My husband has a fortune in student loans, and i never thought for a second that we would get out of paying them. Of course, I wouldn’t have cast my vote for the O even if I was 100% sure his loans would be forgiven. I am a pretty rabid conservative.

his lips are moving.

Unless there was substantive proof there that the suspect was dangerous and that violence was already present, what reason was there to introduce violence into the situation, potentially putting the homeowner, his children and the police at risk (and certainly putting all of them in harms’ way)?

This is the problem with the increased use of no-knocks in cases where non-violent crimes are suspected and in other cases where danger to the officer serving the warrant is not imminent: it introduces violence into a situation where there was previously none, and forces the suspected (and likely innocent) homeowner to react to said violence.

This situation ended “well”; that is to say, without physical harm to any of those involved. But what if the homeowner had been armed and intent on defending his household? As he himself said, he didn’t know who these people were. What if the cops had gone trigger happy? It happened no less than a month ago here in Tucson to a Marine vet who was defending his house and family (including a 5-year old son) from SWAT members who dropped in unannounced and riddled his corpse with 70ish bullets. What if the homeowner had fired on one of the cops? That would have been a somewhat less terrible outcome than the homeowner’s death, given that the cop had signed up with the knowledge that he might die in the line of duty. Nonetheless, it would have also been an unnecessary death that could have been easily prevented by having an officer knock on the door and serve a warrant.

In short, I see no reason for which to have a no-knock warrant served with extreme prejudice in this manner: it goes against rule of law, our traditional protections from agents of the state transgressing on our property and even just plain common sense.

…saying that they didn’t kick in the door or handcuff the guy. Because the Stockton cops don’t want any part of this particular rain of excrement.

All of Moe’s links are live from my laptop.

if (or when) a SWAT Team on a DofEd warrant, shoots and kills a high school drop-out in a case of mistaken identity.

What’s the literacy rate for that Cabinet department?

the closer we get to being the country the colonists ran away from!

(at least they had the reading of the riot act)

Mew

They get away with it because in a sane world, there would be 1 million people outside the WH as soon as they could get there calling for the head of whoever signed the warrant, or the president, whichever the people inside prefer, but make it fast because tomorrow it becomes both.

They get away with it because we don’t show them that they’ve really stepped in it this time. And it will get worse until we do.

Sorry, but that’s the correct answer to your question.

Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education, and Ronald Reagan promised to cut it. Education can and should be done at the State and Local level. There is no need for a Federal, centrally controlled Department of Education (or re-education?), with it’s own military-style troops (SWAT).

by the legal parties involved, and I have seen them (or at least summaries of them) released by PDs when controversy is afoot (such as in the shameful case of the recent Tucson shooting of a Marine combat vet). I would also like to see helmet-cam footage of the raid, if it is available. It should at the very least dispel idiotic conjecture that the homeowner, with his Hulk-like strength and aggressiveness, broke through his own door.

suggests that a warrant MUST at least detail the kinds of items for which the police may search. So, if they’re looking for evidence of fraud or abuse, they warrant should specify that THAT’s what they’re looking for.

Yes? No?

At this juncture, yes, it’s pretty much beside the main point of the completely unnecessary force used, the alleged false imprisonment and, frankly (if the homeowner’s story is accurate) assault.

That said, we have the just as important issue of authority, which should also be considered.

.