5 ms·

It would be a non-violent crime, probably. Non-violent crimes shouldn't result in swat teams.

dublinben 12y ago
Non-violent crimes turn into violent standoffs when the police routinely respond to them with aggressive raids. This is completely a product of escalation between the illegal gangs and the 'legal' gang.
- opendais 12y ago
  Yes. A non-swat approach is pretty simple: Observe the location in an unmarked police car and wait for the suspect to leave, then enter to acquire the evidence. No confrontation required. There is no real urgency that justifies a raid when no one is in any danger of violent harm.
  - danielweber 12y ago
    You don't even need to have a cop in the unmarked car. You can have a remotely viewable camera that the desk-duty cop watches from the precinct headquarters. EDIT to address the troll: you can run these off of a car battery and stream it over the cellphone network. Quality will be rather good even then. If you can park a car, you can set up the camera. PTZ, too.
    - moggflunkies 12y ago
      "don't mind me poor 100% black community im just here from ADT to install this randomly hallarious HD camera and wireless antenna facing this decrepit house" king of non-suspicious behavior
      - malandrew 12y ago
        The typical utility company truck (gas, electricity, water) can be parked outside and someone could install any number of objects that contain cameras/microphones, but don't look like one. Resorting to an obvious strawman does nothing.
        a3n 12y ago
        That would be dangerous for the utility company employees, because this tactic would quickly become known, and all utility vehicles and employees would then be viewed with hostility and suspicion by criminals and other residents. Similar to the vaccination blowback after the Bin Laden raid.
      - bmelton 12y ago
        Having built them for the ATF, there are concealable cameras that mount to light poles and run off grid power. There are also concealable cameras that look like fire hydrants, high voltage signs, rocks, and cars that are designed to feed the video back wirelessly and be rapidly deployable.
  - ganeumann 12y ago
    Even easier: wait for the suspect to leave the house, arrest him, then go do a leisurely search without having to worry about the suspect being violent.
    - moggflunkies 12y ago
      LOOOL How about real life happens in your story: - Look outs realize there is an anomalous vehicle staged in the neighborhood & alert the team. How do you not get detected? - Drug dealers arn't home so they send a child/girlfriend to pickup the stash/cash from the home. Do you arrest and charge the 14 year old son of the dealer? - Dope boys have children/women runners do the logistical aspects. Arrest the dealer, go in the house and find the stash, the girlfriend claims its hers. Dope boy walks free. Congrats you have done nothing but charged a 14 year old relative and/or girlfriend of the dealer, alerted the hood that its under surveillance and your target flees to a different zone/state/country.
      - matwood 12y ago
        Huh? If you have evidence for a warrant on a supposedly dangerous dealer you don't need to catch them with drugs. Simply wait them out for when they leave their house and pick them up then.
        chc 12y ago
        Did you know that a search warrant is not the same as an arrest warrant?
        matwood 12y ago
        The original comment mentioned arresting someone. If they want to search the house then wait till it is mostly empty. Presumably to get the warrant they have at least a modicum of surveillance? Maybe made and undercover buy or 2? There are plenty of ways to avoid violence unless absolutely necessary. Instead police want to raise the level of violence and approach every citizen as an enemy combatant. If a cop wants to play military war fighter, then go join the military.
- moggflunkies 12y ago
  ITT: people who have never been in law enforcement or military service. >drug offenders are perfectly well adjusted people, just politely knock they will let you in every time. >drug dealers don't flee the state/country when they suspect being watched/followed/pending arrest >I wonder why it's called a "trap house" I hope that you live in an upper middle class community in California to justify the logic behind your post.
  - opendais 12y ago
    No? You just don't do it for the pot dealer down the street. Instead, you wait for him to leave and break in to get what you need. Preferably in a way that isn't visible from the street so you can arrest the guy before/after.
jacquesm 12y ago
This swat team just committed a violent crime. If you're looking for a small amount of drugs on a person who you aren't even sure is present in a single room with a whole pile of occupants including children and you start throwing flashbang grenades then you should be 100% culpable. Stuff like that has no application in regular policing, definitely not in raids to arrest people on suspicion of some small time crime. If you go after the hold-out of a nest of armed bankrobbers that have been spotted going into some warehouse then you could make a case for it but even then preferably only after they try to shoot their way out. This is an absolutely ridiculous level of escalation in a residential area.
- EpicEng 12y ago
  I hate the "war on drugs" and the levels to which the police take it, but the only person who said "a small amount of drugs" was the parent. I can't imagine that a SWAT team would be used for a "small amount of drugs".
- chillingeffect 12y ago
  I just watched a brief youtube video on flashbang grenade training [0]. Apparently, the grenades aren't even supposed to be thrown into the room, they're only supposed to be thrown into the doorway. And that's in a military context, not even a police context. So it's bad enough they're using military hardware, but then they're not even using it according to proper training. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhfyQXZOwg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhfyQXZOwg
  - moggflunkies 12y ago
    >arrest anyone who writes code that is vulnerable and is exploited by a malicious party and causes damages. That is your logic.
  - the_ancient 12y ago
    Military context is often safer and more humane than police context The Police get all the "toys" but none of the training, or self control. Just watch any SWAT raid then compare that to a true military RAID, the Control and restraint used by the military is vastly contrasted by the Uncontrolled and Free Firing of a Police Raid. The police are very dangerous
chc 12y ago
I don't think "nonviolent" is a good description of a lot of hard drug rings. They aren't being violent right at the moment, but if they see a cop standing outside the door, they very well might just shoot him. No-knock warrants are by and large a horrible thing and SWAT teams are drastically overused, but that doesn't make the problem they are meant to address any less real.
- opendais 12y ago
  1) And how does raiding their place when they aren't there for evidence somehow result in this violence you speak of? 2) You think the people in this article were "hard drug ring members"? http://www.ajc.com/news/news/lawsuit-clayton-swat-grenade-badly-burned-woman-in/ngFS5/ http://www.ajc.com/news/news/lawsuit-clayton-swat-grenade-ba... You mean like this guy with "an ounce or less of marijuana"? I think you have no idea what you are talking about. They aren't being used for "hard drugs" they are being used for "any situation where we might be able to link to someone who uses drugs".
  - chc 12y ago
    This seems so disconnected from my comment that I'm not even sure you responded to the right one. Either you mis-replied or you have mentally transformed me into a bizarre caricature of what people who don't completely agree with you must be like.
    - opendais 12y ago
      Me: > It would be a non-violent crime, probably. Non-violent crimes shouldn't result in swat teams. Where in here do you see 'hard drug ring'? Or 'hard drugs'? You: > I don't think "nonviolent" is a good description of a lot of hard drug rings. They aren't being violent right at the moment, but if they see a cop standing outside the door, they very well might just shoot him. No-knock warrants are by and large a horrible thing and SWAT teams are drastically overused, but that doesn't make the problem they are meant to address any less real. > This seems so disconnected from my comment that I'm not even sure you responded to the right one. Either you mis-replied or you have mentally transformed me into a bizarre caricature of what people who don't completely agree with you must be like. Funny, I thought that is what your comment was. I was talking about no knock warrants on nonviolent crimes and you make the false claim I was talking about armed, hard drug criminal organizations. That somehow them being "overused" makes the problem "less real". I never claimed the problem wasn't real either. I claimed they shouldn't be used in relation to non-violent crimes/criminals in general.

Non-violent crimes turn into violent standoffs when the police routinely respond to them with aggressive raids. This is completely a product of escalation between the illegal gangs and the 'legal' gang.

opendais 12y ago
Yes. A non-swat approach is pretty simple: Observe the location in an unmarked police car and wait for the suspect to leave, then enter to acquire the evidence. No confrontation required. There is no real urgency that justifies a raid when no one is in any danger of violent harm.
- danielweber 12y ago
  You don't even need to have a cop in the unmarked car. You can have a remotely viewable camera that the desk-duty cop watches from the precinct headquarters. EDIT to address the troll: you can run these off of a car battery and stream it over the cellphone network. Quality will be rather good even then. If you can park a car, you can set up the camera. PTZ, too.
  - moggflunkies 12y ago
    "don't mind me poor 100% black community im just here from ADT to install this randomly hallarious HD camera and wireless antenna facing this decrepit house" king of non-suspicious behavior
    - malandrew 12y ago
      The typical utility company truck (gas, electricity, water) can be parked outside and someone could install any number of objects that contain cameras/microphones, but don't look like one. Resorting to an obvious strawman does nothing.
      - a3n 12y ago
        That would be dangerous for the utility company employees, because this tactic would quickly become known, and all utility vehicles and employees would then be viewed with hostility and suspicion by criminals and other residents. Similar to the vaccination blowback after the Bin Laden raid.
    - bmelton 12y ago
      Having built them for the ATF, there are concealable cameras that mount to light poles and run off grid power. There are also concealable cameras that look like fire hydrants, high voltage signs, rocks, and cars that are designed to feed the video back wirelessly and be rapidly deployable.
- ganeumann 12y ago
  Even easier: wait for the suspect to leave the house, arrest him, then go do a leisurely search without having to worry about the suspect being violent.
  - moggflunkies 12y ago
    LOOOL How about real life happens in your story: - Look outs realize there is an anomalous vehicle staged in the neighborhood & alert the team. How do you not get detected? - Drug dealers arn't home so they send a child/girlfriend to pickup the stash/cash from the home. Do you arrest and charge the 14 year old son of the dealer? - Dope boys have children/women runners do the logistical aspects. Arrest the dealer, go in the house and find the stash, the girlfriend claims its hers. Dope boy walks free. Congrats you have done nothing but charged a 14 year old relative and/or girlfriend of the dealer, alerted the hood that its under surveillance and your target flees to a different zone/state/country.
    - matwood 12y ago
      Huh? If you have evidence for a warrant on a supposedly dangerous dealer you don't need to catch them with drugs. Simply wait them out for when they leave their house and pick them up then.
      - chc 12y ago
        Did you know that a search warrant is not the same as an arrest warrant?
        matwood 12y ago
        The original comment mentioned arresting someone. If they want to search the house then wait till it is mostly empty. Presumably to get the warrant they have at least a modicum of surveillance? Maybe made and undercover buy or 2? There are plenty of ways to avoid violence unless absolutely necessary. Instead police want to raise the level of violence and approach every citizen as an enemy combatant. If a cop wants to play military war fighter, then go join the military.
moggflunkies 12y ago
ITT: people who have never been in law enforcement or military service. >drug offenders are perfectly well adjusted people, just politely knock they will let you in every time. >drug dealers don't flee the state/country when they suspect being watched/followed/pending arrest >I wonder why it's called a "trap house" I hope that you live in an upper middle class community in California to justify the logic behind your post.
- opendais 12y ago
  No? You just don't do it for the pot dealer down the street. Instead, you wait for him to leave and break in to get what you need. Preferably in a way that isn't visible from the street so you can arrest the guy before/after.

jacquesm 12y ago

This swat team just committed a violent crime. If you're looking for a small amount of drugs on a person who you aren't even sure is present in a single room with a whole pile of occupants including children and you start throwing flashbang grenades then you should be 100% culpable. Stuff like that has no application in regular policing, definitely not in raids to arrest people on suspicion of some small time crime. If you go after the hold-out of a nest of armed bankrobbers that have been spotted going into some warehouse then you could make a case for it but even then preferably only after they try to shoot their way out. This is an absolutely ridiculous level of escalation in a residential area.

EpicEng 12y ago
I hate the "war on drugs" and the levels to which the police take it, but the only person who said "a small amount of drugs" was the parent. I can't imagine that a SWAT team would be used for a "small amount of drugs".
chillingeffect 12y ago
I just watched a brief youtube video on flashbang grenade training [0]. Apparently, the grenades aren't even supposed to be thrown into the room, they're only supposed to be thrown into the doorway. And that's in a military context, not even a police context. So it's bad enough they're using military hardware, but then they're not even using it according to proper training. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhfyQXZOwg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhfyQXZOwg
- moggflunkies 12y ago
  >arrest anyone who writes code that is vulnerable and is exploited by a malicious party and causes damages. That is your logic.
- the_ancient 12y ago
  Military context is often safer and more humane than police context The Police get all the "toys" but none of the training, or self control. Just watch any SWAT raid then compare that to a true military RAID, the Control and restraint used by the military is vastly contrasted by the Uncontrolled and Free Firing of a Police Raid. The police are very dangerous

chc 12y ago

I don't think "nonviolent" is a good description of a lot of hard drug rings. They aren't being violent right at the moment, but if they see a cop standing outside the door, they very well might just shoot him. No-knock warrants are by and large a horrible thing and SWAT teams are drastically overused, but that doesn't make the problem they are meant to address any less real.

opendais 12y ago
1) And how does raiding their place when they aren't there for evidence somehow result in this violence you speak of? 2) You think the people in this article were "hard drug ring members"? http://www.ajc.com/news/news/lawsuit-clayton-swat-grenade-badly-burned-woman-in/ngFS5/ http://www.ajc.com/news/news/lawsuit-clayton-swat-grenade-ba... You mean like this guy with "an ounce or less of marijuana"? I think you have no idea what you are talking about. They aren't being used for "hard drugs" they are being used for "any situation where we might be able to link to someone who uses drugs".
- chc 12y ago
  This seems so disconnected from my comment that I'm not even sure you responded to the right one. Either you mis-replied or you have mentally transformed me into a bizarre caricature of what people who don't completely agree with you must be like.
  - opendais 12y ago
    Me: > It would be a non-violent crime, probably. Non-violent crimes shouldn't result in swat teams. Where in here do you see 'hard drug ring'? Or 'hard drugs'? You: > I don't think "nonviolent" is a good description of a lot of hard drug rings. They aren't being violent right at the moment, but if they see a cop standing outside the door, they very well might just shoot him. No-knock warrants are by and large a horrible thing and SWAT teams are drastically overused, but that doesn't make the problem they are meant to address any less real. > This seems so disconnected from my comment that I'm not even sure you responded to the right one. Either you mis-replied or you have mentally transformed me into a bizarre caricature of what people who don't completely agree with you must be like. Funny, I thought that is what your comment was. I was talking about no knock warrants on nonviolent crimes and you make the false claim I was talking about armed, hard drug criminal organizations. That somehow them being "overused" makes the problem "less real". I never claimed the problem wasn't real either. I claimed they shouldn't be used in relation to non-violent crimes/criminals in general.