Otherwise it's tldr, and they'll miss your wisdom.
-Because of the multiple assumptions/reverse onus used in no-knock-raids a LEGAL response (lawsuit/appeal/trial/letters) do not really apply nor rectify the situation because during a raid such as this (because they prepare on the assumption of a threat) EVEN if no resistance is encountered your animals/loved ones/property may be taken/destroyed.
-It is a precarious situation because (due to the cost of the invasion and the pressure for it to produce results) i fear the incentive is FAR too strong for police/swat to FIND something that justified the raid. (and due to the INCREDIBLY vague laws i feel it is far more believable that a minor drug offense/misdemeanor would be found rather than admit 'ooops wrong house no Al' Capone here' and used to justify a para-military raid.)
-These raids bring up an interesting point. (and one that hasn't really existed since 1910 western boom-town settlements and sheriff-law.) I am not going to get into the discussion of WHETHER the government should have the ability to POSSIBLY send a no-knock-raid to the wrong house (since they do not require court-warrants therefor proof the basis of the 'intelligence' is very questionable). But SINCE it has happened several times where a no-knock-raid was sent to the wrong place (such as the mayor! of a small town) The question raised is IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is acting in a manor that relies on force violence AND the threat of death AND IS NOT ACTING UNDER/GOVERNED BY LEGAL STATUTE . . . are his actions still protected by the same concepts/laws that require cooperation/lack of resistance to his actions??.
Personally I think the answer is no. If an officer is threatining someones life/liberty in a manor THAT DOES NOT confer legal backing of his actions (ie beating his wife at a shopping mall . . . selling drugs to a minor etc) the fact that he IS an officer and his actions MIGHT be protected are not relevant in my opinion.
Uh, may be the law is intended to"decriminalize" resistance to illegal or inappropriate acts by police officers. Please exclude no-knock raids from the definition of illegal.
Even when hitting the wrong house....in the cops mind he believes hes hitting a valid target with a valid warrant. There is no mens rea.
A rouge cop rapeing a woman on a dark roadside? Illegal through and through.
I think that's what hes talking about.
If the officers are doing what they believe to be their duty, why would the legislature attempt to place them in potential danger, beyond what they already are in.
I would suggest that a reasonable person, who find themselves being swarmed by swat in body armor, would assume, unless they were into some ****, that they are, in fact, mistakenly targeted, and not that cartoon drug cartels randomly decided to take over the ranch and act accordingly.
This spurious law, IMO, worsens the climate, and needlessly harms LE outreach, which is a vital component of effective policing. It's not damn the police/DEA need better intel., It's they are the enemy sometimes. That isn't helpful.
@tgce I agree and yes I see/understand the difference between the 'rouge cop' scenario and a no-knock raid. You are correct without mens rea they are not equal . . .
BUT (agreeing with bobyclumsyninja) I believe the BIGGER issue is the climate created from BEING ABLE to claim 'ooops wrong house sorry bout your dog and child' because the cops were 'in their mind executing a valid warrant on a valid criminal' and somehow the cops LACK OF INTENT to raid the wrong house = no foul??!. If a 'law' was passed tomorrow requiring anyone of color to wear an insignia/ be subject to arrest . . . forgive me but I would not suffer to allow the country to continue enforcing laws/policies/and raids REGARDLESS of what the LEO feels about what he is doing.
Not every German soldier was a nazi . . . but EVERY German soldier believed that what he was doing was correct enough that- anyone who stands against/disagrees or was willing to resist against the nazi laws/legislation WAS somehow an enemy/threat.
I am CERTAIN LEO`s feel they are doing `what is right`but that is not a valid reasoning.
Nearly every LEO on earth intends to work his shift then go home afterwards . . . I believe this is the weakness/flaw/focus we should have on activism AGAINST these.
I feel it is a SERIOUS problem that we live in a society at the point where an LEO can 'kettle' and arrest an entire group of people whether they were protesting or walking their dog . . . or raid the wrong house and kill their animals just to punch out and go home and watch a movie.
Most LEO might realize many of their policies are silly or incorrect but THEY STILL ENFORCE THEM. and UNLIKE THE RESPECT I GRANT MILITARY . . . THEY DO NOT EVEN [B]ARTIFICIALLY BELIEVE THAT THEIR CAUSE IS 'JUST' OR WORTH LIVES TO ACCOMPLISH.
When an LEO wrestles a kid to the ground to SEE if HAD anything and the kid resists . . . because this LEO is a part timer trying to go home to his cushy bed afterwards . . . HE WILL NEVER regard resistance as 'hmmm maybe this kid doesn't like a cop with a complex frisking him for no reason' INSTEAD all he thinks is 'omg omg omg i don't wanna die i have kids and a comfy bed' and respond accordingly. (usually with LOTS more force than it require . .. but hey the cops are frightened they might get HURT imposing these drug laws and traffic tickets HEAVEN FORBID.)
Its to early to decipher that wall of text.
While they do happen...and they shouldn't. This black helicopter fear of the cops raiding your home by mistake is hyperbole. Meteors can hit your home too....
I equate it to the nationwide fear of child abduction everytime a news story hits the press. People on the other side of the nation start keeping their kid's indoors over a statistically minuscule occurrence.
Cops lying after a mistaken raid?...accusations without evidence.
A nazi comparison already? I thought it would take a bit longer.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
I am also not afraid of 'the black helicopter' lol. Nor am i worrying about an exaggerated threat . . . it is more that I am concerned about the climate it creates.
"accusations without evidence" hahaha you mean "come on that was mean- cops do not like being told they are lying just because they do it . . . you know . .. constantly and have a career nearly BASED on it." If you REALLY believe that saying 'oops sorry bout your dogs . . . we will get the right house next time" is somehow morally superior to 'lying' then i will instead focus on that' being a VERY poor apology for threat of death and imprisonment.
Nazi comparison? was it really far fetched? All I am saying is whether or not LEO feels they are 'doing the right thing' they had better be QUITE certain they are justified and correct in their actions.