by Pharmakon

There is no comparison between holding police accountable for their actions instead of lobbing softballs at them and disarming the military in a warzone because of collateral damage (a product of war). Innocent deaths should never be a product of law enforcement, and if it is; what's good for the goose...

Militarized police get shot at by a scared and innocent American in his own home and they are heros for enduring the horror of returned fire and get medals for their bravery (whoa wait. They shoot back!?). Soldiers get shot at every day because in war it's not a crime to shoot someone who is armed and shooting at you like it is here when your door gets kicked in by the state because you may posses an illegal substance.

When drug dealers are firing rounds your way its a war zone buddy. When people are shooting at you it makes little difference rather your uniform is camo or navy blue with a shinny badge. Military blunders are on the rise as well. They are taking felons, people are getting killed who are unarmed and women and getting raped. So do we junk the military for a few bad apples (more bad apples on a percentage basis by far due to lower standards) no of course not same goes for SWAT.

And in this case the citizen was not innocent he was firing on police officers who identified themselves as such who where wearing uniforms with police markings. That is far from innocent. Yes the police screwed up by going to the wrong house. The home owner screwed up by not properly identifying the threat before opening fire.
Pat

[MGD 45]

Originally Posted by D_Fence

If that much is known about a particular house and suspect(s), one would think it would be really really hard to go to the wrong house.

If the no-knock SWAT raids were contained to scenarios such as what you described, I doubt we'd all be having this conversation. I think that is the point most of us are trying to make. I have zero confidence that these warrants are being reviewed with due diligence.

Your right....going to the wrong house is unheard of in my area and unacceptable in my opinion. Proper investigations & surveillance will stop that from happening.

[MGD 45]

Yuppie,

You posted in one of your other threads something like 56 innocent deaths attributed to SWAT raids in the past ten years, and that there have been 40,000 raids a year. Going just by these numbers....in the past 10 years there have been 400,000 raids with a accidental death percentage of .00014%

Unless I just suck doing my math.....which is very possible....0.00014% is a REALLY low number. Of course, If your one of those deaths, it's not acceptable.......

[REDTAIL]

this reminds me of the Tom Selleck movie An Innocent Man when cops got the wrong house ans shot him and set him up with drugs to hide their mistake. unreal

[Yuppicide]

Originally Posted by MGD 45

Yuppie,

You posted in one of your other threads something like 56 innocent deaths attributed to SWAT raids in the past ten years, and that there have been 40,000 raids a year. Going just by these numbers....in the past 10 years there have been 400,000 raids with a accidental death percentage of .00014%

Unless I just suck doing my math.....which is very possible....0.00014% is a REALLY low number. Of course, If your one of those deaths, it's not acceptable.......

True enough.

Of course those numbers are only the Deaths (hard to find stats for people just wounded, beat up, dead pets, traumatized children, old people who have heart attacks, destroyed property, false arrests, etc...)


.

[Alaskapopo]

Originally Posted by Yuppicide

True enough.

Of course those numbers are only the Deaths (hard to find stats for people just wounded, beat up, dead pets, traumatized children, old people who have heart attacks, destroyed property, false arrests, etc...)


.

Ok lets find some common ground. We all agree that botched raids are a bad thing. I don't think disbanding all SWAT teams is a viable answer however as it is throwing the baby out with the bath water. What is needed in my opinion is standardized training and standards. For example now my small PD could start a SWAT team with low standards if we wanted. The next agency over could set the standards so high only Navy Seals could make it. What we need is the States to set minimum guide lines up for SWAT and we need to get better training out to the smaller agencies. There still is a need in small towns and what not. For example where I am we had a guy popping rounds off at people in one of the national parks near us. We assisted the troopers. They called the regional SWAT team. It took 4 hours for them to arrive. Our dispatcher had the guy talked down by then over the phone. We needed a team that had at least marginal training close by. My last agency had it my current one does not. Many rural towns simply can not wait for the big city's SWAT team to arrive. But we don't want people playing dress up that don't have the skills needed to do the job.
So I saw more training and higher standards.
Pat

[Yuppicide]

It's 5:10 AM, and I'm way too tired to argue...So I guess I'll have to agree with you..................
For NOW!!!!!!

LOL

-Yuppicide


.