No-Knock Warrant Results in Death of Minneapolis Man

[returntosender]

I guess it depends on what news you watch. What I saw was that they were looking for his cousin. Also, the policeman was given off duty until it was investigated.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It seems that is what they did.

Obviously they did not plan for the possibility of an innocent relative sleeping on the couch because if they did plan for that possibility they would not have shot him.

I think we can reasonably assume that they considered the possibility of another person or persons who were in the building. I'm pretty sure that is why they had their guns drawn.

No, the drawn guns were because the person they were after was likely armed. They did not consider carefully enough the welfare of others.

I can't really say I agree with this...

Have you considered the possibility of more murderers evading justice and continuing to murder if the police aren't willing to pursue evidence?

It's a question of weighing possibilities. The police have many methods of gaining evidence. Bursting in to an apartment shooting is not the only means. On the other hand, there have been too many innocent casualties from no-knock warrants.

And we can reasonably conclude that more murderers will evade justice...potentially taking more lives.

Not necessarily. Police can use other means to gather evidence.

Is there a reaction that we can reasonably expect from Amir?

No. We cannot assume anything about the free will of Amir to exercise his constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

That's an assertion that I don't see how you can make without any understanding of how this case represents the totality of no knock cases.

I did not say that all no-knock warrants were unjustified. I said this one was unjustified. And many others too. There might be a very rare case where it is justified.

It could be that this is the exception...and the rule is that the vast majority of the time, no knock cases are overwhelmingly beneficial and result in the safe arrests of many dangerous subjects without any loss of life in the police.

It appears they are not beneficial enough to warrant the high cost in innocent lives.

As for unnecessary....it's all unnecessary. We could just stop making arrests and pursuing criminals in certain communities if we decided that we would rather not have the police ever put themselves, or any members of the community, in danger.

Generally speaking, I would imagine that we don't want to do that. We would rather the police still enforce the law in those communities.

That's a false dichotomy. No one ever said that police should abandon all efforts to enforce the law. The question is not do we enforce the law or don't we. The question is to what lengths are we willing to go to enforce the law.

1. There is a problem that needs corrected here....even if you can't clearly explain what the problem is.
2. That problem is the result of the police's choices or actions or both.

I explained exactly what the problem was - the killing of innocent people as a side effect of trying to enforce the law. Means must be employed that put more emphasis on public safety. Columbo always got his murderer despite never needing to fire a gun.

 

[ruthiesea]

When I was working a no knock search warrant was extremely difficult to get. I never even applied for one. The only type of search warrant that was more closely regulated was a wiretap warrant.

 

[timothyu]

When I was working a no knock search warrant was extremely difficult to get. I never even applied for one.

What would have been your reasoning for applying for one and what makes it different in enforcing?

 

[ruthiesea]

What would have been your reasoning for applying for one and what makes it different in enforcing?

No knock warrants are generally used in drug enforcement so that there is no time to destroy the drugs. It may also be used when persons who will be present are known to have used or threatened to use deadly force against LEOs. I applied for and got a number of search warrants for drugs and violent felonies and never had a problem with ‘knock and identify’.

 

[rjs330]

The video revealed that did not happen before the police were in the house.

And what makes you think home invaders won't also announce that they are police?

I've never heard of this happening. Have you?

 

[rjs330]

I'm really not all that for no knock warrants. Citizens have a right to protect themselves.

I think we conservatives have to be better at understanding the issues here. We support castle doctrines and a person's right to defend themselves, their families and their home. If an intruder breaks into your home at night particularly you have a right to assume it's dangerous and can respond with a gun.

If the police break into you home at night without knocking and announcing and do it so quickly that you don't have enough time to process what's happening I can see why you'd pull a gun.

Just as we give police the right to try and make a deadly decision within a matter of a second or less, we have to give the citizen the same rights. In fact maybe even longer, cause they are not trained to see, determine a threat and act as fast as police are.

So, I'm not in favor of the no knock warrant as we have it right now.

I don't know about this case, but no knocks need to be reserved for cases where the police have probable cause that the person is armed and dangerous and reserved for crimes of violence.

I don't think they should be gotten rid of completely because there are certainly times lik I mentioned where they would be needed.

Drug crimes or arrest warrants for crimes of non-violence should not be reasons for no knock warrants.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm really not all that for no knock warrants. Citizens have a right to protect themselves.

I think we conservatives have to be better at understanding the issues here. We support castle doctrines and a person's right to defend themselves, their families and their home. If an intruder breaks into your home at night particularly you have a right to assume it's dangerous and can respond with a gun.

If the police break into you home at night without knocking and announcing and do it so quickly that you don't have enough time to process what's happening I can see why you'd pull a gun.

Just as we give police the right to try and make a deadly decision within a matter of a second or less, we have to give the citizen the same rights. In fact maybe even longer, cause they are not trained to see, determine a threat and act as fast as police are.

So, I'm not in favor of the no knock warrant as we have it right now.

I don't know about this case, but no knocks need to be reserved for cases where the police have probable cause that the person is armed and dangerous and reserved for crimes of violence.

I don't think they should be gotten rid of completely because there are certainly times lik I mentioned where they would be needed.

Drug crimes or arrest warrants for crimes of non-violence should not be reasons for no knock warrants.

I said that earlier, so I heartily agree. I don't buy the "they might dispose of the evidence" excuse. Any evidence that is so quickly disposed (you can't flush a meth lab) is too small a crime to be worth the risk of killing the wrong person. The only reason I'd accept for a no-knock warrant is when there is a life known to be in imminent danger, and someone is likely to die whether you do or you don't.

Any other circumstance, there is time and occasion to make the arrest some other way.

 

[Ana the Ist]

What would have been your reasoning for applying for one and what makes it different in enforcing?

Stop looking for tips lol.