Fairfax County Ad Hoc Police Commission

[SouthNarc]

Darryl,
I don't advocate removing no-knock entries, BUT there have been dozens of entries into the wrong address or when the bad guy/girl wasn't there and too many innocent occupants killed...at least in Fairfax County.

Cody are you saying that the Fairfax County SWAT team has hit the wrong house AT LEAST 24 times? Because in 11 years of dope work and 12 of SWAT I hit the wrong house exactly ONCE.

And how many innocent occupants have been killed? Over what kind of time period?

[TCinVA]

This was the exact same argument made to pass the Amendment to ban alcohol in the United States. Look how that turned out. We should learn our lessons from that debacle. We do have alcoholics but we don't have people murdering people over sale and distribution of it.
Cody

No, we just have thousands of people killed every year in drunk driving accidents...among a whole bunch of other costs.

[TGS]

No, we just have thousands of people killed every year in drunk driving accidents...among a whole bunch of other costs.

Would criminalizing the ownership or consumption of alcohol change that?

No.

[TCinVA]

Would criminalizing the ownership or consumption of alcohol change that?

No.

Would criminalizing the ownership or consumption of alcohol lower the number of drunk driving deaths? Undoubtedly. Would it cause an increase in criminal activity? Undoubtedly. When it was all said and done would fewer people be dead? Would the costs to society be lower?

Point being, there's no fucking free lunch on this. Legal alcohol gets cited all the time in these WOD discussions but few actually seem to acknowledge that legal alcohol brings with it enormous social costs. Not a whole lot of SWAT raids over illegal alcohol in 2014, but about 10,000 people were killed by drunk drivers. That's a whole lot of dead people.

I'd legalize most stuff tomorrow, but I'm not naive enough to believe it would fix a bunch of problems. It would create different problems, some of them preferable to the problems seen with excesses in the drug war.

[HCM]

We have another incident recently where a guy was sleeping in a temporary apartment, came home drunk one night and left the door cracked. A neighbor called the cops and, without checking with the landlord, entered the apartment and his bedroom and every cop pointed the muzzle of their gun at the occupants HEAD as they entered the room. The guy was an Army veteran who saw action overseas and was appalled at the poor judgement used. There was no indication he was armed or dangerous. See Here for this account: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...338_story.html

Cody

Cody,what exactly is a "temporary "apartment? When you say didn't check with the landlord, is this an apartment complex? How big is it?Is there a living manager who's on site? Because if not most apartment managers are only present from 9 to 5 Monday through Friday or Monday through Saturday. Regardless, what you describe is a classic mistake of fact case. In the real world it happens all the time. Officers have to work with limited or incorrect information and make the best decisions that can. Not sure if you're aware of a concept called judicial notice. Basically where the courts make and except common presumptions regarding certain situations. For example it is a common legal presumption for both the courts and law-enforcement officers that people involved in drug dealing or gang activity may be presumed to be armed and dangerous in general. That doesn't mean every drug dealer or gang member is armed or dangerous, but it does mean that a reasonable and prudent officer dealing with them will begin with the presumption that they are. A reasonable and prudent Officer responding to a residential burglary or even a residential squatter call would presume such a suspect was armed and dangerous. So what is with the drama about the officers OMG! Pointing the gun at his HEAD! ? Deadly force is deadly force. The officers are investigating a potential residential burglary. Residential burglaries are reasonably presumed to be armed and dangerous until proven otherwise. It makes no difference whether they point a gun at his head or his torso as long as they were legally justified in pointing a gun at him in general.

[cclaxton]

I'd legalize most stuff tomorrow, but I'm not naive enough to believe it would fix a bunch of problems. It would create different problems, some of them preferable to the problems seen with excesses in the drug war.

I would say the same. Perhaps changing the word "some" to "many".
Cody

[cclaxton]

Cody,what exactly is a "temporary "apartment? . It makes no difference whether they point a gun at his head or his torso as long as they were legally justified in pointing a gun at him in general.

It absolutely does make a difference between whether they are in a firearm "ready position" as opposed to muzzling the occupant. This is the key point. Many here have noted that it is not necessary to point a gun AT someone when you don't know if they are armed or dangerous. It certainly made sense to have guns drawn and at the ready...I don't argue that. But what has happened in Fairfax County is too many times that has resulted in the death or murder of an innocent person. The point here is Public Safety is the mission, and the mission is turning into "Police Safety" first. Police go into the business understanding their lives may be at risk. That doesn't give them the right to intimidate citizens into "show me your hands" at the threat of lethal force. If I did that as a civilian, I would surely be charged with a crime.
Cody

[LittleLebowski]

Kevin,
We want laws, and WE are willing to suffer the affects, but WE are turning our country into a police-state...and THAT we don't want. The war on drugs is a primary component, and this should all move to drug courts and decriminalization.
Cody

Police state? Nope. Not at all. Visit a real third world police state and you'll see.

[HCM]

It absolutely does make a difference between whether they are in a firearm "ready position" as opposed to muzzling the occupant. This is the key point. Many here have noted that it is not necessary to point a gun AT someone when you don't know if they are armed or dangerous. It certainly made sense to have guns drawn and at the ready...I don't argue that. But what has happened in Fairfax County is too many times that has resulted in the death or murder of an innocent person. The point here is Public Safety is the mission, and the mission is turning into "Police Safety" first. Police go into the business understanding their lives may be at risk. That doesn't give them the right to intimidate citizens into "show me your hands" at the threat of lethal force. If I did that as a civilian, I would surely be charged with a crime.
Cody

My question was not ready position vs pointing at / muzzling some one. It was if you ARE muzzling someone - what difference does it make whether is us their head or torso since you emphasized his " HEAD"?

[TGS]

It absolutely does make a difference between whether they are in a firearm "ready position" as opposed to muzzling the occupant. This is the key point. Many here have noted that it is not necessary to point a gun AT someone when you don't know if they are armed or dangerous. It certainly made sense to have guns drawn and at the ready...I don't argue that. But what has happened in Fairfax County is too many times that has resulted in the death or murder of an innocent person. The point here is Public Safety is the mission, and the mission is turning into "Police Safety" first. Police go into the business understanding their lives may be at risk. That doesn't give them the right to intimidate citizens into "show me your hands" at the threat of lethal force. If I did that as a civilian, I would surely be charged with a crime.
Cody

This is a good point.

A well reasoned, highly regarded copper on this forum once said, "Officer safety is a goal, not legal authority."