Is that the light at the end of the tunnel? (O.T. Thread)

[MWil23]

Just now, MWil23 said:

IMO, it boils down to how things used to be on a few things:

1. Teams all should have stayed inside for the anthem, because up until the US Military was a sponsor, that's how it always worked.

2. The messages on shirts, hats, helmets, whatever, should all be allowed or disallowed. The entire context of a "NBA/NFL approved message" under the guise of the 1st amendment is a hilarious contradiction (Dear NBA, where's your "Free China" jersey? Probably don't want to lose billions in revenue from China.). Drawing attention to those things as a side piece and why/how/etc. is also something I'd steer clear of. If you let them do it (athletes), great, but we don't need to pull up a bunch of tweets about it, a 4 minute fluff piece, etc. 

3. Athletes should be encouraged to voice/say whatever they want in interviews and other things before and after the event, but I'd like to separate the sports and personal in those avenues during the window of game watching. That's just me speaking as a fan. By all means, celebrities should use their voice (appropriately and consistently) and platform to help drive change, but there also needs to be an understanding that I'm literally watching these guys and only care about them inasmuch as they entertain me athletically. Some people really care about celebrities and athletes, but I'm not one of them. That doesn't make me cold or callous...that would be the case if that's how I viewed the HS kids that I coach (which I don't obviously). 

TL;DR

$$$$$$

Money

$$$$$$ earned vs. $$$$$ lost

[pnies20]

1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

I'll toe the line here, but I think we as a society need to look at archaic policy that puts everyone in a lethal situation. No knock warrants (and whether or not that was used here I'm not going down that road) are a complete violation of the fourth amendment and robs citizens of their due process. Plain clothes officers are inherently dangerous for everyone involved, as if anyone enters my house without announcing and without wearing a uniform, will be met with panic, will not be met with the benefit of the doubt, and I will assume that they are in my house to harm me/my family. (Even a single knock that wakes me up/disorients me as someone kicks down my door and enters isn't exactly something I'm prepped to react rationally to.)

In all reality, that has nothing to do with police officers, as they're carrying out this archaic/these archaic policies, and those who use lethal force will be met with lethal force, per policies and training.

It's time we as a society push for policy changes and do away with those who put everyone's life/lives at risk, especially ones that were made to keep people from flushing weed/other drugs down the toilet. 

As for  the moron firing his gun without a clear line of sight into an apartment, he was and should have been charged.

You don’t have to go down that road. They knocked. It’s a fact. No knock warrants are very rarely used and not used for destruction of property. They are used in the execution of search warrants involving violent individuals so that they can gain a tactical advantage. I Have never been and probably will never be a part of one. Very rare.
 

I’ll tell you that they knew the catalyst for a no knock wasn’t there because they were tracking his phone and car. They knew he wasn’t there. They applied for a no knock at all locations for this long term drug investigation and only used it where the violent target was. The murder suspect was taken into custody Around the same time as the breonna Taylor incident as they executed all warrants simultaneously. 

 

on your last point I agree. Police are responsible for every round fired regardless of if the shooting is justified or not.

 

This isn’t about someone smoking weed or selling weed. They were investigating a violent group of drug dealers trafficking large amounts of narcotics. Multiple murder were committed by this group related to drug trafficking.

[MWil23]

@pnies20 thanks for your willingness to protect and serve (obviously the same to @NateDawg). I again want to reiterate that we need to look at policies that put YOU GUYS (and others as well) at risk. When a dispatch call to a situation is often times your only means of context as to what is going on, or you guys are trained to respond to various situations with various policies and then use force trained as to what that situation warrants, then context and details are critical, but often times, that's not what's covered or reported. I hope that makes sense.

[pnies20]

2 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

@pnies20 thanks for your willingness to protect and serve (obviously the same to @NateDawg). I again want to reiterate that we need to look at policies that put YOU GUYS (and others as well) at risk. When a dispatch call to a situation is often times your only means of context as to what is going on, or you guys are trained to respond to various situations with various policies and then use force trained as to what that situation warrants, then context and details are critical, but often times, that's not what's covered or reported. I hope that makes sense.

I totally get what you are saying. 
 

Police 💯 need more and better training. Drug investigations are already changing. Detectives in almost all big cities are not using weed as probable cause in most investigations.
 

I will also say that the detectives doing these investigations are literally keeping this sort of behavior off your doorstep. 
 

Several cities, you could probably guess which ones, are disbanding plain clothes units. These cities are seeing violent crime SKY ROCKET. You can’t go to a gas station without seeing a shootout.

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, pnies20 said:

I totally get what you are saying. 
 

Police 💯 need more and better training. Drug investigations are already changing. Detectives in almost all big cities are not using weed as probable cause in most investigations.
 

I will also say that the detectives doing these investigations are literally keeping this sort of behavior off your doorstep. 
 

Several cities, you could probably guess which ones, are disbanding plain clothes units. These cities are seeing violent crime SKY ROCKET. You can’t go to a gas station without seeing a shootout.

I actually have no issue with plain clothes units, but rather having plain clothes units as the means to enter houses and execute search warrants. 

[pnies20]

12 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

I actually have no issue with plain clothes units, but rather having plain clothes units as the means to enter houses and execute search warrants. 

Because of the suspects confusion?

[DawgX]

1 hour ago, malibuspeedrace said:

I stand by the my stance that Twitter is the true downfall of our society.

Been standing on that hill since I knew of it's existence

And Facebook.

[MWil23]

Just now, pnies20 said:

Because of the suspects confusion?

Correct, and the safety of everyone involved. Serious question, because I may need to be educated here. If someone enters my home/breaks down the door and I'm a legal gun owner here, and they announce themselves and show me a warrant, which I've never seen before, and they're armed, and my wife and kids are in the house. My adrenaline is rushing, I've never been trained/prepped for something like this, and my first instinct is to stand my ground and protect myself/my family. What's that process look like and what should I do?

[pnies20]

11 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Correct, and the safety of everyone involved. Serious question, because I may need to be educated here. If someone enters my home/breaks down the door and I'm a legal gun owner here, and they announce themselves and show me a warrant, which I've never seen before, and they're armed, and my wife and kids are in the house. My adrenaline is rushing, I've never been trained/prepped for something like this, and my first instinct is to stand my ground and protect myself/my family. What's that process look like and what should I do?

So here’s a standard search warrant execution:

Marked police car using lights and sirens out front (was also used in breonna Taylor incident) announcing something to the effect of: “Residents Of __________, this is the metro ______ police department. This is a search warrant. Come to the door and do not resist.”

This is happening while police are stacked at the door knocking and saying “police search warrant” or something similar.

This is done until a supervisor says to breach the door if the residents don’t come to the door.

This is pretty much department policy everywhere.

Edited September 24, 2020 by pnies20

[MWil23]

1 minute ago, pnies20 said:

So here’s a standard search warrant execution:

Marked police car using lights and sirens out front (was also used in breonna Taylor incident) announcing something to the effect of: “Residents Of __________, this is the metro ______ police department. This is a search warrant. Come to the door and do not resist.”

This is happening while police are stacked at the door knocking and saying “police search warrant” or something similar.

This is done until a supervisor says to breach the door if the residents don’t come to the door.

This is pretty much state law everywhere.

So, hypothetically speaking, if I come to the door and say "My wife and kids are inside, can I go get them?", is that acceptable? I assume at that point, I'll be escorted to them to be able to remove them safely?

[pnies20]

9 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

So, hypothetically speaking, if I come to the door and say "My wife and kids are inside, can I go get them?", is that acceptable? I assume at that point, I'll be escorted to them to be able to remove them safely?

Yes that’s what is preferred. They will immediately take you into custody and probably call them out into the common area before clearing the house.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

10 minutes ago, pnies20 said:

So here’s a standard search warrant execution:

Marked police car using lights and sirens out front (was also used in breonna Taylor incident) announcing something to the effect of: “Residents Of __________, this is the metro ______ police department. This is a search warrant. Come to the door and do not resist.”

This is happening while police are stacked at the door knocking and saying “police search warrant” or something similar.

This is done until a supervisor says to breach the door if the residents don’t come to the door.

This is pretty much department policy everywhere.

So if this was the likely course of how the interaction went down, why would a guy with no criminal record or drugs/illegal stuff in his home open fire on cops?  I get this would be purely speculation, but I can’t even think of a single motivation for risking your life/life imprisonment for essentially what would be the inconvenience of being woken up.

And if he was wrong, why drop the charges against him?
 

I guess I’m just not seeing how he did nothing wrong (legally) and the officers did nothing wrong (legally) and yet there’s a lady shot 8 times in her home.

I’m legit asking how an innocent person can end up dead and everyone be justified in their actions from a legal perspective? Legit question, not baiting.

[pnies20]

22 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

So if this was the likely course of how the interaction went down, why would a guy with no criminal record or drugs/illegal stuff in his home open fire on cops?  I get this would be purely speculation, but I can’t even think of a single motivation for risking your life/life imprisonment for essentially what would be the inconvenience of being woken up.

And if he was wrong, why drop the charges against him?
 

I guess I’m just not seeing how he did nothing wrong (legally) and the officers did nothing wrong (legally) and yet there’s a lady shot 8 times in her home.

I’m legit asking how an innocent person can end up dead and everyone be justified in their actions from a legal perspective? Legit question, not baiting.

I can’t answer why he would do what he did. It’s happened before and it will happen again. It’s happened here in the past few years.
 

It seems like the crux of your questions is the fact the had no criminal history and no drugs were located in the house. 

 

You don’t have to have a criminal history to be involved in drug trafficking or violent crime. Im not even sure if that’s a true statement that he had no criminal history.
 

Are you aware that no one ever searched the house? As soon as the shooting happened The Louisville equivalent of internal affairs took over and the narcotics unit was not allowed to Search for or recover any evidence. Media immediately reported “no drugs found”.

 

edit: I don’t want to get into why I think the boyfriend wasn’t charged. It was investigated at the city level and not state. I’ll leave it at that.

Edited September 24, 2020 by pnies20

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

Just now, pnies20 said:

I can’t answer why he would do what he did. It’s happened before and it will happen again. It’s happened here in the past few years.
 

I know you can’t and I don’t expect you (or any other officer) to, I’m just saying that a.) there’s no clear motive for doing so other than b.) the explanation he gave, which seems reasonable enough.

Just now, pnies20 said:

It seems like the crux of your questions is the fact the had no criminal history and no drugs were located in the house. 
 

Correct.

Just now, pnies20 said:

You don’t have to have a criminal history to be involved in drug trafficking or violent crime. Im not even sure if that’s a true statement that he had no criminal history.
 

Fair point on the first part.  To more accurately phrase it, he has no previous convictions. He’d have been willing to go down in a blaze of glory for at most a first time drug offense? Not impossible, I know, but rather unlikely I’d imagine.

Just now, pnies20 said:

Are you aware that no one ever searched the house? As soon as the shooting happened The Louisville equivalent of internal affairs took over and the narcotics unit was not allowed to Search for or recover any evidence. Media immediately reported “no drugs found”.

Now I’m even more confused.  

Why not search the home if that’s why they were there originally? I get they needed to process everything that just happened, but there should have been time for that eventually, no?

They couldn’t have went in for any other reason, like to arrest/charge him with something drug related, as they didn’t do so when they had him in custody.

I still don’t see how everyone’s actions can be just and legal and an unarmed person end up dead in her own bed.  You’d think there’d have to be some breach of the law or negligence in there somewhere.

[NateDawg]

Pretty cringe society we live in where an officer gets shot and isn’t allowed to shoot back.