Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sam Cree

What we don't know is what the police had for intel before they entered the house. Did they have intel of weapons? Did they have intel of significant amounts of drugs being present? So they shot the dog...did the dog attack one of the officers? If so, there is why you have a dead dog.

The real issue here is if these folks had NOT been involved with drugs, they would not have been in the situation they are in. The police had a valid search warrant, that was based upon a specifice set of facts that gave a judge sufficient belief that it was proper to issue asearch warrant. This is no different that the US invasion of Iraq. We had a specific set of facts, generally accepted and recognized by Dims and Republicans alike, that gave us a credible justification, along with UN Sanctions, to invade Iraq and remove Saddam from power. While some things are not exactly as we had expected, the reasons for our invasion remain solid. If Hussein has cooperated with the UN and the US to allow unfettered inspections, then perhaps he may haf retained his power...but he didn't...just as those post heads chose to keep weed in their house. Sorry....the cops were doing their damned job....


31 posted on 10/28/2006 11:54:53 AM PDT by GLH3IL (Truth: The remedy for liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: GLH3IL

So if someone accuses you of some crime, say theft, are the police justified in kicking in your door and exploding stun grenades to capture you, or should they have used reasonable means to determine whether in fact any basis for the charge exists?


35 posted on 10/28/2006 11:58:43 AM PDT by jdub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: GLH3IL

"Sorry....the cops were doing their damned job...."

Sorry we killed your dog mam, we were just doin our job snuffing out uhm uhmmm I mean sniffing out a pot smoker to kill maim mutilate or anything within his range. Just be thankful you weren't home mam. Heck we might have snuffed you too.

Well, we gotta go now. It's time to head off to the local LEO watering hole to celebrate another successful raid. Got some serious beer drinkin and some high fivin to do. Still, sorry about your dog, course it's better off now you know, and so is Sugarland with your pot smokin boyfriend and son behind bars for a few hours. Yea, that's right mam, we are human too. Hey, you can probably get another golden lab down at the shelter. You should check with them.

See Ya!


45 posted on 10/28/2006 12:23:32 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: GLH3IL
"the reasons for our invasion remain solid."

The reason for the search may have been solid, though the article makes it sound like small potatos in the world of crime and drug dealing. The reason for the SWAT team and the violence by the cops hasn't been explained at all, at least not in the article. It may have been justified, or not, but the small amount of drugs produced by the raid is not justification.

As for the assumption that such tactics are justified because there may have been guns inside, well, our founding fathers assumed "that every man be armed." Therefore if guns are suspected, police protocol should call for the same violent police tactics for all search warrants. At least as long as we have the RKBA.

Yeah, I can imagine the dog may have attempted to defend its masters - that is the nature of dogs and one of the reasons for owning them...that's probably why it has apparently become police protocol to shoot them immediately.

I happen to agree with you that the invasion of Iraq was justified, on several levels, but I'm not too convinced that drawing a parallel with this particular SWAT action makes a very good case for our action in Iraq.

53 posted on 10/28/2006 12:31:46 PM PDT by Sam Cree (Don't mix alcopops and ufo's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: GLH3IL
The real issue here is if these folks had NOT been involved with drugs, they would not have been in the situation they are in.

No, the real issue is the unnecessary violence. I remember a retired black pastor in Boston who died in one of these raids. They had the wrong house.

I remember an east coast southern couple with a dog being pulled over in their car and their dog shot as the cops chased after a fictitious robbery based on a phone call from an idiot.

I remember four plain clothes cops (three of which were rookies) pumping 41 bullets into a black man as he tried to get into his apartment building. They thought his keys were a gun.

None of these cops were ever were punished. In the dreaded private sector, you always get punished for your mistakes. This is not the case for public workers.

90 posted on 10/28/2006 3:34:56 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The only good Mullah is a dead Mullah. The only good Mosque is the one that used to be there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: GLH3IL
The real issue here is if these folks had NOT been involved with drugs, they would not have been in the situation they are in.

You know, I'd really LIKE to believe that that's an absolute...but I just can't bring myself to believe it.

139 posted on 10/30/2006 10:41:44 AM PST by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: GLH3IL
Did they have intel of weapons? Did they have intel of significant amounts of drugs being present? So they shot the dog...did the dog attack one of the officers? If so, there is why you have a dead dog.

I've read a more detailed account of this story where the police chief said they used the amount of force they did because they weren't sure if there was any weapons in the house but they didn't want to take any chances. No, the dog didn't attack but it charged and scared the officer terribly - you know how vicious those goldens are, they'll have you down & licked within an inch of your life with that razor sharp tongue of theirs.

I don't like drugs, but this sounds like a bunch of overzealous cops who are too embarrassed to admit they made a mistake. You don't raid houses for a couple of joints, this would just get you a ticket in a lot of places.

143 posted on 10/30/2006 11:00:53 AM PST by Smittie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson