Texas deputy dies serving no-knock, no-announce SWAT raid for marijuana

[rambone]

So it's bad when these things happen as a result of the drug war...but a non-issue when these same things happen as a result of addiction, overdose, etc related to the same drugs?

No, its not a non-issue. Its a personal & family issue. Not a legal issue.

Government lacks the ability and constitutional authority to stop it from happening.

Define "dangerous".

Danger (noun) : an immeasurable condition that is irrelevant to lawmaking.

Not all drugs are the same. If you want to sit around and smoke pot without worrying about breaking any laws that's one thing, but I don't see how a rational person can think making heroin, meth, etc legal would improve anything.

I would get to keep an extra $1,000 of my own earnings per year. Cops wouldn't have to die crashing into people's bedrooms at midnight. We wouldn't be reading about cavity searches and people getting terrorized over victimless crimes. Seems like an improvement to me.

Making these drugs legal will only make things worse. Many do not partake due to the legal ramifications. Remove those and the numbers will increase.

Fact or fiction, this is not what government is supposed to be for. Laws should not be about "fixing" people's bad habits, like watching too much TV, smoking too many cigarettes, or partaking in a forbidden high. This is social engineering.

 

[Tired of Lies]

Go for the queen, not the pawn. You're wasting your time making enemies and outing yourself with an obvious agenda.

And, what agenda what that be?

 

[rambone]

While it's fun to point fingers and blame its helpful to do it to the people who are responsible or capable of fixing the problem.

It is fun to point fingers.

Its the fault of the legislators for voting for such awful laws.
Its the fault of the people for voting for the legislators.
Its the fault of the courts for stretching the constitution and allowing prohibition without adding an amendment.
Its the fault of the judges for signing the warrants.
et cetera, et cetera

But the one branch of government that is blameless is the Executive Branch. Their job is just to fill the cages, not ask why. Feeling oppressed? Not my problem. I just work here.

Some would like to place the blame on my shoulders, I place it on the people.

your attempts to place that responsibility with me is flawed.

You are 100% right! it is the fault of the legislators. The people have to fix that.

I didn't make the plant illegal. I don't support it continuing to be illegal. I don't conduct the investigations, I don't write the warrants, I don't sign the warrants and I don't accept responsibility that you would like to place on my shoulders.

Why yes. Yes they are, other people's which means not mine. While it's fun to point fingers and blame its helpful to do it to the people who are responsible or capable of fixing the problem.

But as a citizen you have the opportunity to use your voice to speak out against the injustice...

Not interested in becoming an activist for something I have no desire to partake in.

Oy.

 

[phylodog]

Wow, thanks for putting all of those quotes in one spot. Seems as if I'm pretty consistent and convinced of my position, eh?

 

[steveh_131]

Wow, thanks for putting all of those quotes in one spot. Seems as if I'm pretty consistent and convinced of my position, eh?

"I was just following orders" has not been a historically good position.

 

[phylodog]

"I was just following orders" has not been a historically good position.

I'd be happy to listen to a critique of my actions that should cause me concern.

 

[Sgtusmc]

And, what agenda what that be?

Just an observation. I don't answer rhetorical questions.

 

[steveh_131]

I'd be happy to listen to a critique of my actions that should cause me concern

Which of your actions were you referring to when you blamed them on the legislature because you didn't want to be responsible for them?

 

[phylodog]

Which of your actions were you referring to when you blamed them on the legislature because you didn't want to be responsible for them?

Those would be the actions of others that you want to blame me for. I've said many times that all teams are not created equal, many shouldn't exist. I don't accept responsibility for others and I don't live in a hypothetical world. If I've done something you find offensive I'm all ears.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Those would be the actions of others that you want to blame me for. I've said many times that all teams are not created equal, many shouldn't exist. I don't accept responsibility for others and I don't live in a hypothetical world. If I've done something you find offensive I'm all ears.

I am going to take this and run with it. In my travels, I have seen some truly worthless police. I have seen times I carried a gun with my primary concern being protection from the police rather than criminals (in spite of not being a criminal myself). I have seen police who were certifiable cowards who saw a badge as a tool of protection while breaking the law and extorting favors. We have all heard of police activities that were clearly over the line past the point of being criminal in nature including paramilitary raids on the undeserving, the well-known murders committed by Lon Horiuchi under the color of the law, a mob of police beating a mentally deficient man to death while he screamed for his dad, etc.

I have had a number of jobs in my life, and even the ones I liked came with parts I didn't like, some on account of moral reasons not dissimilar with those now under consideration. Just like our officers, I did not find quitting in protest a viable solution.

While I agree completely that activities which do not generate one or more individual identifiable victims with few rare exceptions are none of the government's business at any level, I do not understand the point of berating some of the best examples for the malfeasance of the worst. I am completely in favor of coming down like tons and tons of bricks on the guilty, but raising hell at Frank and Phylodog is misplaced, particularly given that they are not in the habits of randomly beating people to death on the streets, killing old ladies in bungled raids, and so forth. My thought is that we should reserve our scorn for those who truly deserve it rather than badgering some of the best for the actions of the worst.

I will further say that, even in a very imperfect system of criminal justice--even when it can scarcely be accused of being an instrument of justice--we need to have the best people, the people most faithful to the republic, in that system even if they are occasionally required to do things with which they disagree. We are left with a far greater threat if we succeed at browbeating these people into getting jobs in factories, driving bread trucks, or selling used cars while the police agencies are left with the remainder who thoroughly enjoy being JBTs in every regard. I have seen departments which are for all practical purposes universally corrupt. Believe me, we don't want the conscientious objectors leaving, even if there are times in which they have to go along to get along. I will also say that corrupt laws are the product of corrupt legislatures, which are the product of a corrupt voting majority, which is the product of a corrupt society. Somehow, I don't think Phylodog has any chance of single-handedly changing this in spite of the most honorable intentions and actions to the extent he is able to act independently. On that note, there is also a reason why we don't hear about his team in the news while we hear plenty about some others.

I am a firm believer in Jefferson's position that the government which governs least governs the best. I am thoroughly opposed to the militarization of police, forfeiture (state-sponsored piracy) laws, the existence of almost all 'victimless' crimes, the overwhelming majority of no-knock raids, and official corruption. I can also see that, just like criminals don't follow the law, if we browbeat anyone into leaving law enforcement as conscientious objectors, it will be the people we need more of with badges, not the ones we need rid of.

One last thing...in fairness to Phylodog, I see some examples of his lack of remorse for doing his job being taken as evidence that he is not disturbed by overreaching law enforcement without account being taken of the fact that it is entirely possible that he is not distressed by his own actions because he is not called upon to do the things which are generating the opposition. There is no reason why he should have a mea culpa attack for the actions of other officers and other departments. It is entirely possible for him to sleep on a clear conscience with his own actions without endorsing the actions of others. I have seen several posts which seem to fail to account for this. I don't expect him to be ashamed of being a police officer because there are bad ones in circulation any more than I would make any apology for being a truck driver even though there are plenty of them on the road who are just plain dangerous. I am not one of them and refuse to accept shame or blame on account of them. Likewise, I do not expect good, responsible, upstanding, liberty loving, Constitution supporting lawmen to lower their heads in shame because not everyone with a badge is a decent human being. I am all in favor of seeing the guilty eliminated from any position of authority for the rest of their lives and in many cases spending the rest of their lives on the opposite side of the bars. That does not, however, mean that I am going to heap scorn on those who do not deserve it. In fact, I would think that the poor examples of lawmen in circulation would make people thankful for those who approach their jobs with the intention of doing the best they can to honor the oath they took, even if at times they are required to do things they find distasteful albeit legal orders.

 

[steveh_131]

Those would be the actions of others that you want to blame me for.

That's not true at all. You are responsible for your own actions, nothing more. I'm introducing hypotheticals because you won't give me a straight answer on where you draw the line and why. It would help if you'd answer my questions.

I take no issue with you, personally. You seem like a pretty cool guy, and we have plenty of interests and values in common. Even if we differ on this subject, I have no problem with you. I'm just asking questions to try to introduce a different perspective. I think our society has been conditioned to accept these things as a given, and I think that is a mistake. A mistake that has cost us many liberties and that will cost us many more. If we don't start thinking outside the box then this is only going to get worse.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

I am late to the argument, but I have read this entire thread. One thing that stands out to me is Phylodog's consistent and obstinate adherence to his position. His resistance is so firm that I suspect it gives us insight on his very character. It makes him look like a stubborn guy with firm beliefs and hard held values. He thinks he's right and doesn't even consider dissenting opinions....... Detractors voices falls on deaf ears and he's not ashamed of his values or of his complete disregard for criticism of them.

Now let me ask this question. Who sounds more like a guy who would likely tell his boss to f**k himself if ordered to do something that he couldn't abide in, than Phylodog? Well, maybe Frank. He is a lot like Phylodog except that he won't even DISCUSS criticism. he will make a condescending reply or sometimes a scorching retort, then go on about his business without another thought. I would hate to try to force EITHER OF THEM to commit a crime. I don't know either of them personally, but their attitude and demeanor are as constant as the morning star. If they were posers then inconsistencies would show in their posts, there are none

I do not believe these guys reflect what is wrong with the law enforcement community. I agree with IndyDave in that blaming these two officers for the actions of their departments or their fellow officers does not fix the problems. Don't sacrifice the honorable men in the attemp to purge the corrupt ones. All we know of phylodog and Frank is what they have presented here for us to see. What I see is the consistent presentation of pride and professional service. I could be wrong, but I believe that these men are who they say they are. Also they claim that the majority of officers are just like them. Like a small percentage of criminals commit the majority of crimes, it's the few corrupt cops who are causing the peoples distrust of the police.

 

[phylodog]

That's not true at all. You are responsible for your own actions, nothing more. I'm introducing hypotheticals because you won't give me a straight answer on where you draw the line and why. It would help if you'd answer my questions.

I take no issue with you, personally. You seem like a pretty cool guy, and we have plenty of interests and values in common. Even if we differ on this subject, I have no problem with you. I'm just asking questions to try to introduce a different perspective. I think our society has been conditioned to accept these things as a given, and I think that is a mistake. A mistake that has cost us many liberties and that will cost us many more. If we don't start thinking outside the box then this is only going to get worse.

My lines are drawn where I see someone being harmed by the law. Not inconvenienced or irritated, but actually harmed. Marijuana may have medicinal benefits, even if it didn't I'm not opposed to legalization, but not being allowed to smoke it is not causing harm therefore it is not worth putting my family at risk. I am allowed to utilize discretion in enforcement and have done so if I don't find a particular law agreeable.

I am a participant in our system of government, I wouldn't be if I didn't believe in its viability. It is not perfect, far from it, but I've not been exposed to one better. We have reached a tipping point on many fronts and I believe we are entering a time when we will begin too see things change. The legalization of marijuana in CO & WA and the refusal to register "assault" rifles in CT being examples of this. It is unfortunate that the citizens of CT must be forced to break the (ridiculous) law to get the ball rolling (hopefully they succeed) but the citizens of WA & CO did things the right way. They took to the streets, convinced the voting public and got things changed. Many like to talk about the slippery slope, I believe ignoring laws one doesn't agree with is just that; once it starts where does it end? Part of living in a society involves accepting the rules, working to get them changed or relocating beyond their jurisdiction. Willingly ignoring the law drastically reduces one's legitimate right to complain about the consequences of that choice.

I don't agree with the way many SWAT teams are used and I don't agree with the existence of many of them. I'm proud to serve in the capacity I do on ours as I believe we do an extremely good job and our methods are reasonable. We have reduced the number of no knock warrants in recent years in favor of knock and announce. I cannot recall our team shooting anyone on a warrant in at least the last ten years. Considering our agency is averaging a dozen shootings a year and we typically get called to deal with the most violent criminals in our city I think we are doing a decent job of preventing serious injury and death, not promoting it.

 

[Tired of Lies]

Just an observation. I don't answer rhetorical questions.

Or, the military ASSUMED rather than a real observation.

 

[rambone]

I am late to the argument, but I have read this entire thread. One thing that stands out to me is Phylodog's consistent and obstinate adherence to his position. His resistance is so firm that I suspect it gives us insight on his very character. It makes him look like a stubborn guy with firm beliefs and hard held values. He thinks he's right and doesn't even consider dissenting opinions....... Detractors voices falls on deaf ears and he's not ashamed of his values or of his complete disregard for criticism of them.

Now let me ask this question. Who sounds more like a guy who would likely tell his boss to f**k himself if ordered to do something that he couldn't abide in, than Phylodog? Well, maybe Frank. He is a lot like Phylodog except that he won't even DISCUSS criticism. he will make a condescending reply or sometimes a scorching retort, then go on about his business without another thought. I would hate to try to force EITHER OF THEM to commit a crime. I don't know either of them personally, but their attitude and demeanor are as constant as the morning star. If they were posers then inconsistencies would show in their posts, there are none

I do not believe these guys reflect what is wrong with the law enforcement community. I agree with IndyDave in that blaming these two officers for the actions of their departments or their fellow officers does not fix the problems. Don't sacrifice the honorable men in the attemp to purge the corrupt ones. All we know of phylodog and Frank is what they have presented here for us to see. What I see is the consistent presentation of pride and professional service. I could be wrong, but I believe that these men are who they say they are. Also they claim that the majority of officers are just like them. Like a small percentage of criminals commit the majority of crimes, it's the few corrupt cops who are causing the peoples distrust of the police.

+1 .

From what I can discern on the internet, I think Phylodog has good intentions and is not corrupt by anyone's account. I like that he says that there is a line he will not cross, even if its not exactly where I'd like it to be. I will of course continue to work on him.

I will also say that as someone who follows a lot of police-related news, Indiana does not produce a very large number of corruption & abuse stories, relative to other states. I am thankful for that. Let's be vigilant and always strive for improvement.

 

[GunnerDan]

phylodog, would you if ordered to, confiscate weapons from legal gun owners?

Gunner

 

[phylodog]

phylodog, would you if ordered to, confiscate weapons from legal gun owners?

Gunner

I've answered that several times on here and the answer is no, just as it always has been.

 

[GunnerDan]

I've answered that several times on here and the answer is no, just as it always has been.

So whats the difference in confiscating guns and confiscating cannabis?

Gunner

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

So whats the difference in confiscating guns and confiscating cannabis?

Gunner

Cannabis is illegal in Indiana, no exceptions. Guns are legal to possess, with some stipulations/exceptions.

 

[ghuns]

If anyone else is jumping into this thread 6 pages deeps and thinking of reading this thread from the beginning... DON"T DO IT!

Thread summary:
1. Cops are bad
2. No we're not
3. OK, some don't suck
4. Drugs are bad
5. No they are not
6, OK, some are less bad, but all should be legal

Throw in a few random personal insults, some sammich talk, and a biatch slap from a mod, and there you have it.

Just your average day on INGO, well, other than the 219 posts and no mention of bacon.