There are rising concerns regarding SWAT tactics lately especially the no-knock breaching method used in multiple drug raids nationwide. With police and civilian casualties this method has proved risky and overwhelmingly dangerous for both law enforcement and civilians. During my time in the military I have conducted hasty breaches in training similar to the ones used by SWAT teams and I can understand the immense stress that is involved with breaching and clearing a complex in a quick fashion. This type of entry used by police officers is very suspicious in some accounts however. This form of action has been abused by officers in recent years with law enforcement officials lying on their applications for the warrants in some instances. There is no doubt that drug raids are a necessary part of combating the drug business complex within the United States, but it may be more beneficial for law enforcement agencies to report SWAT operations and to allow constructive criticism in when it is valid and just. Furthermore, knock breaches maybe more risky for officers than for civilians but law enforcement tactics can be replaced and revised, innocent lives can't. Having dark figures come onto your property at night and breaking into your house violently would lead you to act defensively which is only by instinct. Some critics and officials argue that more surveillance and stake-outs would help solve this issue, but that implies a higher cost to tax payers and the law enforcement departments. This higher cost translates into what we have now, so, while these changes could be effective, they may not solve the issue and may even bring it back to where it is now. It is a deplorable thing to end innocent lives when it can be avoided, but sometimes accidents happen and they will continue to happen no matter what changes are made. I am not sure if this is a "one bad apple ruins the bunch" kind of case, but with so many casualties and killings it is statistically a serious problem. Maybe we should require certain information or evidence be present and presented to a judge and response team in order for a no-knock warrant to be issued. Ghost003
The no knock is extremely dangerous as this can make a non dangerous sitition dangerous as said in the article a man who had his home raided by SWAT wasn't even aware who he was shooting at. I agree with the evidence being in place as well as some of these SWAT raids came from information that was unreliable. The cost to tax players is defiantly lessened by the amount it would cost cities or county's that are involved from law suits from over using or improper use of SWAT. Eagle001 Eagle002
These no knock warrants are extremely dangerous. I understand why they are done, but you have to feel bad for the innocent people that are inside the homes and lost their lives. You would think there can be a better way of catching these people without people dying. hotfox003
I agree with you because it might not help the situations that they are bringing up. Only because people mess up all the time in different sittuation. Like how they got the wrong house or how it could end up in a shoot down with SWAT and drug dealers. Other people could get hurt by the passing bullets. Because even if they change it to wear they do not just go in unannouced and do announced it could be better. Also deals with less causualties. I am surpried about how many offiers were hurt even thought they where supposed to were a bullet proof vest durring these raids.adelle002
In the article Special Operations and Community Thoughts, the house invasion the Swat went into everything with authorization they should have had a better visual of what is inside of the house as this could have killed the infant if inside the play pin, or even caused this person to be deaf for the rest of their life all because of being eager. This article also made another dramatic point stating that after looking into open police files since the government doesn’t collect information for the UCR or NICRBS found that due to deploying SWAT teams this caused 81 civilians to die alongside 13 officers. The goal of policing is protection of life and property but just the opposite has happened with the militarization of policing. Also, in each year that passes there is about 1,000 officer involved shootings even innocence’s have died. I believe these no knock warrants should exist in extreme causes but only if certain reasonable suspicion exists to believe a crime is taking place and officers need to not just employ their guns first but try to see what the best outcome would be without having to take course that may cause an individual to loss their life. Also, the flip side exists as well if someone doesn’t storm into the place this could be loss of life of a fellow officer, but the focus should be to prevent the crime or prohibit the activity without leading to over using force or creating the loss of anyone civilian, or law enforcement. With the fact that 4 and 10 adults have weapons I understand why law enforcement has militarized as almost half of society may have a deadly weapon but at the same token this is never worth the life of an individual that was never involved in the crime as there is no tolerance to what this does in face of police relationship to the community of shaping the way that police are characterized in the mindset of society. Eagle001 Eagle002
I agree that violent offenders should be surprised and not know they are getting ready to be raided. Officers are also being shot because of the surprise intrusion the individual if selling drugs they could think they are being robbed. There are to many innocent bystanders being hurt in the process of extreme force. The community policing may have lowered the conviction rate but what cost. Police are being thought of as violent and uncaring when they are trying to stop the crimes happening in low income neighborhoods. Its a touchy topic because of the policing.sly.003
I do agree with you. These no knock warrants should be used in extreme circumstances. I do wonder if the police do their homework on these houses before they go in. Like if they have kids or elderly people that are innocent. It could make a difference on how the police respond inside the home. hotfox003
The no knock policy needs serious modifications when entering the homes of nonviolent offenders. Innocent children and elderly are being hurt in the process of the flash grenades and overall force of the entrance. Its understandable that the police want to surprise the offenders so they don't have an opportunity to get rid of the drugs or to go into hiding. When it comes to the reliability of the informants that is a slippery topic because they are just trying to get off or have their sentence reduced for any information they give and most times the officers just go off what they say. With violent offenders it makes sense to use extreme measures because there can be cross fire that's why officers are being shot will entering on a no knock warrant. People may think its an intruder and fire without thinking. Its sad when infant's are harmed. Its hard for officers to make the call when entering because they don't know all of the occupants of the house. If the informants were more reliable they could inform the officers if children were involved.overall its a serious problem causing multiple deaths.sly.003
I agree while no knock breaches are dangerous, the real danger lies in the information gathering process. The use of informants can be beneficial and sometimes necessary, but officers should seek to gather their own information through stake outs and other surveillance operations. Helping to paint a bigger better picture to the judge signing the warrant and the officers doing the breach would help save countless innocent lives and officers lives as well. Ghost003
I think that the no knock tactic can potentially be dangerous to the lives of the suspects, as well as the SWAT officers, but it can also be advantageous to the officers if the element of surprise is effective in that particular scenario. It all depends on the case at hand, and I think that is how it should be treated, case by case, not as a generality. gh_blackhawks002, 001
I agree with Mr. Chabali, the retired SWAT veteran who said, “Why would you run into a gunfight? If we are going to risk our lives, we risk them for a hostage, for a citizen, for a fellow officer. You definitely don’t go in and risk your life for drugs.” These no-knock warrants are too dangerous for officers. I understand the benefits of not knocking, such as not giving the potential threat time to grab a weapon or hide the drugs, but I see too many disadvantages to no-knock warrants. It is similar to the idea that it is better letting 100 guilty people go than one innocent person locked up; it is better to not get 100 of those guilty drug dealers and users than kill one innocent person. Too many lives, both civilian and law enforcement, have been lost for drugs. Knocking should be required. Yes, brainless drug dealers would try to take on the officers every once in a while during a knocking warrant, but they will get caught. Knocking will allow time for drugs to be hidden, but officers are smart and can find the drugs. Law enforcement should not risk their lives on drugs and should focus on more serious violent crimes. Scuba002
I also agree because by not knocking you are putting ypur own self at risk. I don't feel like it is a good risk at that. The people first response to someone just barging into their home is too defend themselves and their family. The SWAT just barging in is stupid. A knock and a warrant should be required. WS002
Police officers put their lives on the line every day. At any moment, an attack could occur, a natural disaster, a violent outbreak, a robbery, or any other crime. Officers are expected to attend every crime scene, as they are the heroes who will save us all from the criminals. Any moment the public is in danger, the law enforcement are to be there to help. Well, this is great, and officers are often willing to give their lives for the greater good. However, these risks should be avoided when possible. Especially when it comes to no knock warrants. Catching criminals off guard is a great strategy and, on paper, seems like a great idea. However, the sudden violence and aggression is likely to give rise to more violent returns. Officers are risking too much on these operations. Yes, knocking has the disadvantages of allowing the drugs to be hidden and perhaps allowing the criminals to escape or prepare defense, but the danger of barging into a citizen's home is too great. You never know how the attack will look, or how likely the owners of said home are to just immediately return force. I appreciate the quote from Mr. Chalabi, who said "Why would you run into a gunfight? If we are going to risk our lives, we risk them for a hostage, for a citizen, for a fellow officer. You definitely don’t go in and risk your life for drugs.” This is a good way to look at it. Officers risk their lives for many things, but busting a drug house should not be taken to the extent of such violence and such endangerment to a law enforcers life. - AJC001
If a no-knock warrant serves the purpose of catching the drugs before they can be hidden like you mentioned here as a reason why, then instead of introducing more weapons and flash bang grenades the system could introduce warrants that let the officers search the entire house and not just plain sight. Half the cases mentioned drugs were found but you can't tell me they were all sitting out on the coffee table at the time of the door being busted down after 15 second after a simple knock was given at 2 in the morning. Aggressive tactics are sometimes needed but I do not think all the cases mentioned especially in ones where individuals in the home were harmed or killed or officers injured and killed necessarily needed those drastic of means to accomplish the goal. I think our system should be able to come up with something else and safer to still accomplish the same goal with less injuries sustained. Marras002
I understand why the police do the no knock. It is a measure they have to do in order for the outcome to be in their favor. Otherwise the people in the house can start shooting or get rid of the drugs, whatever the case may be. It is sad that innocent people can get hurt in the process. I do wonder if the police check into the fact if the people they are doing the no knock warrant's have any kids or elderly people living there. So at least they know that there is innocent people in the house before they go in. hotfox003
When you are a police officer you risk your life everyday. I find it shocking how 81 civilians and 13 officers died during a swat raid from 2010 and 2016. It makes me think if there is a better way to server a drug search warrant. I can see how it can be dangerous for the swat because all they do is use a battery ram to bust down the door and throw a flash grandaid in the house. As it shows on the website how one of the flash graniads landed near a play pin. It makes me think of what if a baby or a child was in there at time.They need to come up with a safer solution even thought it is a drug bust. In some case the police get the wrong addresses and innocent people get hurt.Also there are some cases where people have a gun and there home and they think it is intruders busting in and not the cops. So they start shooting at who ever is coming in. Just because when it comes to swat they can enter without saying who they are. When police have to announce them selves before they enter.Adelle002
I feel like then "no knock" raid is unnecessary and dangerous. It is dangerous because with the SWAT team just knocking down the door it is putting their lives in danger. In all the videos that were shown in just about everyone someone was getting shot. If police or SWAT don't have a search warrant then they should not be in the stance to search houses. They are just walking in and shooting and not knowing the situation. By them just walking in without knocking put people on edge and forces them to retaliate and get defensive. Judges and police can not get mad if the people decides to fight back and react by there emotions and by whats going on. The man with golf club was shot dead instantly when SWAT barged in unexpectedly. SWAT has killed many innocent people because they decided to not knock before coming in the building. And, I do not feel like that is right. They have killed minority people, disabled people, and even the elderly. Why are they getting applaud for being assholes? WS002
Special Operations exist as elite task force teams who have a specific mission. This article highlighted SWAT enforcement who typically raid houses with some information or evidence of narcotics or weapons inside or both inside. The reason the community may have an issue with how they carry out their missions is the fact that it causes both civilian and officer deaths. In this piece they reported 81 civilian deaths and 13 officers had died in raid from 2010-2016. Numerous injured and animals killed as well. Injuries and deaths that as they pointed out could have been avoided. The typical information used for a warrants is evidence or information that there is drugs inside a home for the authorization of a no-knock or knock and announce warrant to be issued. In other raids reported as misinformation given a 7 year old and a 68 year old male died because of mistakes the police made. The community does not feel safer when information isn't properly given through the chain of command and a young baby Bou Bou in the article speaks of getting hit with a flash bang grenade. So not only is the community paying for the raid, the pay for the mistakes. SWAT do not have to always report what they do, this is a problem with how our system operates. If the community is paying for something I think we also deserve the right to know all the information. Names, charges, exact locations don't need to be told to the public but there needs to be reasoning behind this especially in situations that a death occurred and barely misdemeanor charges worth of drugs were found. When the officer said "Those are dangerous people we're dealing with" in regards to the reasoning they go in heavy handed with weapons and grenades it make me think is that what you thought after someone died because of 3 plants of marijuana found in the home? In an opening paragraph Sack mentioned that there could be other procedures, better stake-outs or undercover operations, and surveillance to get proper information on the serious crimes they are looking to stop. Body cameras should be used in these situations especially when the information does not have to be reported to the state which very few require. If officers justify shooting someone who thought a burglar was coming into their home and shot at police get charged then why does it seem like officers get an out even after killing, or permanently disabling someone in a situation where they weren't sure of what the "criminal" was doing or claimed they shot first even when evidence came back they did not? Everything in policing is difficult to reason to the community, especially when peoples lives are on the line. But I disagree with the comment about a community wanting anything to be done if they were living next to a crack house. I would want them to get caught and receive help not murdered or given heart attacks for someone bursting in their home in the middle of the night with no notice, or their child ending up disfigured and having to go through 15+ surgeries because of extreme actions taken by the police. Special operations is needed because they do what no other fields can, but they should also do it with standards and limits and within reasoning. I'm glad our community can be protected by the best kind of trained individuals but at what costs is that too much? Marras002
I think that the no knock tactic is beneficial, and should be allowed in the case of SWAT. If SWAT needs to be called for a certain situation, it must be serious enough that it should be allowed to use this tactic. It may also be smart to take this case by case, however. If the situation is deemed to be high profile and potentially dangerous for the SWAT officers, I think the no knock tactic is definitely okay to use when breaching a house. However, I do see that this tactic can prove to be dangerous and cause a more violent situation than is necessary. If the no knock tactic is going to be used, the SWAT team needs to be aware of everything that is inside of the house or apartment that they are breaching, as the infant in the case that was explained could have been killed. Another issue with this tactic is how people may respond to such a surprise, especially if it occurs at night for example. I would personally act in aggression if someone barged into my house late at night, so that is definitely a possibility of danger for the SWAT team as well as those that live in the apartment or house that was breached by the special forces team. gh_blackhawks002, 001
I like your idea that it would be smart to take these no knock tactics case by case. Some situations mentioned in the article should not have used the no knock tactics. The only con to taking it case by case would be extra time consumption, but if that is what it takes to save law enforcement and civilian lives, then it is worth it. The SWAT team really does need to be aware of everything in the house, for their own safety and other's safety. The no knock tactics should be only used at night in very special cases where they have 100% certainty and can provide very good reason on why they cannot do the no knock tactic during the day. Scuba002
This article highlighted SWAT enforcement who typically raid houses with some information or evidence of narcotics or weapons inside or both inside.In this piece they reported 81 civilian deaths and 13 officers had died in raid from 2010-2016. Numerous injured and animals killed as well. Injuries and deaths that as they pointed out could have been avoided. When it comes to no knock warrants I understand the idea behind them, it’s to be able to catch the crimes happening in that moment. Yes, knocking has the disadvantages of allowing the drugs to be hidden and perhaps allowing the criminals to escape or prepare defense, but the danger of barging into a citizen's home is too great. When you don’t knock and just walk into a house everyone is taking part in the raid is taking a big risk because they don’t know what could happen to them. It is a deplorable thing to end innocent lives when it can be avoided, but sometimes accidents happen and they will continue to happen no matter what changes are made. The officers have to be very careful not to hurt anyone who would be in the crossfire of a raid gone bad. Pie001,002
This article was the most interesting thing I read all semester. Raids can be very dangerous at times and then they can be very easy and safe. Executing a search warrant contains so many variables than you can imagine. For example, figuring out where the subject is, that you are looking for and figuring out how to approach the location. In the article is stated that the SWAT team threw a flash bang into the residents and it landed into a child's playpen. The family of the home and SWAT are all very lucky because that child was not in the playpen at the time. So when executing a warrant it's harder then it looks. There is no doubt that drug raids are a necessary part of combating the drug business complex within the United States. Because it brings out more drug dealers from hiding and that means more raids which leads to less drugs on the street. I honestly believe that no knock warrants are safer than knock warrants because if they knock it gives the subject or subjects more time to get rid of stuff and arm themselves or even run. But that all depends on the where u are serving the warrant. With the fact that 4 and 10 adults have weapons I understand why law enforcement has militarized where as almost half of society may have a deadly weapon. Because big drug dealers also comes with big weapons.-NIKE001/NIKE002
There are rising concerns regarding SWAT tactics lately especially the no-knock breaching method used in multiple drug raids nationwide. With police and civilian casualties this method has proved risky and overwhelmingly dangerous for both law enforcement and civilians. During my time in the military I have conducted hasty breaches in training similar to the ones used by SWAT teams and I can understand the immense stress that is involved with breaching and clearing a complex in a quick fashion. This type of entry used by police officers is very suspicious in some accounts however. This form of action has been abused by officers in recent years with law enforcement officials lying on their applications for the warrants in some instances. There is no doubt that drug raids are a necessary part of combating the drug business complex within the United States, but it may be more beneficial for law enforcement agencies to report SWAT operations and to allow constructive criticism in when it is valid and just. Furthermore, knock breaches maybe more risky for officers than for civilians but law enforcement tactics can be replaced and revised, innocent lives can't. Having dark figures come onto your property at night and breaking into your house violently would lead you to act defensively which is only by instinct. Some critics and officials argue that more surveillance and stake-outs would help solve this issue, but that implies a higher cost to tax payers and the law enforcement departments. This higher cost translates into what we have now, so, while these changes could be effective, they may not solve the issue and may even bring it back to where it is now. It is a deplorable thing to end innocent lives when it can be avoided, but sometimes accidents happen and they will continue to happen no matter what changes are made. I am not sure if this is a "one bad apple ruins the bunch" kind of case, but with so many casualties and killings it is statistically a serious problem. Maybe we should require certain information or evidence be present and presented to a judge and response team in order for a no-knock warrant to be issued. Ghost003
ReplyDeleteThe no knock is extremely dangerous as this can make a non dangerous sitition dangerous as said in the article a man who had his home raided by SWAT wasn't even aware who he was shooting at. I agree with the evidence being in place as well as some of these SWAT raids came from information that was unreliable. The cost to tax players is defiantly lessened by the amount it would cost cities or county's that are involved from law suits from over using or improper use of SWAT. Eagle001 Eagle002
DeleteThese no knock warrants are extremely dangerous. I understand why they are done, but you have to feel bad for the innocent people that are inside the homes and lost their lives. You would think there can be a better way of catching these people without people dying. hotfox003
DeleteI agree with you because it might not help the situations that they are bringing up. Only because people mess up all the time in different sittuation. Like how they got the wrong house or how it could end up in a shoot down with SWAT and drug dealers. Other people could get hurt by the passing bullets. Because even if they change it to wear they do not just go in unannouced and do announced it could be better. Also deals with less causualties. I am surpried about how many offiers were hurt even thought they where supposed to were a bullet proof vest durring these raids.adelle002
DeleteIn the article Special Operations and Community Thoughts, the house invasion the Swat went into everything with authorization they should have had a better visual of what is inside of the house as this could have killed the infant if inside the play pin, or even caused this person to be deaf for the rest of their life all because of being eager. This article also made another dramatic point stating that after looking into open police files since the government doesn’t collect information for the UCR or NICRBS found that due to deploying SWAT teams this caused 81 civilians to die alongside 13 officers. The goal of policing is protection of life and property but just the opposite has happened with the militarization of policing. Also, in each year that passes there is about 1,000 officer involved shootings even innocence’s have died. I believe these no knock warrants should exist in extreme causes but only if certain reasonable suspicion exists to believe a crime is taking place and officers need to not just employ their guns first but try to see what the best outcome would be without having to take course that may cause an individual to loss their life. Also, the flip side exists as well if someone doesn’t storm into the place this could be loss of life of a fellow officer, but the focus should be to prevent the crime or prohibit the activity without leading to over using force or creating the loss of anyone civilian, or law enforcement. With the fact that 4 and 10 adults have weapons I understand why law enforcement has militarized as almost half of society may have a deadly weapon but at the same token this is never worth the life of an individual that was never involved in the crime as there is no tolerance to what this does in face of police relationship to the community of shaping the way that police are characterized in the mindset of society. Eagle001 Eagle002
ReplyDeleteI agree that violent offenders should be surprised and not know they are getting ready to be raided. Officers are also being shot because of the surprise intrusion the individual if selling drugs they could think they are being robbed. There are to many innocent bystanders being hurt in the process of extreme force. The community policing may have lowered the conviction rate but what cost. Police are being thought of as violent and uncaring when they are trying to stop the crimes happening in low income neighborhoods. Its a touchy topic because of the policing.sly.003
DeleteI do agree with you. These no knock warrants should be used in extreme circumstances. I do wonder if the police do their homework on these houses before they go in. Like if they have kids or elderly people that are innocent. It could make a difference on how the police respond inside the home. hotfox003
DeleteThe no knock policy needs serious modifications when entering the homes of nonviolent offenders. Innocent children and elderly are being hurt in the process of the flash grenades and overall force of the entrance. Its understandable that the police want to surprise the offenders so they don't have an opportunity to get rid of the drugs or to go into hiding. When it comes to the reliability of the informants that is a slippery topic because they are just trying to get off or have their sentence reduced for any information they give and most times the officers just go off what they say. With violent offenders it makes sense to use extreme measures because there can be cross fire that's why officers are being shot will entering on a no knock warrant. People may think its an intruder and fire without thinking. Its sad when infant's are harmed. Its hard for officers to make the call when entering because they don't know all of the occupants of the house. If the informants were more reliable they could inform the officers if children were involved.overall its a serious problem causing multiple deaths.sly.003
ReplyDeleteI agree while no knock breaches are dangerous, the real danger lies in the information gathering process. The use of informants can be beneficial and sometimes necessary, but officers should seek to gather their own information through stake outs and other surveillance operations. Helping to paint a bigger better picture to the judge signing the warrant and the officers doing the breach would help save countless innocent lives and officers lives as well. Ghost003
DeleteI think that the no knock tactic can potentially be dangerous to the lives of the suspects, as well as the SWAT officers, but it can also be advantageous to the officers if the element of surprise is effective in that particular scenario. It all depends on the case at hand, and I think that is how it should be treated, case by case, not as a generality.
Deletegh_blackhawks002, 001
I agree with Mr. Chabali, the retired SWAT veteran who said, “Why would you run into a gunfight? If we are going to risk our lives, we risk them for a hostage, for a citizen, for a fellow officer. You definitely don’t go in and risk your life for drugs.” These no-knock warrants are too dangerous for officers. I understand the benefits of not knocking, such as not giving the potential threat time to grab a weapon or hide the drugs, but I see too many disadvantages to no-knock warrants. It is similar to the idea that it is better letting 100 guilty people go than one innocent person locked up; it is better to not get 100 of those guilty drug dealers and users than kill one innocent person. Too many lives, both civilian and law enforcement, have been lost for drugs. Knocking should be required. Yes, brainless drug dealers would try to take on the officers every once in a while during a knocking warrant, but they will get caught. Knocking will allow time for drugs to be hidden, but officers are smart and can find the drugs. Law enforcement should not risk their lives on drugs and should focus on more serious violent crimes. Scuba002
ReplyDeleteI also agree because by not knocking you are putting ypur own self at risk. I don't feel like it is a good risk at that. The people first response to someone just barging into their home is too defend themselves and their family. The SWAT just barging in is stupid. A knock and a warrant should be required. WS002
DeletePolice officers put their lives on the line every day. At any moment, an attack could occur, a natural disaster, a violent outbreak, a robbery, or any other crime. Officers are expected to attend every crime scene, as they are the heroes who will save us all from the criminals. Any moment the public is in danger, the law enforcement are to be there to help. Well, this is great, and officers are often willing to give their lives for the greater good. However, these risks should be avoided when possible. Especially when it comes to no knock warrants. Catching criminals off guard is a great strategy and, on paper, seems like a great idea. However, the sudden violence and aggression is likely to give rise to more violent returns. Officers are risking too much on these operations. Yes, knocking has the disadvantages of allowing the drugs to be hidden and perhaps allowing the criminals to escape or prepare defense, but the danger of barging into a citizen's home is too great. You never know how the attack will look, or how likely the owners of said home are to just immediately return force. I appreciate the quote from Mr. Chalabi, who said "Why would you run into a gunfight? If we are going to risk our lives, we risk them for a hostage, for a citizen, for a fellow officer. You definitely don’t go in and risk your life for drugs.” This is a good way to look at it. Officers risk their lives for many things, but busting a drug house should not be taken to the extent of such violence and such endangerment to a law enforcers life. - AJC001
ReplyDeleteIf a no-knock warrant serves the purpose of catching the drugs before they can be hidden like you mentioned here as a reason why, then instead of introducing more weapons and flash bang grenades the system could introduce warrants that let the officers search the entire house and not just plain sight. Half the cases mentioned drugs were found but you can't tell me they were all sitting out on the coffee table at the time of the door being busted down after 15 second after a simple knock was given at 2 in the morning. Aggressive tactics are sometimes needed but I do not think all the cases mentioned especially in ones where individuals in the home were harmed or killed or officers injured and killed necessarily needed those drastic of means to accomplish the goal. I think our system should be able to come up with something else and safer to still accomplish the same goal with less injuries sustained. Marras002
DeleteI understand why the police do the no knock. It is a measure they have to do in order for the outcome to be in their favor. Otherwise the people in the house can start shooting or get rid of the drugs, whatever the case may be. It is sad that innocent people can get hurt in the process. I do wonder if the police check into the fact if the people they are doing the no knock warrant's have any kids or elderly people living there. So at least they know that there is innocent people in the house before they go in. hotfox003
ReplyDeleteWhen you are a police officer you risk your life everyday. I find it shocking how 81 civilians and 13 officers died during a swat raid from 2010 and 2016. It makes me think if there is a better way to server a drug search warrant. I can see how it can be dangerous for the swat because all they do is use a battery ram to bust down the door and throw a flash grandaid in the house. As it shows on the website how one of the flash graniads landed near a play pin. It makes me think of what if a baby or a child was in there at time.They need to come up with a safer solution even thought it is a drug bust. In some case the police get the wrong addresses and innocent people get hurt.Also there are some cases where people have a gun and there home and they think it is intruders busting in and not the cops. So they start shooting at who ever is coming in. Just because when it comes to swat they can enter without saying who they are. When police have to announce them selves before they enter.Adelle002
ReplyDeleteI feel like then "no knock" raid is unnecessary and dangerous. It is dangerous because with the SWAT team just knocking down the door it is putting their lives in danger. In all the videos that were shown in just about everyone someone was getting shot. If police or SWAT don't have a search warrant then they should not be in the stance to search houses. They are just walking in and shooting and not knowing the situation. By them just walking in without knocking put people on edge and forces them to retaliate and get defensive. Judges and police can not get mad if the people decides to fight back and react by there emotions and by whats going on. The man with golf club was shot dead instantly when SWAT barged in unexpectedly. SWAT has killed many innocent people because they decided to not knock before coming in the building. And, I do not feel like that is right. They have killed minority people, disabled people, and even the elderly. Why are they getting applaud for being assholes? WS002
ReplyDeleteSpecial Operations exist as elite task force teams who have a specific mission. This article highlighted SWAT enforcement who typically raid houses with some information or evidence of narcotics or weapons inside or both inside. The reason the community may have an issue with how they carry out their missions is the fact that it causes both civilian and officer deaths. In this piece they reported 81 civilian deaths and 13 officers had died in raid from 2010-2016. Numerous injured and animals killed as well. Injuries and deaths that as they pointed out could have been avoided. The typical information used for a warrants is evidence or information that there is drugs inside a home for the authorization of a no-knock or knock and announce warrant to be issued. In other raids reported as misinformation given a 7 year old and a 68 year old male died because of mistakes the police made. The community does not feel safer when information isn't properly given through the chain of command and a young baby Bou Bou in the article speaks of getting hit with a flash bang grenade. So not only is the community paying for the raid, the pay for the mistakes. SWAT do not have to always report what they do, this is a problem with how our system operates. If the community is paying for something I think we also deserve the right to know all the information. Names, charges, exact locations don't need to be told to the public but there needs to be reasoning behind this especially in situations that a death occurred and barely misdemeanor charges worth of drugs were found. When the officer said "Those are dangerous people we're dealing with" in regards to the reasoning they go in heavy handed with weapons and grenades it make me think is that what you thought after someone died because of 3 plants of marijuana found in the home? In an opening paragraph Sack mentioned that there could be other procedures, better stake-outs or undercover operations, and surveillance to get proper information on the serious crimes they are looking to stop. Body cameras should be used in these situations especially when the information does not have to be reported to the state which very few require. If officers justify shooting someone who thought a burglar was coming into their home and shot at police get charged then why does it seem like officers get an out even after killing, or permanently disabling someone in a situation where they weren't sure of what the "criminal" was doing or claimed they shot first even when evidence came back they did not? Everything in policing is difficult to reason to the community, especially when peoples lives are on the line. But I disagree with the comment about a community wanting anything to be done if they were living next to a crack house. I would want them to get caught and receive help not murdered or given heart attacks for someone bursting in their home in the middle of the night with no notice, or their child ending up disfigured and having to go through 15+ surgeries because of extreme actions taken by the police. Special operations is needed because they do what no other fields can, but they should also do it with standards and limits and within reasoning. I'm glad our community can be protected by the best kind of trained individuals but at what costs is that too much? Marras002
ReplyDeleteI think that the no knock tactic is beneficial, and should be allowed in the case of SWAT. If SWAT needs to be called for a certain situation, it must be serious enough that it should be allowed to use this tactic. It may also be smart to take this case by case, however. If the situation is deemed to be high profile and potentially dangerous for the SWAT officers, I think the no knock tactic is definitely okay to use when breaching a house. However, I do see that this tactic can prove to be dangerous and cause a more violent situation than is necessary. If the no knock tactic is going to be used, the SWAT team needs to be aware of everything that is inside of the house or apartment that they are breaching, as the infant in the case that was explained could have been killed. Another issue with this tactic is how people may respond to such a surprise, especially if it occurs at night for example. I would personally act in aggression if someone barged into my house late at night, so that is definitely a possibility of danger for the SWAT team as well as those that live in the apartment or house that was breached by the special forces team.
ReplyDeletegh_blackhawks002, 001
I like your idea that it would be smart to take these no knock tactics case by case. Some situations mentioned in the article should not have used the no knock tactics. The only con to taking it case by case would be extra time consumption, but if that is what it takes to save law enforcement and civilian lives, then it is worth it. The SWAT team really does need to be aware of everything in the house, for their own safety and other's safety. The no knock tactics should be only used at night in very special cases where they have 100% certainty and can provide very good reason on why they cannot do the no knock tactic during the day. Scuba002
DeleteThis article highlighted SWAT enforcement who typically raid houses with some information or evidence of narcotics or weapons inside or both inside.In this piece they reported 81 civilian deaths and 13 officers had died in raid from 2010-2016. Numerous injured and animals killed as well. Injuries and deaths that as they pointed out could have been avoided. When it comes to no knock warrants I understand the idea behind them, it’s to be able to catch the crimes happening in that moment. Yes, knocking has the disadvantages of allowing the drugs to be hidden and perhaps allowing the criminals to escape or prepare defense, but the danger of barging into a citizen's home is too great. When you don’t knock and just walk into a house everyone is taking part in the raid is taking a big risk because they don’t know what could happen to them. It is a deplorable thing to end innocent lives when it can be avoided, but sometimes accidents happen and they will continue to happen no matter what changes are made. The officers have to be very careful not to hurt anyone who would be in the crossfire of a raid gone bad. Pie001,002
ReplyDeleteThis article was the most interesting thing I read all semester. Raids can be very dangerous at times and then they can be very easy and safe. Executing a search warrant contains so many variables than you can imagine. For example, figuring out where the subject is, that you are looking for and figuring out how to approach the location. In the article is stated that the SWAT team threw a flash bang into the residents and it landed into a child's playpen. The family of the home and SWAT are all very lucky because that child was not in the playpen at the time. So when executing a warrant it's harder then it looks. There is no doubt that drug raids are a necessary part of combating the drug business complex within the United States. Because it brings out more drug dealers from hiding and that means more raids which leads to less drugs on the street. I honestly believe that no knock warrants are safer than knock warrants because if they knock it gives the subject or subjects more time to get rid of stuff and arm themselves or even run. But that all depends on the where u are serving the warrant. With the fact that 4 and 10 adults have weapons I understand why law enforcement has militarized where as almost half of society may have a deadly weapon. Because big drug dealers also comes with big weapons.-NIKE001/NIKE002
ReplyDelete