SWAT team throws concussion grenade into baby playpen during no-knock raid

[Destro]

they hurt a kid

The whole situation is tragic, I can't imagine the personal grief involved.

 

[Rob377]

If there was allegedly dope in the house, that's carte blanche to start tossing grenades in without any regard or accountability for where they land. Because that's how operators roll. That toddler played a stupid game and won a stupid prize. Amiright?

 

[jamil]

How come we never hear about no-knock raids involving the arrest of white collar criminals?

I posted an article in one of the "bundy" threads about the department of education's no-knock raid on an old lady regarding suspected tuition fraud or some such thing.

 

[Rob377]

Looks like I made a cop mad. Don't grenade me bro!


Latest Reputation Received (140 point(s) total)
05-30-2014 11:55
phylodog
Thread: SWAT team throws concussion grenade into baby playpen during no-knock raid
You're a ****ing idiot

 

[phylodog]

Mad? That would require your opinion being of some value.

 

[Rob377]

According to ABC news, these guys decided to raid the house without the slightest hint of due diligence as to who or what was in it based on the word of an informant.

Talk about ***** idiots.

 

[phylodog]

I agreed on the first page of this thread but that was before Benny wished for my death and you started with your third grade, jealousy filled remarks. Hadn't planned on joining back in to the discussion until you decided to openly crybaby to the mods by posting my rep comment.

 

[Rookie]

Looks like I made a cop mad. Don't grenade me bro!


Latest Reputation Received (140 point(s) total)
05-30-2014 11:55
phylodog
Thread: SWAT team throws concussion grenade into baby playpen during no-knock raid
You're a ****ing idiot

Kinda juvenile to post what should be private.

 

[Rob377]

Kinda juvenile to post what should be private.

I made no agreement to keep that private. If he wants to hurl insults, he can own it.

 

[Rookie]

I made no agreement to keep that private. If he wants to hurl insults, he can own it.

Sure. Whatever. The only reason you posted that was because you wanted to try to embarrass him. Like I said, juvenile.

 

[Rob377]

More or less juvenile than butthurt name calling?

 

[pudly]

Kinda juvenile to post what should be private.

Nothing is private on the Internet.

 

[phylodog]

More or less juvenile than butthurt name calling?

Gosh, that's a tough one.

A burnt up and permanently disfigured toddler is a small price to pay for donut munchers to live out their SEAL Team 6 fantasies.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Seems to me the best fix is legislative: if Destructive Devices are used, qualified immunity for police is waived. Thoughts?

 

[Rookie]

Seems to me the best fix is legislative: if Destructive Devices are used, qualified immunity for police is waived. Thoughts?

Sounds good to me. Won't ever happen.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The whole situation is tragic, I can't imagine the personal grief involved.

The department there seems to be showing none, reminds me of my hometown last year with the grandmother and granddaughter. Fortunately we do not hear this kind of crap from most cities in our state. And I have yet to hear of one gone bad in Indy where Phylo and a few others work

 

[Rob377]

Gosh, that's a tough one.

I make no claim of maturity. But I will say it and own it and not get all upset when it's pointed out.

If the shoe quoted above fits, wear it. If not, don't. It wasn't directed at you. It was directed at the cops that started throwing flash bangs in cribs. For the record, I'd always read your posts as being "one of the good ones" on matters like this.

guess not.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Sounds good to me. Won't ever happen.

I think with more and more people rethinking their position on the War on Drugs, I think it has a chance.

I'd also like to see the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court adopt a rule that Destructive Devices are per se unreasonable absent a showing of necessity by clear and convincing evidence, but that could be a rule of criminal procedure or a statute as well.

There are cases where these bombs are necessary, but I think we need to limit them or their use will expand (mission creep, rationalize budgets, inter alia).

 

[Mark 1911]

No matter what the parents of that innocent baby had done, which seems to be a matter of debate as well, there is no way that child should have suffered those injuries, there is no way the sheriff can justify doing that do a helpless infant. To hurt a baby like that is totally inexcusable. If he can't distinguish the good guys from the bad, then he can't be allowed to make those decisions anymore.

 

[phylodog]

I'll repeat the statement I made in the first page. This team was wrong, now it's known on many levels. Safe and acceptable practice is to lay a bang just inside of the door, not toss it into a room. This is intended specifically to prevent this type of thing from occurring. If a bang is needed at a window it should be attached to a pole so control of where it detonates is maintained, again to prevent this type of thing from happening. We do not utilize bangs (NFDD - noise flash diversionary devices) if we have any indication that there are children in the house (absent hostage rescue) and a situation would have to be critical if they were to be used with elderly or handicapped inside.

As as I've said before, there are many teams that just shouldn't be.