I think the issue that I and most here have is that it often appears that the military, crash, shoot, and subdue is the FIRST option that you folks are using. I understand that you are trying to provide a valuable service. However, when the lives of innocent people are at stake, is it REALLY too much to ask that you verify the situation you are going into? Is it really? How hard is it to confirm if it’s the freaking maypr’s house? How hard is it to say…you know…maybe we can wait and take this guy when he comes out of the door and NOT shoot his dogs, kids, wife, etc. How much extra would it REALLY take to verify information that some other criminal has given you to save HIS own ass in order to prevent something like this? I guess the informant has NO motivation to give up somebody…ANYONE…just to try to save his own ass. It seems to me that instead of getting smarter, law enforcemnet has just gotten more brutal and callous with little or no regard for the people they are protecting.

The actions that constantly inspire topics such as Radley post here are not that few and far between. It seems as if there are 3-4-5 EVERY day! Wrong houses…shooting mothers carry children, trashing those houses, shooting pets….all avoidable with a little brain work instead of muscle. THAT is why they get the lable “over-testosteroned”…because that is the behavior of someone more concerned with getting their adreniline rush and NOT of someone concerned about protecting citizens.

Until YOU change your tactics and methods, the public backlash is going to get worse and worse. I can appreciate an officer that actually displays compassion and uses common sense. But my own personal experience is that you are few and far between.

Your fellow officers are creating the image, complain to them…not to us.

The problem begins with the people who provide the resources that allow police to exist and expand their business in the first place (and by police I mean FBI, state, local; they are all different sides of the same fascist toilet-token).

And that would mean everyone from the mayor who campaigns on the promise to provide more funding and the ‘necessary tools’ to these state sucking leaches to ‘do their job’ to the corrupt judges who are in bed with them, to the politician that thinks that ‘hiring an extra 100,000 cops’ is something to be proud of.

Of course, the people most responsible in the end are the mom and pops who crave as much ‘Security’ as these officials can offer them. So if you’re looking for who’s responsible, it’s most likely your neighbors. If you want the problem to end, Police departments and agencies need to be shut down, cops need to be FIRED not hired, there must be strict limits on their scope of work and strict penalties for ANY wrongdoing.

But good luck with that happening. What we have instead is the expansion of said facilities. As that happens, the additional policing members need to find more ‘jobs’ to do to justify their existence. It’s pretty much set in that direction right now. The only thing historically that has stopped the build up is when the situation becomes so unbearable that people break down and fight back. And for most people in the world, that point is non-existant.

Here is one link.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081203/ap_on_re_us/illinois_police_corruption

“CHICAGO – Duffel bags stuffed with cocaine were delivered by plane to an out-of-the-way suburban airport while two sheriff’s officers provided security. A police officer stood by to guard the cash and keep out the riffraff at a poker game where $100,000 changed hands. And a drug dealer was told squad cars marked “sheriff” and “sheriff’s police” might be available on a “freelance” basis to provide protection for his deliveries.”

Scalia’s New Professionalism is that police are now acting exactly like you’d expect. No impactful governance and complete immunity for ridiculously armed and hyped-up quasi-soldiers. What other result has history taught us to expect?

FUCK. THA. PO. LICE.

About the story? of course “the FBI declined to comment.” They have to wait until everyone gets the story straight and they’re sure they’ll stick to it.

Don’t despair. There are many people, insiders and activists who are trying to change things. Radley Balko is, in my opinion, one of the shining stars of the movement. I would also recommend that you google Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), a group of retired and current criminal justice practitioners who attempt to counter drug war propoganda with calls for a legal, regulated market for currently illicit drugs. In addition, you may want to look at Professor Peter Moskos’ blog copinthehood.com and read his book “Cop in the Hood,” which discusses his tenure with the Baltimore City Police Department, and his suggestions for radical reform of policing.

There are many practical ways to undermine the policy of strict drug prohibition. Familiarize yourself with the work of the activists I’ve mentioned, and be aware of your rights and responsibilities as a juror if you are ever called to serve during a drug trial (consult the Fully Informed Jury Association for more on that). Change will be incremental, but, as Sam Cooke sang, “its been a long time coming, but I know, change is gonna come.”

RIP Laquisha.

The FBI agents? Sounds good to me.

I see no way a jury that was accurately informed of the circumstances surrounding the woman’s death would find the original assailants guilty of her murder. A felony murder conviction requires that there be a reasonably foreseeable chain of events between the felony action and a person’s death. The fact that the circumstances causing a person’s death would not have occurred but for a felony crime does not justify a felony murder conviction if the circumstances are not a reasonable and foreseeable consequence.

Otherwise, a thief who stole a person’s wallet causing the person not to get a job in another city could be prosecuted for murder if the person later died (since, were it not for the crime, their life would be completely different and whatever circumstances ended up causing their death would likely not have occurred the same way).

To be sure, some prosecutors trot out felony-murder convictions in situations that defy logic, but the only way this one could logically hold would be if a reasonable person would expect the FBI to conduct a flash-bang raid against a quadriplegic crime victim. Do they really want to make that argument?

As a dad…I honestly think I would go to prison if some over-testeroned cop killed my daughter. I think I would honestly wait for an opportunity and kill them…seriously. In fact…if I could figure out a way…I would torture them first…I guess I’m just a sick, vengeful asshole….but I really think I would….with no remorse.

Mencken wrote: “”The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”

Never accuse the State of being unclever.

all this grief over bullshit drug laws.