Posted on 05/27/2011 11:44:07 AM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
VIDEO AT LINK
A U.S. Marine who was killed when he was gunned down in his home near Tucson, Arizona, never fired on the SWAT team that stormed his house firing 70 times in a hail of bullets, a report has revealed.
The revelation came as dramatic footage of the shooting was released, showing the armed team pounding down the door of Jose Guerena's home and opening fire.
The father-of-two, who had served twice in Iraq, died on May 5 after the SWAT team descended on his home believing it was one of four houses associated with a drug smuggling operation.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Now if you take this into consideration, The homeowner hears someone trying to break into his car, tell his family to get into the closet and then grabs his gun. He identified the break in as the cops and left his gun on safety. The deputies, being conditioned to believe we don't have the right to own guns and protect our property, assumed he was a perp and watched for any flinch or twitch to open fire. Now the wagons are circled and the fact that he owned a gun and body armor makes him the worst of the worst. 6 rounds or 60 rounds, at least we are all safe from a veteran who owned a gun. I shudder to think what would be written about me if they broke into my house. He may have even had FreeRepublic in his bookmarks tool bar.
Keep defending the murderers, eventually you will get whats coming to you.
Thankfully that was only a state court and not applicable to any other state. Under the Indiana ruling, police could ILLEGALLY force their way into your home with no suspicion, proof of wrongdoing, or warrant and then kill you if you choose to try to defend your family from their jack booted tactics.
I disagree, it's very relevant. The media can't say he was some hayseed militia type, he was a combat Marine, and if had chose to fire the keystone cops would have been calling in for ambulances for what was left of their "SWAT" team.
I told the Statist idiot I was done with him. He didn’t get the message.
Thankfully that was only a state court and not applicable to any other state. Under the Indiana ruling, police could ILLEGALLY force their way into your home with no suspicion, proof of wrongdoing, or warrant and then kill you if you choose to try to defend your family from their jack booted tactics.
**************
Change “could” to “CAN NOW”. As a result of this ruling, Jack-booted Thuggery will increase in America.
Moonman claims the IN ruling “puts ‘em in line with a majority of other states” but hasn’t yet provided data to support that. I hope he’s wrong.
Considering that Big Sis Napolitano and the rest of the gubment thugocracy consideration prior service to be a security threat, I think it is very relavent.
Sickening.
So do citizens.
Yes they do, however they don't have a right to point a weapon at officers serving a valid warrant.
Some of my family...long ago..centuries..were forced to choose to fight because the King's men assumed their prerogatives of no knock warrants.
You know little of the ignorance of which you speak.
>> Keep defending this homicide. Clearly these guys were ITCHING for violence. It’s what they live for. They shot an innocent man, and you defend it. He had a right to defend himself against the thugs. <<
Did the SWAT team know he was innocent? No, they had a warrant; they announced themselves; they even ran the siren upon arrival. If there was a problem with the issuance of the warrant, they had no way of knowing that.
He had a right to defend himself? Really? Does this apply to everyone? If you’re a SWAT team member and the person you’ve come to arrest isn’t actually guilty, he gets to kill you?
>> If they were acting on a “hunch” (which they obviously were) <<
Pretty hard getting a warrant for a SWAT team based on a hunch.
Not every tragedy is a murder.
How do you know his weapon wasn't pointed down....dufus. It was still safe after they pumped him, and the neighborhood full of lead. I can't believe a FReeper of you age and stature can defend what you just saw in those videos. I'm sorry, go argue with someone else....I'll just get mean, ugly and mad if you reply to me again.
No knock warrants have been ruled constitutional by our Supreme Court because of their establishment in Common Law. Now what were you saying about ignorance?
You don't need a warrant to answer a citizen's request for help.
Now, don't you feel ashamed, or are you some big john type Arab macho guy who thinks the rights of women don't count ~ BTW, the wife had every right to shoot the man who attacked the cops ~ under the Indiana Castle Doctrine Law, but she didn't. The cops merely tasered him and hauled him, but he attacked them.
They absolutely do. When you mature you’ll learn the difference between what’s legal and what’s ethical. Breaking into someone’s house when there are superior alternatives is just plain stupid.
The cops were wrong about the shots fired, they were probably wrong (OR LYING) about the weapon being pointed at them as well.
Immediately after the incident the wife was locked in a room with police investigators, and she said the SWAT members dropped a gun near her husband after he was killed.
The bigger picture is this.
We have "The State" demanding more control over our lives, even to the point of deciding whether who lives and who dies (healthcare).
We have "The State" telling us what we can eat and can't eat.
We have "The State" telling our children what words they can't say, in the name of "anti-bullying" without reprisal from the Government, (which is a model for what they intend for the grownups: elimination of free speech).
We have "Police State" invading our homes at gunpoint on a suspicion, and shooting us into a bloody pulp if we try to defend ourselves. And according to the Police State, this is "legal" and "proper" so long as a higher-up in the Police State gives it the rubber stamp.
AND WE HAVE FLAMING BRAINLESS IDIOTS DEFENDING THE LAST THING!!!!
I agree, but as to whether this warrant was ethical will be determined by whether the suspect was involved in a criminal enterprise and what role he played.
Supposedly, the weapon was hit by bullets from the officers. As to whether it was present and pointed at them may be determined by forensics.
And whose to say - the police? They thought they were being fired on. There observations are worse than useless.
The victim didn't seem like a big gun collector guy, a .38 revolver, an AR-15 - but the police officer at the scene said there was an AR-15 in the victims bedroom. The wife said she didn't know about any rifle, how could he have 2 rifles she didn't know about? She said she cleaned every inch of the house, and I don't think she wouldn't be aware he had 2 rifles, especially when one was right near his bed.
The police lies just keep piling up.
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.