Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Police dont need to knock, justices say...

  • Thread starter Thread starter tattoopierced1
  • Start date Start date
jay the man just got run over by a truck are you ****ing kidding me? his arm must have been shatterred in 3 or 4 places, not to mention one of his legs looks like its made of rubber its so wobbly. he couldnt even get up or move he just got run over by a vehicle weighing several tons.

would you like to have your shattered arm shoved behind your back and cuffed?

A relative of mine was involved in prosecuting an individual who was in a car accident. this person had some type of warrant out for his arrest and when the police arrived they turned him over on his stretcher and cuffed him.

the EMTs informed the police that unless they removed the handcuffs they could not treat him. he ended up losing one of his arms.

justified? for officer safety?

jay believe it or not, people that arent police officers are people too. our safety matters just as much as yours does.
 
jay the man just got run over by a truck are you ****ing kidding me? his arm must have been shatterred in 3 or 4 places, not to mention one of his legs looks like its made of rubber its so wobbly. he couldnt even get up or move he just got run over by a vehicle weighing several tons.
Click to expand...
And is still considered a possible threat. there's a reason why everyone is treated as a threat and why everyone is handcuffed. Too many deaths and injuries have resulted because of feeling the small girl or injured person was no longer a threat. Notice that in that video the only thing being looked into is the vehicle hitting the suspect and not the handcuffing afterwards. it's because this is SOP for depts.


would you like to have your shattered arm shoved behind your back and cuffed?
Click to expand...
No, no I wouldn't. I also wouldn't rob someone and flee from the police who were chasing me whith a vehicle while I was on foot. I would not of put myself into that position to be handcuffed with a broken arm. Had he not handcuffed the guy and the cop was shot and killed or the EMT arriving was shot and killed what would be your answer, outrage or solution?

the EMTs informed the police that unless they removed the handcuffs they could not treat him. he ended up losing one of his arms.

justified? for officer safety?

jay believe it or not, people that arent police officers are people too. our safety matters just as much as yours does.
Click to expand...

In some cases that is very true but upon arrival the EMT's will want to know if they have been searched and will still usually require them handcuffed to something. When looking at the big picture and everyone involved the one's who do this every day and you may one day need, you have to consider their safety too.

It almost seems as if you're arguing for the guy who just robbed someone and fled from the scene and police. Out of all this the only outrage is after the guy was injured AND still moving should not of been cuffed but I have yet to hear of a solution.
 
Except for a very early post, I've remained silent because I don't expect anyone to change his or her mind based on anything I say here. BUT - I've got to call you out Jay, on a point that you keep reiterating with regard to Ms. Johnston - the 92 year old woman that was murderd by a couple or three thugs parading as legitimate law enforcement.

You question whether she should have been allowed to have a gun "because of her age" - whoa dude, talkin' about a frickin' bias! Regardless of whether a person has the reflexes and/or physical capacity to drive a car has zero correlation with an individual's mental capacity to preceive a threat to their existence. More importantly, your statement is irresponsible since there is NO EVIDENCE to indicate that Ms. Johnson's mental falculties were any worse than yours or mine. Equally importantly, even folks with diminished mental and/or physical capacity deserve protecetion, and the ability to protect themselves, and if it requires a legal firearm to do so, then so be it.

Since I reside in a metro Atlanta 'burb that's smack dab in da hood, I feel compelled to reiterate my earlier point: At night, knock or no-knock, announcing you're the police or the tooth fairy while kicking in my door will only ensure that the situation is going to end badly for everyone involved (operative words here: "kicking in my door").

The news is chock full of stories about violent home invaders identifying themselves as the police, then raping and/or shooting everyone in the dang place.

As long as the State of Georgia allows me to keep firearms legally in my home, I will do so because quite frankly, the risk of being a victim of violent crime in my own home is probably as great as the risk Ms. Johnston faced daily. It is quite real for me and mine, and I sure as hell know from experience that I should not rely on local law enforcement to protect me. The reality is that law enforcement is at it's best responding to crime - not preventing it, and anyone who believes otherwise is a datgum fool.
 
Jayhawkk said:
For those of you arguing against this policy of no knock then what is your supposed position on minimizing the risk to officers who are entering houses and being killed/injured? How many cops have to die before change is justified? because they are cops and not a 92 year old lady do they deserve any less protection and safety?
Click to expand...

Simple: get rid of the laws that 'require' such ridiculous paramilitary actions on the part of the police.
 
Regardless of whether a person has the reflexes and/or physical capacity to drive a car has zero correlation with an individual's mental capacity to preceive a threat to their existence. More importantly, your statement is irresponsible since there is NO EVIDENCE to indicate that Ms. Johnson's mental falculties were any worse than yours or mine. Equally importantly, even folks with diminished mental and/or physical capacity deserve protecetion, and the ability to protect themselves, and if it requires a legal firearm to do so, then so be it.
Click to expand...
I have personal experience in dealing with people and their perception of what they can do with a firearm vs. what they are actually capable of doing. The woman did fire first right? So she was unable in a fraction of a moment, able to not fire her weapon. She was committed to firing on whoever came through that door, imho.

Make no mistake that this woman was a victim regardless of whether or not I believe she should have a gun because as of now it is legal for her to do what she did. It was the police that broke the law.

The fact that both are potential deadly weapons yet one requires much higher regulations to hold a license for. I would feel safe in assuming a person unable to operate a vehicle because of age would be any more capable to operate a handgun in self defense scenarios.

So you believe that someone with a dimished mental capacity should be able to defend themselves with a firearm? Interesting.
 
Jayhawkk said:
So you believe that someone with a dimished mental capacity should be able to defend themselves with a firearm? Interesting.
Click to expand...
To the extent of being allowed to keep a legally acquired weapon in the home - yes. License to carry concealed? No IF you've got legal evidence of diminished mental capacity that has been determined by the courts - otherwise, the answer is still "yes." Elderly would-be gunslingers are generally less prone to unprovoked violence than the young ones who have permits for all the wrong reasons, IMHO - so equal protection under the law and all that jazz!

People have been keeping guns in the home for ages, including some of my older, allegedly "nutso" relatives and probably some of yours as well, and most without incident because the firearm generally stays in the bedroom drawer. If you're gonna take away the firearms, then what about the baseball bats, kitchen knives, etc...

The difference between driving versus keeping weapons in the home hinges on the the public aspect of the former (ON THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY(s)), as opposed to the private aspect of the latter (i.e., IN THE HOME). Also, as I've previously stated, there is no evidence I'm aware of that shows Ms. Johnston had any legally-determined diminished mental capacity, so in this specific case, it's a moot point.

Just so we're clear - under the circumstances that have been reported with regard to Ms. Johnston's death, I would have died the same way. I would have fired at the first sign of intrusion - period - and kept on firing regardless of what the intruders were saying or wearing. Ya know why? Because except for occasional speeding, I am a straight arrow, law-abiding person - period. In my mind, there would be no legitimate reason for law enforcement to come crashing through my door (especially in the middle of the night), so my assumption would be it's the bad guys attempting to do a job on my black ass.
 
Under the same situation I probably would of died as well except for the fact I don't keep my firearms close enough to me that I could of got to it in this particular case. I teach my guys to keep their firearms far enough away to wake from a sleep and let their thought process kick in.

I'm glad you explained your position a bit better. I can agree with some of it...Most of it.

If you're gonna take away the firearms, then what about the baseball bats, kitchen knives, etc...
Click to expand...
My stance on firearms for self defense is that there should be a better system to keep people licensed. Too many people who carry that think situations through their head without knowing anything about how it usually happens. Hollywood and all.
Elderly would-be gunslingers are generally less prone to unprovoked violence than the young ones who have permits for all the wrong reasons, IMHO - so equal protection under the law and all that jazz!
Click to expand...
I do agree with this 100%
 
Jayhawkk said:
Under the same situation I probably would of died as well except for the fact I don't keep my firearms close enough to me that I could of got to it in this particular case. I teach my guys to keep their firearms far enough away to wake from a sleep and let their thought process kick in.
Click to expand...

That's a good idea. I've moved my thermonuclear weapons to the far side of the room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top