Arizona SWAT shoots marine, new developments

[Russianfist]

Watch for yourself you decide.


YouTube - ‪Raw video: PCSD helmet cam clip shows SWAT raid and shooting‬‏

Tactical entry. Sirens then you hear officers give multiple commands that they are the sherrifs office and have a search warrent and ordering the door be opened (I heard at least two sirens and 3 verbal commands). Also did you see how the officers were just calmly milling about in the front yard? Not exactly the behavior of a bunch of guys amped up on adrenalin but rather almost routine in movement. Also, why on earth did the guy grab his AR AND his family had taken the time to get to the closet before entry so I can't help but think he knew what was going on and had taken the time to get his family to cover before entry. I can see where this guy could have thought it was a home invasion but the sirens and commands nearly invalidates that point. A much more plausable
Explanation would be as simple as a wrong address. That, or the guy was a bad guy. We will just have to wait and see.

 

[RB87]

"Not exactly the behavior of a bunch of guys amped up on adrenalin but rather almost routine in movement."

Which begs the question, why did they need a swat team to serve a search warrant, armed with full auto weapons, riot shields and armor?

 

[jvbutter]

Tactical entry. Sirens then you hear officers give multiple commands that they are the sherrifs office and have a search warrent and ordering the door be opened (I heard at least two sirens and 3 verbal commands). Also did you see how the officers were just calmly milling about in the front yard? Not exactly the behavior of a bunch of guys amped up on adrenalin but rather almost routine in movement. Also, why on earth did the guy grab his AR AND his family had taken the time to get to the closet before entry so I can't help but think he knew what was going on and had taken the time to get his family to cover before entry. I can see where this guy could have thought it was a home invasion but the sirens and commands nearly invalidates that point. A much more plausable
Explanation would be as simple as a wrong address. That, or the guy was a bad guy. We will just have to wait and see.

very possible...

"Not exactly the behavior of a bunch of guys amped up on adrenalin but rather almost routine in movement."

Which begs the question, why did they need a swat team to serve a search warrant, armed with full auto weapons, riot shields and armor?

yes that is my thought also... who so many officers for just a casual warrant serving???? and 71 shots fired???? really

 

[glock.40]

"Not exactly the behavior of a bunch of guys amped up on adrenalin but rather almost routine in movement."

Which begs the question, why did they need a swat team to serve a search warrant, armed with full auto weapons, riot shields and armor?

It doesn't beg the question. If SWAT was called to serve a warrant, for whatever reason, in whichever city, SWAT shows up in SWAT gear - body armor, automatic weapons, and riot shields. It's not a matter of severity of circumstance, but a characteristic of the unit as a whole.

 

[dmancornell]

It doesn't beg the question. If SWAT was called to serve a warrant, for whatever reason, in whichever city, SWAT shows up in SWAT gear - body armor, automatic weapons, and riot shields. It's not a matter of severity of circumstance, but a characteristic of the unit as a whole.

The question is not how SWAT was equipped, but why they were deployed in the first place. Don't call SWAT for routine search warrants. DUH!

Whether our taxpayer dollars should be pissed away for tax parasites to play soldier in suburbia is another issue altogether.

 

[Sasquatchvnv]

<broken link removed>

The Intercept: A dead Marine and a silent sheriff

'What Were You Guys Thinking? Why Did You Kill Him?' by William Norman Grigg

 

[dmancornell]

<broken link removed>

 

[Russianfist]

The question is not how SWAT was equipped, but why they were deployed in the first place. Don't call SWAT for routine search warrants. DUH!

Whether our taxpayer dollars should be pissed away for tax parasites to play soldier in suburbia is another issue altogether.

SWAT is ALWAYS CALLED when serving a search warrent. The only time they are not called is when a dept has to act fast to prevent evidence from being destroyed or suspects fleeing. Playing soldier in suberbia? Seriously dude................

 

[dmancornell]

SWAT is ALWAYS CALLED when serving a search warrent. The only time they are not called is when a dept has to act fast to prevent evidence from being destroyed or suspects fleeing. Playing soldier in suberbia? Seriously dude................

LOL, note to self, never move to Sweet Home Oregon, apparently they deploy SWAT cops for all search warrants.

You do know that the traditional way of executing search warrants is with regular cops and knocking on the door, and that SWAT was originally created for hostage situations and armed robberies? But in today's police state, sheeple actually buy the garbage propaganda that SWAT should be used for every day search warrants. Sad and pathetic.

And you have a point, "playing soldier" isn't right, that's insulting to soldiers. A more proper term would be "steroid raging taxpayer money wasting constitutional rapist".

 

[RB87]

The Guerena Shooting: Initial Analysis:

Confederate Yankee: The Guerena Shooting: Initial Analysis

It doesn't beg the question. If SWAT was called to serve a warrant, for whatever reason, in whichever city, SWAT shows up in SWAT gear - body armor, automatic weapons, and riot shields. It's not a matter of severity of circumstance, but a characteristic of the unit as a whole.

Again, so why call the swat team in at all if they're so unconcerned about their safety to be lax in their tactics via that helmet cam video released the other day.

 

[glock.40]

The question is not how SWAT was equipped, but why they were deployed in the first place. Don't call SWAT for routine search warrants. DUH!

Whether our taxpayer dollars should be pissed away for tax parasites to play soldier in suburbia is another issue altogether.

That actually was part of his question. As for why they were called, according to the report, the home was suspected to house people who were involved in home invasions, homicides, and other things... whether they were right or wrong (sounds like they were wrong), swat was deemed necessary. DUH!

 

[glock.40]

The Guerena Shooting: Initial Analysis:

Confederate Yankee: The Guerena Shooting: Initial Analysis




Again, so why call the swat team in at all if they're so unconcerned about their safety to be lax in their tactics via that helmet cam video released the other day.

I haven't seen that video, so I don't know the answer to that question. But my complaint was the poor logic of that post. It doesn't seem as though the officers were doing the right thing in this situation - so that isn't being debated, but rather the complaint of SWAT showing up in SWAT gear.

The article posted mentions a role of SWAT serving warrants where surprise is necessary and where damage is to be minimized. Damage wasn't minimized in this case, unfortunately, but nonetheless, calling in SWAT as an individual choice does not seem to be wrong, and to criticize them for showing up ready for work is quite silly.

 

[dmancornell]

That actually was part of his question. As for why they were called, according to the report, the home was suspected to house people who were involved in home invasions, homicides, and other things... whether they were right or wrong (sounds like they were wrong), swat was deemed necessary. DUH!

And if you bothered reading the thread, multiple posters made a point regarding the over-deployment of SWAT for various reasons, such as funding, the "officer safety" canard, etc. The issue at hand is whether the cops have a legitimate, Constitutionally valid reason to deploy SWAT, as opposed to idiotic excuses SWAT cops use to justify their meaningless jobs.

 

[glock.40]

And if you bothered reading the thread, multiple posters made a point regarding the over-deployment of SWAT for various reasons, such as funding, the "officer safety" canard, etc. The issue at hand is whether the cops have a legitimate, Constitutionally valid reason to deploy SWAT, as opposed to idiotic excuses SWAT cops use to justify their meaningless jobs.

first of all, I have read the thread. Secondly, I don't disagree with what you just said, so I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[dmancornell]

first of all, I have read the thread. Secondly, I don't disagree with what you just said, so I'm not sure what your point is.

You seemed to think the deployment of SWAT in this case is appropriate, I contested that line of thinking. That's all.

 

[glock.40]

You seemed to think the deployment of SWAT in this case is appropriate, I contested that line of thinking. That's all.

Ah, I see. well I would say that if there was reasonable evidence that a home harbored felons, then the use of a traditional swat team to search a home to prevent the harm of innocent citizens, that would be acceptable.

Is that this situation? It seems as though it is not. I merely objected to the poor use of logic, not the circumstance it was being applied to.

 

[dustinm]

I googled the video and read the statement. Knowing there is two sides to every story I think they (SWAT) made the right and only decision. They were faced with a guy who didn't answer the door after being asked to, he pointed an assult rifle at them and like anyone who has ever taken a CCW class or basic self defense class, this guy picked his destany. Unless he was a blind mute he had no reason to believe this was a home invasion, last news I checked home invaders don't drive vehicles with sirens, lights and dress with big signs on them that say SWAT, POLICE, SHERIFF etc....

Watching the video it showed about (not sure how many were actually shooting) four to six officers at the door. Divide that by 70 rounds and its easy to see why there was such a high number of rounds. I bet if you interview 100 people who shot a semi auto at something when they feared their safety was in danger 99% of them couldn't tell you how many times they pulled the trigger. (The other 1% were shooting HiPoints and they jammed)

Just my to cents.....

 

[dmancornell]

he pointed an assult rifle at them and like anyone who has ever taken a CCW class or basic self defense class, this guy picked his destany.

Right, let the cops off the hook for forcing the victim into an impossible situation. The homeowner had no choice whatsoever in the matter.

Correct usage of your term: if the homeowner managed to ventilate the invaders, then the cops "picked their destiny" because they voluntarily assaulted a man in his home.

 

[Russianfist]

Its become obvious that this thread is just a tail chase now so I'm calling "no joy" for myself. I would suggest that some here should get to know the topic better before they post. Its easy to go to your local PD and learn a few things.....later!

 

[Wheeler44]

Its become obvious that this thread is just a tail chase now so I'm calling "no joy" for myself. I would suggest that some here should get to know the topic better before they post. Its easy to go to your local PD and learn a few things.....later!

I suppose that would be better than having them come to your house....