Police Storm Wrong Apartment, Resident Dies of Heart Attack

WABC News NYC ^ | May 16, 2003 | Art McFarland

[rwfromkansas]

Are you high right now or something?

[supercat]

The lady must have had an extreme heart condition for a flash to give her a heart attack though...wow. I am glad she was a Christian.

Depends in part where she was relative to the flash-bang. The things can maim or kill even healthy people if they happen to land close enough.

[plusone]

I think the Senator's comments were sarcastic...

[Howlin]

Hey, supercat! Long time, no see!

[rwfromkansas]

What the hell? You say you are against the drug war and then you blame Bush for not pushing HARDER in said war?

[Howlin]

It's always like this. It changes it's position about every 50 posts, depending on how well it thinks it's doing.

Hint: don't want for an answer to ANY of your questions.

[Howlin]

and it is a 'two faced law'.

Well, since it's changing it's position right now, I guess that suit, eh?

[WoofDog123]

"A special effects grenade shouldn't be able to kill a normal healthy person. They would use that in riot control as well. I wonder what pre-existing condition caused her poor health."

They aren't hiring in the DDR anymore, but have you considered a career with your local swat team?

[Walkingfeather]

You only hear about these when something bad happens. You never hear about the ones that go right.

[WoofDog123]

"A special effects grenade shouldn't be able to kill a normal healthy person. They would use that in riot control as well. I wonder what pre-existing condition caused her poor health."

They aren't hiring in the DDR anymore, but have you considered a career with your local swat team?

[WoofDog123]

darn that was meant for A CA Guy sorry

[harrowup]

Actually I didn't want to make it a war on drugs issue. I wanted TLBSHOW to either back up or retract his assertion that most policemen, lawyers, judges, and teachers use drugs, mainly because I fit one of those categories myself, and I know it's not true, at least where I live.

But of course, he did not assert most

You asserted most did not

Y'all were arguing to argue without paying attention.

tlbshow: So the question is why aren't the teachers the lawyers the police officers or the judges homes doors busted down?

amelia: The question is, how do you know all these people are using drugs?

I'm sure there are some people in every profession who use drugs. In fact, there was an Army major arrested near where I live last year for selling drugs.

But I don't think MOST people in these professions use drugs.

[WoofDog123]

"There's nothing to buy. Dead is dead, but a person of normal health would survive. "

What ratio of wrong-person deaths to correct-person deaths/arrests would strike you as excessive?

[WoofDog123]

"But you are right in that the law breakers that these officers might have been there to take down could have charges of involuntary manslaughter added to them as the result of their actions requiring law enforcement to ever be there to begin with."

If the legal potential of this being enacted appeals to you, you might find a more appealing legal system in China or Cuba. They would share your view regarding collateral damage in civilian law enforcement.

I generally don't respond to trolls, and I am done with you.

[TLBSHOW]

there you go confusing them now....

[headsonpikes]

There's not much fun in teasing a simpleton.

Besides, it's cruel.

[MatthewViti]

very well said!

[WoofDog123]

"Most people would be pretty ticked off at the cops. But you may be different, you seem to have a strong affinity for government power."

He has previously indicated sympathy with the idea of charging the intended target with involuntary manslaughter, assuming the intended target can be located.

[Arpege92]

"Rather, it's just a matter of luck whether anyone happens to be within maiming or killing range."



I disagree....no knock searches can be very dangerous to police officers. With information they have in advance, they evaluate the potential danger in officers being maimed or killed. The information available to them at that time posed a very serious threat.....multiple weapons is nothing to fool around with. in fact, it has been known that alot of drug dealers and illegal weapons dealers buy dogs to use as a signal should police show up on their door step.....but, they also have the vocal chords of the dog removed so the police don't hear them barking. This leaves the cops open to an attack by the dog when they come through the front door.....and that gives the dealers more time to escape out of the window.

[supercat]

I disagree....no knock searches can be very dangerous to police officers.

I agree with that statement, but how does that relate to mine? Police who use flash-bangs on no-knock raids throw them before they can see whether anybody happens to be within lethal range of where the grenades happen to be thrown. How is that not a matter of luck?

Frankly, I'd like to see no-knock raids outlawed in all cases except hostage rescue, and severe limits placed on the evidence that can be gathered in no-knock raids [e.g. if police rescue a hostage, the hostage can give testimony against the kidnappers. If there's no hostage but police happen to find a drug lab, the evidence would be suppressed]. Unfortunately, some politicians like no-knock raids.