Baby that was flash-banged is responsible

Shootin 4 Fun · May 22, 2015

Norman said:
1. Police actions outside the state of Oklahoma. Did JB change the rules again, or is this still in violation of them?

2. Infowars is your sourse? Wow.

3. The parents ARE at fault, at least partially. The knowingly chose to stay at a drug house. They have admitted they knew one of the other residents was selling dope. Did you think living in a crack house was going to be a good life experience for Bou Bou?

4. All children should be taken from Bou Bou's parents, including Bou Bou. See number 3.

5. NFDD's are not incendiary devices

6. Blind deployment of NFDD's is bad ju ju. For his very reason.

Yes, let's blame the parents for the actions of the police. The cops did not Have enough knowledge of the situation to safely execute the warrant, if the had bothered to gather enough information, they might have used different tactics.

My concern is that it appears that our law enforcement agencies and officers are so gung-ho to bust small time drug peddlers that they forget that their first responsibility is to protect the innocents.

Blinocac200sx · May 22, 2015

I'm not going to argue the merits of this particular case, but I would like to pose a question. Doesn't the demonstrated risk to innocents render no-knock warrants unreasonable, and therefore a violation of the 4th amendment?

Glocktogo · May 22, 2015

dennishoddy said:
Ok, they made a buy from the house. Simple police work should have revealed the existence of an innocent child that had no choice about being in that house. It didn't deserve to have the injuries that it sustained.
The people selling could have been arrested on the street, outside the house, etc.
Was anybody in the house in danger of losing their life by another person in the house, or was the only threat to life from law enforcement?

Agencies will usually claim the drug use is "imminent danger" for the child, ignoring the evidence that at least in this case, the remedy is more harmful than the alleged danger they're "saving" the child from. :rolleyes2

Blinocac200sx said:
I'm not going to argue the merits of this particular case, but I would like to pose a question. Doesn't the demonstrated risk to innocents render no-knock warrants unreasonable, and therefore a violation of the 4th amendment?

Absolutely, at least in this case.

caojyn said:
Lol this is great

You still haven't redacted your original post. Please do so. Thanks.

Dave70968 · May 22, 2015

Blinocac200sx said:
I'm not going to argue the merits of this particular case, but I would like to pose a question. Doesn't the demonstrated risk to innocents render no-knock warrants unreasonable, and therefore a violation of the 4th amendment?

As long as the cops go home at the end of their shifts, that's the most important thing.

Seen it right here on OSA.

Blinocac200sx · May 22, 2015

Dave70968 said:
As long as the cops go home at the end of their shifts, that's the most important thing.

Seen it right here on OSA.

Personally, I consider the police to be among the innocents that no-knock raids put at risk.

MadDogs · May 22, 2015

No doubt about it. This was a horrible accident and the agency needs to investigate to understand what happened so such should not happen again.

Glocktogo · May 22, 2015

Blinocac200sx said:
Personally, I consider the police to be among the innocents that no-knock raids put at risk.

I've long said the raid planner should be the most culpable when easily avoidable tragedies occur.

JeffT · May 22, 2015

Glocktogo said:
I've long said the raid planner should be the most culpable when easily avoidable tragedies occur.

I agree with this sentiment, but, wouldn't that require several things...
1. That the raid planner had been trained and shown aptitude for planning raids.
2. That the raid planner had any clue about tactics or logistics used in raiding a structure.
3. That the raid planner had any idea of trying to make the raid successful and not overly dangerous to anyone, raiders or raidees...

Glocktogo · May 22, 2015

Piedmont3 said:
I agree with this sentiment, but, wouldn't that require several things...
1. That the raid planner had been trained and shown aptitude for planning raids.
2. That the raid planner had any clue about tactics or logistics used in raiding a structure.
3. That the raid planner had any idea of trying to make the raid successful and not overly dangerous to anyone, raiders or raidees...

If the raid planner isn't properly trained or qualified to plan raids, then that culpability should fall to the agency itself.

JeffT · May 22, 2015

Glocktogo said:
If the raid planner isn't properly trained or qualified to plan raids, then that culpability should fall to the agency itself.

I Agree.
I think it all ties back to no-knock warrants are rarely, VERY rarely, the best way to accomplish the task they are generally used for, apprehending a known bad guy(s).

Baby that was flash-banged is responsible

Shootin 4 Fun

Sharpshooter

Blinocac200sx

Sharpshooter

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter

Dave70968

Sharpshooter

Blinocac200sx

Sharpshooter

MadDogs

Sharpshooter

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter

JeffT

Sharpshooter

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter

JeffT

Sharpshooter

Similar threads

Latest posts

Baby that was flash-banged is responsible

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!