11 ms·

Regardless of your stance on the entire Mega issue, no-one can deny that the raid is simply terrifying. Personally I have no clue how they justified such a hea

by Peroni 13y ago

Regardless of your stance on the entire Mega issue, no-one can deny that the raid is simply terrifying. Personally I have no clue how they justified such a heavily armed response particularly considering the fact that Dotcom never posed a physical threat to anyone let alone the fact that there were a number of children in the building at the time.

mjolk 13y ago
What's the point of buying all those toys if you never get to use them? And what's a better time to use them, but when you know they can't potentially get damaged?
Samuel_Michon 13y ago
> no-one can deny that the raid is simply terrifying. It looked pretty amateurish to me. They had trouble climbing a 3 foot high gate, which after they had ‘scaled’ it, turns out was easily opened. > such a heavily armed response I counted 5 police officers who approached the house together, only one of them was armed with a rifle. I saw no violence whatsoever, it was pretty laid-back. At no point in the video did they point a gun at any of the suspects, and they lowered their fire arms before they entered the building (highly unusual if you think you’re in danger or if you want to intimidate someone). > Dotcom never posed a physical threat to anyone When you’re dealing with a rich suspect who loves expensive toys and has a large staff, you have to be prepared for anything. In the US, they would’ve sent an army to surround and comb through that enormous mansion. Given that Dotcom is morbidly obese, I doubt the agents saw him as a physical threat, it’s his staff and the presence of weapons they needed to worry about.
- mrmagooey 13y ago
  I'm pretty sure that in most countries if a police officer turns up with a silenced automatic weapon then the police action is no longer "laid-back".
- aranw 13y ago
  Wow you really have no idea do you? Seriously just cause you live in the US and everything is over the top including police force, that doesn't mean its the norm. I can ensure you police force in the US and the use of guns is over the top and unjustified, so was this in the case for Dotcom.
  - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
    I don’t live in the US. Even in the Netherlands, where I live, police raids are a lot larger than just 5 agents and one rifle. In your country, police officers don’t carry guns and tactical units are armed with flowers?
    - codeulike 13y ago
      >In your country, police officers don’t carry guns? Correct. UK.
      - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
        The norm is that police officers wear guns, the UK is an exception. But even in the UK, police carry guns and rifles during raids – especially if they suspect to be met with armed resistance (as was the case with Kim Schmitz). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorised_Firearms_Officer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorised_Firearms_Officer
        minimize_me 13y ago
        Not all raids, no.
        Samuel_Michon 13y ago
        I didn’t say ‘all raids’.
        lmm 13y ago
        Did you read the page you linked to? Guns are only carried by specialized units. While said units will be called in if the circumstances seem to merit it, that's an unusual occurrence; the normal case, even on a raid, is that noone is carrying firearms.
- adrr 13y ago
  Because Kim is super rich, they wouldn't have raid him in the US. It would have been like the Madoff arrest, knock on his door an arrest him. Hell they may have even contacted his lawyers and asked him to surrender.
  - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
    Schmitz had fled several countries previously to avoid being jailed, why should this time be different? Because of his vast amount of funds and his loyalty to no one, he was a flight risk, so they decided to pick him up. However, they knew that was going to be tricky. Schmitz has an enormous mansion in a rural area. He has a large security staff and a private helicopter. In the end, police “neutralized locks and cut their way into a safe room, where Dotcom was found with what looked like a sawed-off shotgun”.
- matthewsimon 13y ago
  > ... did they point a gun at any of the suspects ... This may seem a minor point, but the housekeeper and other staff were not "suspects", they're innocent members of the public.
  - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
    His associates Finn Batato, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk were also arrested and are suspects.
Symmetry 13y ago
Using a SWAT raid to arrest a subject in cases where the police also want to seize evidence isn't at all uncommon in the US these days. The ostensible idea is that speed and ferocity is needed to capture evidence before criminals can destroy it. In practice I think the situation is more that police departments feel they need need SWAT teams because of terrorism, etc. But once they have them they start looking for chances to use them so the members don't get bored. The police in the US are required to knock on the door and announce themselves before conducting a raid which would interfere with the police starting the suspects and getting them before they could, say, flush their drugs down the toilet. Thankfully for the police there's no requirement for how loudly they have to knock, so I don't think I've ever heard of a case where the suspect or neighbors heard them do this. There are some states where over half of police searches are done by tactical squads bursting in behind a battering ram.
- Peroni 13y ago
  This raid was conducted in NZ. One of the most passive countries on the planet.
  - toomuchtodo 13y ago
    At the behest of the US government.
- cafard 13y ago
  Police departments also want SWAT teams because other jurisdictions have them and it's easy to get funding.
- shpxnvz 13y ago
  As you mention this is quite common in the U.S. These "high-risk" warrant teams are used all the time for serving narcotics warrants on non-violent offenders. They also commonly get the wrong address or the wrong suspect with tragic results. Take a peek at the map of botched paramilitary raids for a sobering look at what happens when the police screw up: http://www.cato.org/raidmap http://www.cato.org/raidmap

by Peroni 13y ago

mjolk 13y ago

What's the point of buying all those toys if you never get to use them? And what's a better time to use them, but when you know they can't potentially get damaged?

Samuel_Michon 13y ago

> no-one can deny that the raid is simply terrifying. It looked pretty amateurish to me. They had trouble climbing a 3 foot high gate, which after they had ‘scaled’ it, turns out was easily opened. > such a heavily armed response I counted 5 police officers who approached the house together, only one of them was armed with a rifle. I saw no violence whatsoever, it was pretty laid-back. At no point in the video did they point a gun at any of the suspects, and they lowered their fire arms before they entered the building (highly unusual if you think you’re in danger or if you want to intimidate someone). > Dotcom never posed a physical threat to anyone When you’re dealing with a rich suspect who loves expensive toys and has a large staff, you have to be prepared for anything. In the US, they would’ve sent an army to surround and comb through that enormous mansion. Given that Dotcom is morbidly obese, I doubt the agents saw him as a physical threat, it’s his staff and the presence of weapons they needed to worry about.

mrmagooey 13y ago
I'm pretty sure that in most countries if a police officer turns up with a silenced automatic weapon then the police action is no longer "laid-back".
aranw 13y ago
Wow you really have no idea do you? Seriously just cause you live in the US and everything is over the top including police force, that doesn't mean its the norm. I can ensure you police force in the US and the use of guns is over the top and unjustified, so was this in the case for Dotcom.
- Samuel_Michon 13y ago
  I don’t live in the US. Even in the Netherlands, where I live, police raids are a lot larger than just 5 agents and one rifle. In your country, police officers don’t carry guns and tactical units are armed with flowers?
  - codeulike 13y ago
    >In your country, police officers don’t carry guns? Correct. UK.
    - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
      The norm is that police officers wear guns, the UK is an exception. But even in the UK, police carry guns and rifles during raids – especially if they suspect to be met with armed resistance (as was the case with Kim Schmitz). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorised_Firearms_Officer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorised_Firearms_Officer
      - minimize_me 13y ago
        Not all raids, no.
        Samuel_Michon 13y ago
        I didn’t say ‘all raids’.
      - lmm 13y ago
        Did you read the page you linked to? Guns are only carried by specialized units. While said units will be called in if the circumstances seem to merit it, that's an unusual occurrence; the normal case, even on a raid, is that noone is carrying firearms.
adrr 13y ago
Because Kim is super rich, they wouldn't have raid him in the US. It would have been like the Madoff arrest, knock on his door an arrest him. Hell they may have even contacted his lawyers and asked him to surrender.
- Samuel_Michon 13y ago
  Schmitz had fled several countries previously to avoid being jailed, why should this time be different? Because of his vast amount of funds and his loyalty to no one, he was a flight risk, so they decided to pick him up. However, they knew that was going to be tricky. Schmitz has an enormous mansion in a rural area. He has a large security staff and a private helicopter. In the end, police “neutralized locks and cut their way into a safe room, where Dotcom was found with what looked like a sawed-off shotgun”.
matthewsimon 13y ago
> ... did they point a gun at any of the suspects ... This may seem a minor point, but the housekeeper and other staff were not "suspects", they're innocent members of the public.
- Samuel_Michon 13y ago
  His associates Finn Batato, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk were also arrested and are suspects.

Symmetry 13y ago

Using a SWAT raid to arrest a subject in cases where the police also want to seize evidence isn't at all uncommon in the US these days. The ostensible idea is that speed and ferocity is needed to capture evidence before criminals can destroy it. In practice I think the situation is more that police departments feel they need need SWAT teams because of terrorism, etc. But once they have them they start looking for chances to use them so the members don't get bored. The police in the US are required to knock on the door and announce themselves before conducting a raid which would interfere with the police starting the suspects and getting them before they could, say, flush their drugs down the toilet. Thankfully for the police there's no requirement for how loudly they have to knock, so I don't think I've ever heard of a case where the suspect or neighbors heard them do this. There are some states where over half of police searches are done by tactical squads bursting in behind a battering ram.

Peroni 13y ago
This raid was conducted in NZ. One of the most passive countries on the planet.
- toomuchtodo 13y ago
  At the behest of the US government.
cafard 13y ago
Police departments also want SWAT teams because other jurisdictions have them and it's easy to get funding.
shpxnvz 13y ago
As you mention this is quite common in the U.S. These "high-risk" warrant teams are used all the time for serving narcotics warrants on non-violent offenders. They also commonly get the wrong address or the wrong suspect with tragic results. Take a peek at the map of botched paramilitary raids for a sobering look at what happens when the police screw up: http://www.cato.org/raidmap http://www.cato.org/raidmap