From: gray@hawkmoon.mn.org (Bill Gray)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Date: 15 Aug 92 18:14:47 GMT
Organization: Semi-Public System (One of the Eternal Champions); Eagan, MN, 55123-2507, USA

Rick, I'm trying hard to control my temper because you seem to be
awfully partial to the "poor officer" while my feelings are reserved for
the "poor daughter, mother, niece, and husband."  But I do not want this to
be a flame--I'm trying hard to stick to the facts.  I do appreciate your
information about the cop who did the killing.

bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:

>My biggest question is:  What the hell ever happened to the line,
>'This is the police.  You are surrounded. Come out with your hands up.!'???

Amen.  Furthermore, what ever happened to the idea that "the right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . ."?

How can anyone defend a military assault against a family home on the basis
of an anonymous tip as "reasonable?"  Maybe an arrest warrant was reasonable
under the circumstances (I'm skeptical, but I do not know what was said in
the anonymous phone call), but certainly not a commando raid.

>In short, why did they use DEA drug raid tactics on a simple arrest?
>Why were both the police officers and innocent citizens endangered for
>no apparently good reason?

Indeed.

>As far as the officer is concerned, I know a friend of his.  Tony is
>(according to this person I trust) a good guy.  He isn't a cowboy of
>some sort or anything like that.  I'm sure he feels as badly as anybody
>involved.  Probably at least as bad as those kids.

The kids didn't put a submachinegun into their hands and shoot an innocent
woman to death, but he didn't see the police he has been raised to trust
and rely on butcher his mother or aunt before his helpless eyes.

I reckon the kids the kids feel *much* worse and have very little chance
of ever really recovering from the trauma.  He, on the other hand, cannot
possibly feel badly enough.

>Did he do anything wrong?  Probably not, in my opinion.  At most he made
>a very human mistake.  Perhaps not even that.  I've done enough role
>playing and training to realize how quickly it happens.  Look at it from
>Tony's viewpoint.  He has been told to storm this house that contains
>vicious murderers.  He has been told that they are armed and dangerous.
>If you think that you aren't going to go into that situation 'adrenalin
>pumped' you aren't human or you have no knowledge at all of what really
>happens to people under stress.

In your opinion, then, there is nothing wrong with storming a house with
deadly weapons you cannot control and killing innocent people?  "Tony"
_took_an_OATH_ to defend the Constitution!  You cannot take that oath and
then assert a Nurenburg defense when you screw up!

I am sick to death of people whining about how tough it is to be a cop
when their objective is to excuse the incompetence or bloodthirstiness
of brutalizing or murderous scoundrels.

Poor "Tony!"  He has these delusions of competence, gets to carry a big
bad SMG, gets to kill entirely innocent women stupid enough to care more
for their babies than themselves, and as special bonuses, gets to make the
kids watch it AND gets to have the _criminal_ justice (how aptly named!)
system tell him it's all ok, now go back to work.

>In such a situation being startled, for example, can cause your fingers
>to contract with up to 50 lbs of pressure without you even realizing it.
>No firearm has a trigger that requires much more than 25% of that force
>to operate.  This is called the startle reaction.  Perhaps Tony made a
>mistake, but it may have been only having his finger on the trigger.
>There are other psychological forces of equal importance at work as well.
>I think there are at least four ways of making somebody involuntarily
>contract muscles.

"Poor Tony," wearing a bulletproof vest, carrying an SMG, executing a
criminal invasion of peaceful people's home, startled by crying children
into killing their Mommy.  Tough break for "poor Tony."

God only knows how he'll react in other stressful situations--like
writing parking tickets or crucifying jaywalkers.

>When that poor lady burst into the room, Tony didn't fire intentionally
>and probably will never remember pulling the trigger.  No cover up, just

If you are right about his not remembering, too bad:  he deserves to.

>human psychology.  It is very unlikely that ANY of us would have reacted
>much differently in the same circumstances.

Wrong.  If I had decided that I had to be there--and I would not have on
this kind of flimsy evidence, I'd have reconned the area and learned that
children lived there.  And I resent the implication that because "poor
Tony" is an incompetent, cowardly, triggerhappy mommykiller, that the rest
of us are, too.

There are enough in the Seattle PD and _criminal_ justice system to
absorb the massive amount of guilt
for this disgraceful debacle that is *not* "poor Tony's."  And you and the
other posters are right that there is an enormous systemic fault here,
a failure of the system of justice on a statewide scale that is as large
ans as culpable in general as "poor Tony" is in specific.

Heads should roll by the battalion.  Of course, having you locals say
it's really ok, nothing all that bad happened--well, it doesn't sound like
any good can come from it.  Worse, with all the covering up being done
by paid stooges, it will probably make other departments even more likely
to follow the Darryl Gates West Coast School of Police State Tactics.

Wonderful.

>I submit that not only was his action not criminal, it was probably
>completely human and predictable.  This doesn't mean that I think this
>situation should have happened or that I don't think there is an
>appropriate place to put the blame.  I just happen to think that placing
>all or even a significant portion of blame on Tony is stupid, short
>sighted and ignoring the real issues.

I'm beginning to understand how the King riots happened.  You weren't
recently a resident and juror in Simi Valley, were you?

[Slap!  Whack!  Deep breath till BP comes down. . . There!  I'm better now!]

Sorry, Rick--I'm going over the line, and I do not want to.  But you
absolutely cannot exonerate the guy in the trenches.  Until *everyone*
in this once wonderful country takes personal responsibility for their
actions, we will never reverse the tide of decay rising around us.

"Poor Tony" shot and killed that woman.  No one else did it.  He is a
grown man sworn to defend a constitution he probably has not even read.
He allowed himself to be put into that position and allowed himself to be
deceived that what he was doing was ok.  He has to be held accountable--
and every single piece of used food in the chain of command on that
Godforsaken raid must be similarly held liable.

Otherwise, you will see more, and worse, and wonder why.

>>>It is really the governing authority of the SWAT unit which needs to be
>>>disciplined here.  A police force which sends armed units into an
>>>expected deadly encounter solely on the basis of a telephone tip from
>>>an anonymous or in any way questionable informant is grossly negligent.
>>>A large civil liability award is a good way to get their attention on
>>>that point.

>Hey, my taxes are already high enough!  This got my attention without me
>being fined.  Who the hell do you think the 'government' around here is?
>I agree that family needs to be taken care of. I have no problem
>with that.

>On the other hand where does the blame lie?  At a first approximation
>I'd say with the police official that ordered that kind of a raid, with
>the DA who requested the warrant on such flimsy evidence, and the Judge
>that issued it. If anybody needs to pay punitive damages, it is them.

>Unfortunately, judges aren't really accountable, the DA isn't directly
>responsible and the police are just going to say it's an unfortunate
>mistake.  Sure maybe SOME people will remember at election time, but I
>doubt many of us will.  We'll just remember that poor officer.

>Remember, each of you.  Any time you permit these 'storm trooper'
>tactics be used for any reason, YOU are partially at fault.  The blame
>extends to some extent to each of us.  I feel fairly safe in stating
>that this situation resulted from gross violations of reasonable police
>operating procedures and the constitution itself.

But you are part of the voting public that allowed this system to
entrench itself.  It is you and your fellow citizens who *must* pay the
damages to this family, and I hope for *my* family's sake that it sets
a new indoor record.  I hope your cops cannot afford new cars, or shoes, or
patrol cars for fifty years.  I hope your judges never get another pay 
raise.  I hope your streets rot to muddy potholes and your taxes are
the highest in the world.  I hope this bankrupts Seattle.

Maybe then the citizens of Seattle will awaken and reassert themselves and
take their rightful authority back from the usurpers.  It would be a bargain
for you, even at that price.

>Rick.

Sorry if I got too contentious there.  But we either hold these creatures
responsible--good and hard--or we have to live with them (or die trying to
be rid of them).

Bill
-- 
gray@hawkmoon.mn.org
This site gets a fair news feed, but e-mail is more reliable. . . :-(
"Veni, vidi, vomiti!"  -- the ghost of Tom Jefferson on reading the Brady Bill