Pima County, Arizona SWAT Team Shoots Iraqi Veteran 60 Times!!

[billt]

Link Removed

They shot this kid 60 TIMES! Perhaps they should apply for a job with LVPD Metro. Never know when they'll have to mow down another in a Costco parking lot. Bill T.

 

[jaysonindaytona]

question one...did they ID them selves before entry...question two...did they give him a chance to put the gun down...

 

[eXGee11]

According to the PD they announced as they broke the door and fired when they saw the Guy with his rifle. Note: he fired no rounds and safety was never switched off. According to the wife she woke him up upon seeing armed masked men advancing through the yard.

If he was indeed a criminal then he was dumb to pick up the rifle. If he was innocent he was defending his family from an unknown threat. Just my opinion.

 

[scottbland247]

I've been keeping up on this story and it's got shady all over it...the sheriff announced immediately that the resident fired first and that was later proven to be false as his safety was on and he didn't fire. The police also kept him inside the house and the ambulance outside for about an hour literally assuring his death. I am not an advocate of no knock warrants, no evidence is worth a chance of a wrongful shooting. There has also been a lot of demogogue'ing on both sides.....him being a vet doesn't have anything to do with his supposed innocence and his owning an ar-15 and body armor has nothing to do with his supposed guilt.

 

[scottbland247]

@exgree11, I would suggest that even criminals have the right to defend themselves from unknown threats (if he was one, which has yet to be proven)

 

[Nightmare45]

I have no criminal record, I own body armor which hangs beside bed, when my wife or my dogs wake me up, I put the body armor on as I check my house, as stated before, kick my door in day or night, I do not care what you are yelling you will be attacked by the dogs and in an all out gunfight from the get go while the wife will call 911 and request police and ambulance and then backs me up with more firepower.

 

[KAM65]

From a short video from this incident, the SWAT team indeed turn on their sirens outside the home and yell "Police," before entering. (Apparently, 71 shot where fired, 22 of them hitting the victim.) Said that, not knowing the layout of the home, etc., its hard to tell how well the two inside could hear this, especially if wakened from a sleep, playing music, being in the shower and so on. What's worrisome here is the heavy paramilitarizing of our civilian police force, and the use of heavy handed tactics, all in the name of "the war on drugs." There have been way to many incidents where SWAT teams have entered the wrong house, ending up shooting innocent people that in a state of confusion and fear pulled their own weapon or otherwise armed themselves in the belief that their own life was in grave danger, with the tragic results that they, themselves was shot and killed.
Berwyn Heights, Maryland mayor's residence drug raid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Link Removed
Detroit Girl, 7, Killed in SWAT Raid - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine
Chain of lies led to botched raid (Atlanta Grandma Shooting)

 

[shooter]

question one...did they ID them selves before entry...question two...did they give him a chance to put the gun down...

First, from what has been reported, it appeared they did announce.

Second, there is no requirement for police to give those pointing guns at them to give them a chance to put guns down.

If you think otherwise, you are watching too many movies and TV shows.

 

[shooter]

Link Removed

They shot this kid 60 TIMES! Perhaps they should apply for a job with LVPD Metro. Never know when they'll have to mow down another in a Costco parking lot. Bill T.

They shot 71 times, hitting him 22 times.

 

[shooter]

@exgree11, I would suggest that even criminals have the right to defend themselves from unknown threats (if he was one, which has yet to be proven)

Unless, of course, those criminals are in possession of firearms in violation of state or federal laws.

 

[shooter]

its hard to tell how well the two inside could hear this

There is no legal requirement to ensure those inside actually hear the announcement.

There have been way to many incidents where SWAT teams have entered the wrong house

They were not at the wrong house, in this incident.

 

[shooter]

@exgree11, I would suggest that even criminals have the right to defend themselves from unknown threats (if he was one, which has yet to be proven)

It depends on what you define as a "criminal."

If the criminal is a convicted felon, in most states, possession of a firearm is illegal. In those cases, criminals would not have the right to defend themselves against unknown threats, if that defense incorporated possession or use of a firearm.

 

[BigSlick]

There is no legal requirement to ensure those inside actually hear the announcement.

Of course there's not. This would make entirely to much sense and rob those para-militarized SWAT teams of their glory in beating down someone's door, rushing in and shooting them 20 times. Just kill them all and we will sort the legal stuff out later. After all, we have a warrant and dead men tell no tales. But in case they screw up just use the following excuses to retroactively make the victim/victims look like a threat.
Option 1, Say he looked threatening or took a defensive posture.
Option 2, say the cell phone he was calling 911 on looked like a gun (we all know those menacing iphones look like machine guns in the dark and don't get me started on those damn Blackberry's).
Option 3, always claim they shot first.
After all it's for officer safety ya know. <wink, wink>

They were not at the wrong house, in this incident.

I think you missed the point KAM65 was trying to make. There have been many cases where police and/or SWAT teams did have the wrong address and innocent people were killed. Did you see the links? Most of the time the police and/or SWAT teams simply blamed the victim for their untimely demise. Sure we had the wrong address but the victim did not get on the ground fast enough or submit to our authority so SOP is shoot them. Again, it's for officer safety. When will you learn that you have no right to protect yourself or your family when someone is beating down your door. Your guilty until proven innocent.

 

[scottbland247]

There is an issue with allowing police to shoot anyone who doesn't comply, while letting them run into a house without requiring them to give the residents time to process that these are actually police trying to get in....no knock warrants or "knock and bang" warrants are a huge danger to society.

 

[shooter]

Of course there's not. This would make entirely to much sense and rob those para-militarized SWAT teams of their glory in beating down someone's door, rushing in and shooting them 20 times. Just kill them all and we will sort the legal stuff out later. After all, we have a warrant and dead men tell no tales. But in case they screw up just use the following excuses to retroactively make the victim/victims look like a threat.
Option 1, Say he looked threatening or took a defensive posture.
Option 2, say the cell phone he was calling 911 on looked like a gun (we all know those menacing iphones look like machine guns in the dark and don't get me started on those damn Blackberry's).
Option 3, always claim they shot first.
After all it's for officer safety ya know. <wink, wink>

I think you missed the point KAM65 was trying to make. There have been many cases where police and/or SWAT teams did have the wrong address and innocent people were killed. Did you see the links? Most of the time the police and/or SWAT teams simply blamed the victim for their untimely demise. Sure we had the wrong address but the victim did not get on the ground fast enough or submit to our authority so SOP is shoot them. Again, it's for officer safety. When will you learn that you have no right to protect yourself or your family when someone is beating down your door. Your guilty until proven innocent.

Your snide and sarcastic remarks reveal a bitter anti-police attitude and general paranoia about law enforcement. It's apparent and obvious you know zip about this stuff and nothing anyone ever says or evidence produced will change your mind. So, I'm not going to try to.

The point I got from KAM65's post was that this event was just another in a line of unfortunate incidents in which mistakes were made. In that regard, he was wrong. They had a signed warrant for that home, as well as 3 others, at the end of a 20-month investigation. There was plenty of reasonable belief that this guy was a bad dude, that he was engaged in illegal activity, and that delivery of the search warrant was high-risk. The guy pointed a firearm at cops, the cops responded appropriately and the result was he lost his life.

Lesson learned -- don't engage in criminal behavior so that there is a potential for cops to show up at your door with a search warrant. And, if they do, it's not a good idea to point firearms at them because they will probably shoot you in self-defense because they reasonably believe they are in immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death.

Your post intimates that police should never make a mistake and that they on the whole intentionally engage in premeditated murder to cover mistakes if and when they do make them. It's a free country to say and believe whatever you want...but, the fact that you would take that position is disturbing to me.

Good luck to you.

 

[Nightmare45]

I agree totally that with a warrent they can enter, and this guy may have been a bad dude, but warrants have been granted on bad information, I have numerous LEO friends including on SWAT, high risk job, bad information has lead to bad outcomes, ex-marine not releasing safety sound strange maybe not, if you kick my doors in you will first have to deal with two dogs (not friendly) and as stated before while wife is calling 911 and requesting ambulance and police there will be one hell of a gunfight going on, I know the layout of my home and what I have done to protect same from kick entry by anyone. Call my lawyer and I will show up, kick my door in and you will experience serious problems up to and including death.

 

[PaxMentis]

Your snide and sarcastic remarks reveal a bitter anti-police attitude and general paranoia about law enforcement. It's apparent and obvious you know zip about this stuff and nothing anyone ever says or evidence produced will change your mind. So, I'm not going to try to.

The point I got from KAM65's post was that this event was just another in a line of unfortunate incidents in which mistakes were made. In that regard, he was wrong. They had a signed warrant for that home, as well as 3 others, at the end of a 20-month investigation. There was plenty of reasonable belief that this guy was a bad dude, that he was engaged in illegal activity, and that delivery of the search warrant was high-risk. The guy pointed a firearm at cops, the cops responded appropriately and the result was he lost his life.

Lesson learned -- don't engage in criminal behavior so that there is a potential for cops to show up at your door with a search warrant. And, if they do, it's not a good idea to point firearms at them because they will probably shoot you in self-defense because they reasonably believe they are in immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death.

Your post intimates that police should never make a mistake and that they on the whole intentionally engage in premeditated murder to cover mistakes if and when they do make them. It's a free country to say and believe whatever you want...but, the fact that you would take that position is disturbing to me.

Good luck to you.

The fact that there is as substantial a minority as there is ready to excuse the deaths of law abiding citizens on the basis of officer safety is disturbing to me.

It has been almost 20 years now since the increasing militarization of police at all levels and the movement to protect the law enforcement personel at the expense of those we are paid to protect caused me to leave direct federal law enforcement and move to corrections for the final 10 years of my career.

When we start using tactics and strategies that cause more deaths and injuries to innocent civilians than the old and accepted strategies resulted in for LEOs, in order to assure the safety and security of those LEOs who have chosen a career that will naturally put them in jeopardy, we are putting the cart before the horse...

When I first became an LEO, one of the reasons I chose the career was a desire to protect those I signed up to serve. I recognized that, in doing so, I placed myself at a higher risk than the average citizen and accepted that as a part of the price to be paid for the satisfaction I received from a job I saw as protecting the "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" to which each of our citizens is entitled. To me, groups of paramilitary or ninja clad individuals armed to the teeth and ready to fire at the slightest provocation busting down doors in the middle of the night without warning or even a clear announcement as to who they are and the reason for their intrusion on the mere possibility that the residents might be armed criminals ready to do battle (something that happens quite rarely in reality) because an informant alleged buying pot on the premises is more like making war on the citizenry than protecting them.

Somehow, our priorities have become twisted to the point that putting the people at risk in order to protect those hired to protect them seems justified...then we object strenuously when someone suggests that we are turning into a police state. Doesn't anyone see what is wrong with this picture?

 

[scottbland247]

Paxmentis, I could not agree with you more. There are much safer methods of delivering a warrant and I absolutely expect zero mistakes all around when you claim the right to charge into someone's house with guns out. I have never understood the "police are always right, now " shutup" mentality. We all went to high school and college with these men/women, some of them are great some not so great. Police are people and prone to mistakes which is why you can't allow these type of warrants...people are dying on a regular basis and that should not happen

 

[9026543]

And of course you will find the police apologist that will say that the victim probably was a bad dude or knew some bad dudes so therefore he deserved to die.

 

[shooter]

There is an issue with allowing police to shoot anyone who doesn't comply, while letting them run into a house without requiring them to give the residents time to process that these are actually police trying to get in....no knock warrants or "knock and bang" warrants are a huge danger to society.

Sorry...police who shoot people for simple non-compliance is not a standard practice and happens rarely. Those occasions are investigated and if a crime was committed, they are charged, tried, and sometimes convicted...all based on the criminal justice system.

This case is not about "allowing police to shoot anyone who doesn't comply." This case is about someone engaged in criminal activity who confronted cops with a firearm.