From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: SEALs
Organization: Twilight Zone
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 04:34:07 GMT

In article <1k635aINNstu@digex.digex.com> robear@access.digex.com (Robear) writes:
>In article <1993Jan20.205947.17810@cbfsb.cb.att.com> osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X) writes:

>>>It's a sad mistake, but I am sure that if you were raiding a house
>>>which you *believed* to be full of armed drug dealers, and someone came
>>>at you with a gun, probably yelling in Spanish, you just might shoot
>>>him.  Or would you let him shoot you?
>>
>>	I would not BE in the wrong house to begin with.  
>
>In Andy's world, cops never make mistakes.  

	First, don't put words in my mouth.  When mistakes are made and
	it can be conclusively shown that all good precautions were taken, 	
	then there is nothing more to be said legally speaking.  But when
	neglegence can be proven, then at the absolute very least, those
	responsible should be tried for negligent homicide, convicted and
	tossed in the slammer for good.  Law enforcement personnel must
	be held to a higher standard, when on duty.

>They don't have the right to.

	Not where carelessness is concerned, that is right.

>If they do, the should be killed.  

	Given the way they tend to behave on these drug raids, I think it is
	a fair payment for unnecessarily taking a life.

>Because lives are involved.  

	That's right.

>Further, cops cannot kill people threatening them with deadly force unless
>those people are known to be threatening them for criminal reasons.

	Again you put words in my mouth.  If a person makes an immediate and
	clearly deadly threat, then they can defend themselves.  But if they
	force an innocent person into a situation where they feel they must
	issue such a threat, and trhen the cops kill them for acting in self
	defense, then those directly responsible for the debacle should
	either go to prison for life or be executed.  Note that this does not
	necessarily mean that those that pulled the trigger are the guilty
	parties.  
	
	Guvermint has no rights.  If you doubt this, try reading the US
	Constitution.  It is pretty clearly stated therein.
>
>Andy, how do you feel about drivers?  Some of them get drunk and kill people.

	What does this have to do with botched drug raids and the deaths of
	innocent citizens at the hands of criminally negligent murdering
	law enforcement personnel?

>That involves lives, people who were not thereatening them.  Would you kill 
>people for drunk driving?

	If you cannot see the difference, then I don't know what to tell you.
>
>You are arguing here that *any* person who makes a mistake involving a life
>should be killed, publically, are you not?  

	No, I am not.  I am saying that law enforcement personnel that plan
	and authorize operations that either target the wrong people or
	unnecessarily involve innocent third parties and result in those
	innocent persons being killed or injured, should be punished in the
	the most draconian manner.

	When an operation is well planned and executed, the chances of
	innocent persons being injured goes down to virtually zero.  When
	something goes awry in an otherwise well done op, it will probably
	be fairly clear that nothing could have been done to foresee.

	I am not advocating a lynching for every cop that screws up.  I am
	talking about conducting thorough and honest investigations and
	holding law enforcement agencies criminally accountable for criminal
	acts that they perpetrate.  This is not currently done very often.
	Witness the Rodney King beating and the murder of Malice Green.
	
	Those that beat King should IMNSHO be spending the rest of their
	lives in prison for their clearly criminal acts.  Those that murdered
	Mr. Green should forfeit their lives.  These barbaric acts of
	premeditated violence, perpetrated under color of law should be
	dealt with utmost clarity and harshness.  The message should be
	clear: you work as an agent of the Guvermint, you go by the rules
	or you pay dearly.

>Or just the folks who are hired to protect us?  And if we don't hire people 
>to protect us, we forgo the rule of law, as a practical consequence.

	I have no idea what this is supposed to be saying.
>
>So okay, only perfect cops can be involved with arrests.

	No.  Cops should have clear rules that make sense and that are
	in line, not so much with law but with the Constitution, and they
	should be strictly held to those rules and severely punished when they
	either willfully or negligently violate them, resulting in the death or
	injury of persons as result of that violation.
>>	
>
>Police man and federal agents go to jail for proven violations of the law. 
>They end up dead or in solitary, of course.  But again, you show us that there is no
>mistake allowed when dealing with criminals, no forgiveness, no humanity.  
>Your policeman is a mechanistic enforcer of the True Law, an automaton
>capable of action only when presented with Absolute Certainty.

	<yawn>  give me a break, will you.

>I'm sure
>none of us have ever acted in a way which irresponsibly endangers another, for 
>reasons of say, drunkenness, tiredness, or carelessness.  

	I never said this.  I have done so, but I am not a cop and I have
	never done so under color of law.  This is IMO a sacred trust that
	citizens put in their law enforcement personnel, that they will not
	recklessly endanger the lives of civillians and that they will uphold
	and defend the Constitution of the USA. Every cop and agent probably
	violates this sworn oath and this trust every time they go on a drug 
	raid, and definitely violates it when they unnecessarily kill and
	maim the wrong persons and destroy property they had no business
	messing with.  And they are RARELY held accountable for such violations.

>Anyone constrained by the realities of real-world investigations can easily
>determine facts, to the nth degree.

	Tough shit.  It is not the place for cops etc. to behave like
	criminals because doing the job correctly is "too hard".

>
>Oh, wait a minute!  *now* you propose that operations can be safely done
>*virtually* every time?  But before there was *no* excuse for *any* failure.
>Which is it?  Must cops be perfect, or *nearly* perfect?  What is *nearly*
>perfect?

	I never said anything about perfection.  I said that there is no excuse
	for sloppy work, which often results in violence and death which is
	unnecessary.  I apologize if I did not say that quite clearly.
>
>Tell me, do the principles this country was founded upon include
>public executions of civil servants who make fatal mistakes?  

	Can't say.  Maybe, maybe not.  But it does make provision for
	punishment of such transgressions against the people.

>Do they
>include the inability to act against criminals, *unless* and until 100%
>certainty of their crimes is achieved?  

	Please stick to the subject.  We were not talking in the general
	case WRT police operations, we were talking of botched raids.  
	In raids, one can be damned near 100% certain of many vital
	areas of information, and all other things being equal,  raids can
	be executed with much greater safety than they typically are.

	In other situations, a cop may indeed need to act quickly, e.g. to
	prevent a rape or murder going on right in front of his face.  That
	is and entirely different situation, strategically speaking, from a
	raid.  It happens quickly and there is not time to think about the
	meaning of life on earth.  One must ACT, and quickly and decisively.
	If in the heat of a fast paced tactical situation the cops hurts
	or kills someone accidentally, I believe that is excusable if it can
	be shown that he acted in good faith and that the mistake could not 
	have been reasonably avoided.  At any rate, in such situations, the cop
	will probably be beating him/herself up plenty.

	But in a situation where you can take weeks or months or even years to
	observe a suspect, and to make "buys" etc., there is not excuse for
	sloppy work, like not checking and triple checking the address on a
	warrant so you don't bust the wrong house (which happens all the 
	time BTW).

	Likewise there is no need to make a Rambo style no knock bust on a 
	house where undercover people have made dozens of  buys and have enough
	physical and eyewitness evidence to arrest, charge and convict Mr.
	Evil Drug Dealer forty times over.  So sorry, but in all but the rarest
	cases, it cannot be justified by any means.  This is what I mean about 
	screwing up.  Playing ot stupidly fort the sake of egos and adrenalin.
	And then taking the wrong house??  Are you kidding?  Do you really
	think that "Oops, our mistake" is good enough?  

>Andy, your world is one of true fascism.  

	Shouldn't use terms you apparently do not understand, excuse me please.

>I wish you could see what it is like in the real world.  

	Pardon ME?  Have you ever been shot or stabbed?  I have.  I doubt
	there is anyhting about the "real world" you could tell me that I 
	have not already seen.  I have seen folks blown to bits in front
	of my face on a city street at lunch time.  I've seen the results of
	all kinds of violence against men women and children.  I've lived in
	the middle of it, day in and out.  So until you know where I've been
	and what I've done, I'd be a bit more careful about making admonitions.

	-Andy V.
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts