-
...is THE PENETRATOR
Achievements:- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 6,795
- Points
- 9,866



Posted On:
3/06/2012 4:22pm

Style: German longsword, .45 ACP--
That story was fucked up. I thought FBI are supposed to exhibit professionalism, not chainsaws.
I am imagining how I'd react if I were sitting quietly at home and all of a sudden I saw a chainsaw emerging from the front door. Is there anyone posting who wouldn't run for their longarm?“nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” - Jack Thompson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Th...%28attorney%29 -
Light Heavyweight
Achievements:- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- East Bay, CA
- Posts
- 4,633
- Points
- 11,106


Posted On:
3/06/2012 4:55pm -
Senior Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Location
- Inland Empire, California
- Posts
- 1,147
- Points
- 1,544

Posted On:
3/06/2012 5:11pm -
Senior Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Posts
- 1,140
- Points
- 2,192


Posted On:
3/06/2012 7:50pm
Style: bjj/judo--
Apparently afterward after they finally caught the intended target(who had somehow been spooked into making a run for it) the FBI came back and made a rather petulant apology to the woman and her daughter and left.
A week later they agreed to pay for the damage to the apartment. As of now this woman hasn't brought a lawsuit, but I assume that someone will talk her into it eventually.
I thoroughly believe we live in an overly litigious society, but I hope she gets her money's worth. Completely avoidable and inexcusable -
Senior Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Location
- Inland Empire, California
- Posts
- 1,147
- Points
- 1,544

Posted On:
3/06/2012 11:26pm
Style: Limalama, Judo & BJJ--
Fully agree with the overly litigious society part. I think we need a law that states if you hurt yourself doing something stupid you are liable for damages. As for the FBI in this case. Ya they should be paying damages. Therapy for the kid alone is going to cost mom a pretty penny.
-
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Little Rock, AR
- Posts
- 263
- Points
- 414

Posted On:
3/07/2012 8:51am -
Transmaniacon MC
Achievements:- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Delray Beach
- Posts
- 1,186
- Points
- 2,178


Posted On:
3/07/2012 11:50am--
Woah, this stopped me cold:
I have a problem with that sentiment, as it seems to fly in the face of Fourth Amendment. However, the Barnes case doesn't seem to be unlawful entry, based solely on my reading of the ISC affirmation.
Originally Posted by Indiana Supreme Court
Somebody called 911, and furthermore the wife in person requested that the police come in, that Barnes let them in. These actions, in my mind, constitute invitation for entry. As such, I don't really understand this proposed law as it relates to the Barnes case, with the exception of the sentence I quoted, above.
Also, anyone else read the chainsaw story and think "typo," or "misread?" 2R<->2F -
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- May 2007
- Location
- Lafayette, IN
- Posts
- 969
- Points
- 1,495

Posted On:
3/07/2012 11:56am -
Senior Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- Western New York
- Posts
- 1,026
- Points
- 1,622



Posted On:
3/07/2012 1:16pm

Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid--
Sometimes the worst sort of PR we LEO's get stems from judges words in case's like this. The actual event has all sort of valid LE actions, but since the defendant appealed on a jury instruction the judge makes the statement that unlawful entry cant be resisted and all sorts of hullabaloo ensues.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk



Reply With Quote














Senior Member
Posted On:
3/06/2012 3:53pm
Style: Limalama, Judo & BJJ