Police honored for firing at the wrong family

[Kramer]

Apparently Minneapolis police can do no wrong. After a raid into the wrong house on a December Sunday morning at 12:45, where in the father of the family fired at what he thought were robbers, and the wife had time to call 911 and report people breaking into the home before police identified themselves, an investigation was started to determine how the police could have made such a mistake. So, the residents of the house, including six children, are left dealing with bullet holes and the stress and trauma of the night, and meanwhile the police officers involved have been given medals and commendations.

http://wcco.com/iteam/swat.team.honored.2.783216.html
http://wcco.com/crime/minneapolis.police.raid.2.612926.html
http://wcco.com/iteam/i.team.police.2.651664.html
http://wcco.com/local/police.raid.house.2.613690.html

Granted, I am a distant outsider to this. But I can't help thinking giving the officers medals is perhaps not really appropriate.

That territory is under the control of liberals - would you expect anything else? What cities does this usually happen at - LA NY Chicago, your run of the mill liberal towns filled with haters and anti-american lunes...

[Universe Prince]

I would think that most political analysts, unless they're total anarchists, would have to agree that the state, be it left or right of centre, must enjoy a monopoly on violence.

Nice idea in theory, but I don't see that working out practically. And that doesn't really address why the citizen should not have the liberty of self-defense, unless you want to turn something like a quarter to a third of the population into police so one officer can be stationed in very home 24/7, which I wouldn't advise, why would the average citizen be left defenseless in the event of criminal violence?

If on balance the state abuses its monopoly more than the monopoly is worth, then it's time to overthrow the state and replace it with another one that doesn't.

And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?

[Plane]

I would think that most political analysts, unless they're total anarchists, would have to agree that the state, be it left or right of centre, must enjoy a monopoly on violence.

If on balance the state abuses its monopoly more than the monopoly is worth, then it's time to overthrow the state and replace it with another one that doesn't.

No some very serious political analisists wrote our first ten admendments , includeing the second.

The state should not be absolutely immune from the wrath of the people , the lack of this fear allows the government to awaken the wrath of the people and ignore it , take note of Burma.

[Michael Tee]

<<And that doesn't really address why the citizen should not have the liberty of self-defense, unless you want to turn something like a quarter to a third of the population into police so one officer can be stationed in very home 24/7, which I wouldn't advise, why would the average citizen be left defenseless in the event of criminal violence?>>

I guess I just don't feel threatened by the extent of criminal violence to the extent that you do.  I consider myself a pragmatist on this issue.  If there really is rampant crime that the police can't control, then it would make a lot more sense to acquire a weapon and learn how to use it properly.  I just don't live in that kind of fear and I don't know anyone who does.  Even my family in the Detroit area (with one single exception, a Libertarian couple) don't see crime as a threat and don't arm themselves, and as far as I can tell, neither do any of their friends.

<<And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?>>

You're kidding, right?  One way is to resort to illegal activities and acquire weapons.  Another way is to follow the path of non-violent resistance, proselytize, withdraw support and service till the whole thing collapses.

[Xavier_Onassis]

And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?


It doesn't. I doubt that even a populace armed as the US populace is armed would actually be able to overthrow the government unless they could either enlist the support of part of the military and police, or at least gain enough influence with these so that they would refuse to fire on the citizens. This is hard to do: McArthur ordered the eviction of the largely peaceful Bonus Army in DC, and many were killed as the army evicted them and burned down the shantytown they had built.
]
Herbert Hoover was hardly a popular guy by this time, but the soldiers preferred to shoot  veterans than to risk a court martial.

With the weapons the Army has now to control crowds and such, it would be exceedingly difficult to defeat the federal government, if not impossible.

[Plane]

And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?


It doesn't. I doubt that even a populace armed as the US populace is armed would actually be able to overthrow the government unless they could either enlist the support of part of the military and police, or at least gain enough influence with these so that they would refuse to fire on the citizens. This is hard to do: McArthur ordered the eviction of the largely peaceful Bonus Army in DC, and many were killed as the army evicted them and burned down the shantytown they had built.
]
Herbert Hoover was hardly a popular guy by this time, but the soldiers preferred to shoot  veterans than to risk a court martial.

With the weapons the Army has now to control crowds and such, it would be exceedingly difficult to defeat the federal government, if not impossible.

McArther was obedient to his orders , it was not his idea.
That incident included one death , an infant who was choked on the tear gas.

[Universe Prince]

I guess I just don't feel threatened by the extent of criminal violence to the extent that you do.  I consider myself a pragmatist on this issue.  If there really is rampant crime that the police can't control, then it would make a lot more sense to acquire a weapon and learn how to use it properly.  I just don't live in that kind of fear and I don't know anyone who does.  Even my family in the Detroit area (with one single exception, a Libertarian couple) don't see crime as a threat and don't arm themselves, and as far as I can tell, neither do any of their friends.

That is a ridiculous argument. It's not about feeling threatened or living in fear, and I would expect someone of your intelligence to comprehend that. One does not have to live in fear to recognize that sometimes bad people do bad things. Do you lock your doors? Does that mean you live in fear? I'm not sure why we bother with health insurance. If you don't live in fear of being in an accident or getting cancer or even just a bad case of the flu, then you don't need health insurance, right? Unless of course it's not about living in fear, but about recognizing that sometimes bad things happen and we cannot always plan for them or avoid them.

In any case, that some people do not feel like owning a weapon does absolutely nothing to explain why other people should be denied the liberty to own one. Or two. Or several. Or many.

<<And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?>>

You're kidding, right?  One way is to resort to illegal activities and acquire weapons.  Another way is to follow the path of non-violent resistance, proselytize, withdraw support and service till the whole thing collapses.

Am I kidding? You recognize that criminals will have weapons, but you still want to leave citizens unable to defend themselves. And somehow you expect a fully disarmed populace to be able to simply withdraw support for an abusive government with a monopoly on authority to use violence, and that will somehow make the government go away. And you ask me if I'm kidding?

[Universe Prince]

And how does a disarmed populace overthrow the state that has a total monopoly on violence and weapons?

It doesn't.

Yeah, pretty much.

With the weapons the Army has now to control crowds and such, it would be exceedingly difficult to defeat the federal government, if not impossible.

All the more reason to not ban assault weapons and machine guns.

[BT]

Captain, I don't think a policeman should work like a dog catcher in putting criminals behind bars. No! In any free country, a policeman is supposed to enforce the law, and the law protects the guilty as well as the innocent.
--from the film "Touch of Evil"--

How does a policeman enforce the law without arrest?

[Lanya]

With the weapons the Army has now to control crowds and such, it would be exceedingly difficult to defeat the federal government, if not impossible.
________________________________

You can try, even if you die trying.  That would be my choice, I think.

[Universe Prince]

Captain, I don't think a policeman should work like a dog catcher in putting criminals behind bars. No! In any free country, a policeman is supposed to enforce the law, and the law protects the guilty as well as the innocent.
--from the film "Touch of Evil"--

How does a policeman enforce the law without arrest?

Likely he doesn't. But that isn't what the quote is suggesting. But you know that.

[BT]

Likely he doesn't. But that isn't what the quote is suggesting. But you know that.

Actually i didn't. What does the quote suggest?

[Universe Prince]

What does the quote suggest?

The quote suggests that rather than assume guilt and expect innocence (or at least not guilty status) to be proven later, and rather than simply be out to get the bad guys, officers of the law are supposed to uphold the law even when the law gives protection to the bad guys and/or the guilty.

[BT]

The quote suggests that rather than assume guilt and expect innocence (or at least not guilty status) to be proven later, and rather than simply be out to get the bad guys, officers of the law are supposed to uphold the law even when the law gives protection to the bad guys and/or the guilty.

That makes no sense. The quote itself says officers are to enforce the law. Is the quote suggesting that the majority of arrests are unlawful?

[hnumpah]

Police raid Md. mayor's home and kill his dogs
By BRETT ZONGKER, Associated Press Writer

BERWYN HEIGHTS, Md. - Mayor Cheye Calvo got home from work, saw a package addressed to his wife on the front porch and brought it inside, putting it on a table.
 
Suddenly, police with guns drawn kicked in the door and stormed in, shooting to death the couple's two dogs and seizing the unopened package.

In it were 32 pounds of marijuana. But the drugs evidently didn't belong to the couple.

Police say the couple appeared to be innocent victims of a scheme by two men to smuggle millions of dollars worth of marijuana by having it delivered to about a half-dozen unsuspecting recipients.

The two men under arrest include a FedEx deliveryman; investigators said the deliveryman would drop off a package outside a home, and the other man would come by a short time later and pick it up.

A furious Calvo said Thursday that he and his wife, Trinity Tomsic, are asking the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the July 29 raid.

"Trinity was an innocent victim and random victim," Calvo said outside his two-story, red-brick house in this middle-class Washington suburb of about 3,000 people. "We were harmed by the very people who took an oath to protect us."

Calvo insisted the couple's two black Labradors were gentle creatures and said police apparently killed them "for sport," gunning down one of them as it was running away.

"Our dogs were our children," said the 37-year-old Calvo. "They were the reason we bought this house because it had a big yard for them to run in."

The mayor, who was changing his clothes when police burst in, also complained that he was handcuffed in his boxer shorts for about two hours along with his mother-in-law, and said the officers didn't believe him when he told them he was the mayor. No charges were brought against Calvo or his wife, who came home in the middle of the raid.

Prince George's County Police Chief Melvin High said Wednesday that Calvo and his family were "most likely ... innocent victims," but he would not rule out their involvement, and he defended the way the raid was conducted. He and other officials did not apologize for killing the dogs, saying the officers felt threatened.

Police announced Wednesday they had arrested two men suspected in a plot to smuggle 417 pounds of marijuana, and seized a total of $3.6 million in pot. Investigators said the package that arrived on Calvo's porch had been sent from Los Angeles via FedEx, and they had been tracking it ever since it drew the attention of a drug-sniffing dog in Arizona.

Police intercepted it in Maryland, and an undercover detective posing as a deliveryman took it to the Calvo home.

Calvo's defenders ? including the Berwyn Heights police chief, who said his department should have been alerted ahead of time ? said police had no right to enter the home without knocking.

But officials insisted they acted within the law, saying the operation was compromised when Calvo's mother-in-law saw officers approaching the house and screamed. That could have given someone time to grab a gun or destroy evidence, authorities said.

Neighbors in Berwyn Heights, which Calvo described as "Mayberry inside the Capital Beltway," have rallied around the couple. On Sunday night, supporters gathered on a ballfield to pay tribute to the family and the dogs. A banner on the wooden fence around Calvo's yard read, "Cheye and Trinity, We support you, Friends and Citizens of Berwyn Heights." Around it were dozens of handwritten messages from supporters.

In addition to being the part-time mayor, Calvo works at a nonprofit foundation that runs boarding schools. His wife is a state finance officer.

"When all of this happened I was flabbergasted," said next-door neighbor Edward Alexander. "I was completely stunned because those dogs didn't hurt anybody. They barely bark."

The case is the latest embarrassment for Prince George's County law enforcement. A former police officer was sentenced in May to 45 years in prison for shooting two furniture deliverymen at his home last year, one of them fatally. He claimed that they attacked him. In June, a suspect jailed in the death of a police officer was found strangled in his cell.

Calvo said he was astonished that police have not only failed to apologize, but declined to clear the couple's names.

His wife spoke through tears as she described an encounter with a girl who used to see the couple walking their dogs.

"She gave me a big hug and she said, `If the police shot your dogs dead and did this to you, how can I trust them?'" Tomsic said. "I don't want people to feel like that. I just want them to be proud of our police and proud to live in Prince George's County."

___

Associated Press writers Sarah Karush and Nafeesa Syeed in Washington contributed to this story.