4 ms·

I never understood the obsession with sending heavily armed police to break down doors for some trivial white collar crime. If there is no immediate threat to l

by melony 5y ago

I never understood the obsession with sending heavily armed police to break down doors for some trivial white collar crime. If there is no immediate threat to life, it can wait. You would think that with all the financial and digital surveillance, the government would be able to do better than physical search, asset robbery, and intimidation. I pay my taxes so the cavalry would come during a violent crime like robbery and kidnapping or physical damage/larceny of personal property. It seems that police are useless when it comes to the urgent crimes and instead waste their time pursuing cases better left to a non-armed government division.

hemloc_io 5y ago
IIRC the official line is that it's to prevent destruction of evidence. Personally doesn't seem like a good enough reason to me. (I'm suspicious it's partly to help their case by intimidating suspects, give a reason for keeping TAC units budgets high, and b/c the TAC guys think it's fun lol) Especially considering that if you knock down doors in the USA you're bound to get people who shoot back.
bell-cot 5y ago
Perhaps those engaged in (or responsible for) such behaviors are more motivated by their own emotional gratification - vs. the competence, efficiency, etc. considerations which are important to you?
rkk3 5y ago
Very few cases where you actually need or want a heavily armed police force to break down doors. Probably shouldn't have a system like this if we wouldn't want it applied to ourselves... Reminds me of an old Chappelle's show skit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeOVbeh2yr0&ab_channel=ComedyCentral https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeOVbeh2yr0&ab_channel=Comed...
sobkas 5y ago
> I never understood the obsession with sending heavily armed police to break down doors for some trivial white collar crime. If there is no immediate threat to life, it can wait. You would think that with all the financial and digital surveillance, the government would be able to do better than physical search, asset robbery, and intimidation. I pay my taxes so the cavalry would come during a violent crime like robbery and kidnapping or physical damage/larceny of personal property. It seems that police are useless when it comes to the urgent crimes and instead waste their time pursuing cases better left to a non-armed government division. That because we live under capitalism first and democracy second. So when capitalist ask government to jump, they ask how high.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  If we really lived under capitalism, the government would send them the bill afterwards and thank them for choosing SWAT™. There's a name for a system where the state and corporations work towards a unified interest that's aligned with the power of both, but it's not capitalism... it's fascism.
oh_sigh 5y ago
What door did they break down? The article mentions that FBI agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had a warrant when she opened it.

by melony 5y ago

hemloc_io 5y ago

IIRC the official line is that it's to prevent destruction of evidence. Personally doesn't seem like a good enough reason to me. (I'm suspicious it's partly to help their case by intimidating suspects, give a reason for keeping TAC units budgets high, and b/c the TAC guys think it's fun lol) Especially considering that if you knock down doors in the USA you're bound to get people who shoot back.

bell-cot 5y ago

Perhaps those engaged in (or responsible for) such behaviors are more motivated by their own emotional gratification - vs. the competence, efficiency, etc. considerations which are important to you?

rkk3 5y ago

Very few cases where you actually need or want a heavily armed police force to break down doors. Probably shouldn't have a system like this if we wouldn't want it applied to ourselves... Reminds me of an old Chappelle's show skit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeOVbeh2yr0&ab_channel=ComedyCentral https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeOVbeh2yr0&ab_channel=Comed...

sobkas 5y ago

> I never understood the obsession with sending heavily armed police to break down doors for some trivial white collar crime. If there is no immediate threat to life, it can wait. You would think that with all the financial and digital surveillance, the government would be able to do better than physical search, asset robbery, and intimidation. I pay my taxes so the cavalry would come during a violent crime like robbery and kidnapping or physical damage/larceny of personal property. It seems that police are useless when it comes to the urgent crimes and instead waste their time pursuing cases better left to a non-armed government division. That because we live under capitalism first and democracy second. So when capitalist ask government to jump, they ask how high.

whatshisface 5y ago
If we really lived under capitalism, the government would send them the bill afterwards and thank them for choosing SWAT™. There's a name for a system where the state and corporations work towards a unified interest that's aligned with the power of both, but it's not capitalism... it's fascism.

oh_sigh 5y ago

What door did they break down? The article mentions that FBI agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had a warrant when she opened it.