Skip to comments.
Police blew up an innocent man’s house in search of an armed shoplifter. Too bad, court rules.
Washington Post ^
| Octoer 30,2019
| Meagan Flynn
Posted on 10/30/2019 12:11:07 PM PDT by Hojczyk
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-196 next last
To: Hojczyk
I keep forgetting, why are we supposed to trust the police??
21
posted on
10/30/2019 12:30:11 PM PDT
by
eyeamok
To: Hojczyk
Greenwood Village, Colo. Police Department?
That's some amazing s**t...They'll need to raise taxes now to provide them with more resources.
22
posted on
10/30/2019 12:30:14 PM PDT
by
dragnet2
(Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
To: SkyDancer
“All for a shirt and a couple of belts. Wonder what they would have done if he’d killed someone? “
I am sure that was on the cops mind after he started shooting at them.
To: where's_the_Outrage?
To: Hojczyk
They got to play with their toys.
25
posted on
10/30/2019 12:34:15 PM PDT
by
dljordan
To: Hojczyk
Even though the suspect was armed, the police response was way over the top.
The people living in that city had better hope the police have been re-educated in the years since this happened.
26
posted on
10/30/2019 12:34:23 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
( Khomeini promised change too // Hail, Chairman O)
To: Hojczyk
This is why you defend your own home!
So the incompetents don't destroy it!
27
posted on
10/30/2019 12:34:56 PM PDT
by
G Larry
(There is no great virtue in bargaining with the Devil)
To: TexasGator
No need to destroy the house and then shaft the homeowner.
28
posted on
10/30/2019 12:35:50 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: Hojczyk
I'm not clicking on the link, but I guess it was a good day after all, nobody's dog was shot / killed. /s
(= end of sarcasm)
29
posted on
10/30/2019 12:36:02 PM PDT
by
Stanwood_Dave
("Testilying." Cop's lie, only while testifying, as taught in their respected Police Academy(s).)
To: Stanwood_Dave
They would have blown up Fido too if present.
30
posted on
10/30/2019 12:37:04 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: Darksheare
“No need to destroy the house and then shaft the homeowner.”
The didn’t shaft the homeowner.
To: Hojczyk
“His out-of-pocket expenses to rebuild the house cost him nearly $400,000, he said. “
_______________________________________
The city offered $5,000 for living expenses; I can understand his frustration there.
The city offered to cover the deductible.
The insurance should have covered the rest.
Did he not have insurance?
Just confused, here.
Annoyed, as well, what with the court’s decision being so asinine.
32
posted on
10/30/2019 12:37:33 PM PDT
by
Notthereyet
(NotThereYet)
To: Hojczyk
Just give them the excuse to shoot up the place, and they’ll be more than happy to oblige. Fortunately, there is no mention of the victims having a pet dog.
To: BuffaloJack; Bob434; Darksheare
"It’s shoplifting."
He had a gun and was shooting out the window. Is that shoplifting? Don't trust the Compost in their treatment of the police any more that you would trust their reporting on Trump.
34
posted on
10/30/2019 12:38:07 PM PDT
by
Wayne07
To: TexasGator
You DID read what happened, right?
He has no house and it was ruled he wasn’t getting any compensation for damages because they occurred during the course of police actions.
Yes, he got shafted.
35
posted on
10/30/2019 12:38:37 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: SkyDancer
36
posted on
10/30/2019 12:39:43 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Everyone who favors socialism plans on the government taking other people's money, not theirs.)
To: Wayne07; BuffaloJack; Bob434
He shoplifted.
Then ran into this uninvolved house.
You still don’t need to destroy the house to get the badguy.
You know where he is, you localize any damage to there.
No need to “Burn the house to kill the spider”.
37
posted on
10/30/2019 12:39:50 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: Hojczyk
It seems in this case everyone is saying that this is just what happens when SWAT attacks. Not so.
They should have sued for SWAT negligent procedure and provided as evidence photos of undamaged or slightly damaged houses after similar SWAT standoffs. Other SWAT teams seem to be able to accomplish this without demolishing the house.
38
posted on
10/30/2019 12:40:22 PM PDT
by
\/\/ayne
(I regret that I have but one subscription cancellation notice to give to my local newspaper.)
To: \/\/ayne
“Other SWAT teams seem to be able to accomplish this without demolishing the house. “
Precisely.
39
posted on
10/30/2019 12:40:56 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: Darksheare
“You DID read what happened, right?
He has no house and it was ruled he wasn’t getting any compensation for damages because they occurred during the course of police actions.
Yes, he got shafted.”
Dude, the house was insured. The offered to pay the deductible and rental assistance. Now, how was he shafted?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-196 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson