Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own

from the not-too-far-away-from-'knock-and-talk'-meaning-'phone-call-and-missl dept

The War on Shoplifters.

This is what was left of Leo Lech's home after the Greenwood Village police were done with it. Lech had done nothing wrong. In fact, he wasn't even home. By the point the local PD had decided to turn a standoff with a suspect into a one-house reenactment of the Battle of Fallujah, the only person inside was Robert Jonathan Seacat -- originally wanted for nothing more than shoplifting.

This was all fully justified, according to the police chief, because Seacat had opened fire on police officers during the standoff.

According to Lech's lawsuit, those shots -- five of them, nine hours into the standoff -- by Seacat were met by tear gas, flash bangs, and "72 chemical bombs." Sure, it turns out Seacat had a backpack (and lower intestine) full of drugs, but the police didn't know that when they began their assault. Of course, the complete destruction of an unrelated family's house was considered copacetic because no one died.

“I made the right call because we’re standing here instead of standing over a casket,” said Greenwood Village Police Cmdr. Dustin Varney.

After Seacat fired five shots through the floor at the SWAT team, the decision was made to "vent" the home so interior areas could be more easily viewed by police officers.

When it was all said and done, the PD had gotten their man, along with his drugs, weapons and five casings from bullets fired at officers. Lech was given back his house by officers who severely misrepresented the condition of the residence.

After the SWAT team arrested Seacat amid the rubble, police told the Lechs they could go home, but there was "some damage."

Lech was also given a check for $5,000, the "assistance" of a reluctant insurance company, the city's demand that he also build a new holding pond while rebuilding his house, and the assurances of the local PD that this destruction was not only necessary, but the best case scenario.

Things then got worse, according to Lech's lawsuit.

The Lechs suffered nausea for weeks from trying to rescue items from the rubble, and property inspectors sent there wore "full hazmat gear."

The Lechs had to move to another county. Leo Lech had to take a new job at a lower salary. The boy, D.Z., had to transfer schools and enter therapy.

All of this began with Seacat stealing two belts and a shirt from Wal-Mart. Twenty-four hours later he was in custody and a family was without their home or belongings. Lech is seeking recovery of costs sustained so far, along with additional damages for emotional distress, civil rights violations, trespass, and "taking without compensation."

The police continue to insist this couldn't have been handled any other way, but arrests of armed, barricaded suspects happen all the time without having to completely destroy the building surrounding them. What happened to Lech's house appears to be the end result of a PD with lots of surplus military gear and an excuse to use it. They rolled up in a BearCat and deployed a robot, rams, and explosives to turn Leo Lech's house into a literal shell of itself. And then they walked away from the total destruction patting themselves on the back for taking the suspect alive.


Reader Comments

The First Word

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:08am

    This is part of what turns citizens, who once believed police were protectors into believing the justice system is both rigged as well as corrupt. It's pretty evident the cops went completely berserk, the city doesn't want to be responsible for the damage, and everyone in authority is ducking and dodging making whole the injured home owner.

    This home owner and many more who read about this will now believe the justice system is something you run from and attempt to protect yourself from, not call for help from... ever.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:32am

      Re:

      This home owner and many more who read about this will now believe the justice system is something you run from and attempt to protect yourself from, not call for help from... ever.

      Police departments are not "the justice system". They are the robust part of law enforcement. You have to execute common sense when to call them.

      If you call an elephant because of a mouse infestation in your china store, it's dubious whether you'll get rid of the mice. But you won't have to worry about them damaging your china any more.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:39am

        Re: Re:

        It should be pointed out that this is not the case anywhere else in the civilized world and the only reason this seems normal to you is because you have lost control of your police force and allowed it to become an anti-citizen paramilitary organization.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          art guerrilla (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 3:25am

          Re: Re: Re:

          you, sir/madam, have hit the nail squarely on the head...
          sad-but-all-too-true button needed once again...

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 3:59am

          Re: Re: Re:

          It should be pointed out that this is not the case anywhere else in the civilized world

          No need for exceptions here: "anywhere in the civilized world" is perfectly fine since it already excludes countries ruled by savages and street gangs.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:00am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Where is this nebulous "civilized world" anyways ... I keep reading about it but have never actually witnessed any such place.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Richard, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:57pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Actually it is Britain, Australia or New Zealand but we don't want gun toting idiots here any more than you do. Solve your problems by disarming everyone and banning guns. Make the police do their work without guns like Britain and then see how the police murder rate drops.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 10:57am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Except we have the world's largest street gang, complete with their own color - blue.

            LEOs have become a gang that neither enforces or obeys the laws of the land. They defend their own, no matter how badly they screw up. And they feel entitled to take what they want and do as they please. By any definition, they are a gang, a heavily armed gang.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:58am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The police have become the citizen army Obama wished for.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 4:58am

        Re: Re:

        "If you call an elephant .."

        But he didn't call - did he?
        Seems you're attempting to lay blame on the homeowner.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:10am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Well, you should take out a suitable insurance if you are living in elephant country.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:53am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Isn't law enforcement related damage considered Force Majeur by most insurance companies? i.e. There is no "suitable insurance"?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:30am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I wouldn't be a bit surprised to read that the insurance company claimed the damage an "act of god" and therefore refused coverage.

              Many police think they are gods, does this give credence to the potential insurance denial?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:10am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                I would assume that it's the police's insurance company that is liable. I doubt any homeowners insurance would cover it.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  ottermaton (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:11am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Emergency services have immunity from "collateral damage"

                  Source: tried to get a township's insurance to pay for a motorbike their firetruck smashed. No dice. I suppose I could have sued, but cost/benefit probably wouldn't have gone my way.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:37am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Governmental immunity for collateral damage

                    Source: tried to get a township's insurance to pay for a motorbike their firetruck smashed. No dice. I suppose I could have sued, but cost/benefit probably wouldn't have gone my way.
                    Under what circumstances was the bike smashed? I could see it being different, especially in court, depending on the circumstances and the deliberation involved. It is one thing for them to accidentally smash it while trying to respond to a life-threatening emergency. It would be quite another if, as in this story, they deliberated and then decided that smashing the bike was the most desirable course of action.

                    The insurance company refusing to pay may not be immunity but rather that the insurer (1) did not want to pay and (2) felt there was enough wiggle room in the contract that they might get out of it. True immunity would preclude any means of holding them legally accountable.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:02am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Then insurance policies should be carefully read before any agreements are made. The problem is no one ever reads the fine print. At least this is a lesson to learn, this is something that you need to pay attention to before signing any insurance policies.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:58am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy

                I agree in principle that you should know what your insurance contract covers. However, if it is standard practice in your area that none of the insurance companies will provide coverage in the event of police destroying your property, does it really help you to know that? What would you do differently if you knew that? Keep enough cash on hand that you can replace the property out of pocket? Most people struggle to have enough liquid assets (i.e. excluding lines of credit) to ride out a few months of unemployment. Keeping the replacement cost of your home and its contents on hand is completely out of the question.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:36am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy

                  If you can't get your countrymen to vote for actual change and/or help you while you try to do your part in bringing it forth, emigrate. You owe it to your children.

                  It's what your forefathers did. Now it's your turn.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:23am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy

                    To where?

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • icon
                      John Fenderson (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 9:21am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy

                      There actually are better places. The problem is that they won't take American immigrants unless they are wealthy or have a special skill the nation is in dire need of.

                      But personally, I think the responsible thing to do is stay in the US and work as hard as possible to improve it.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:22am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy

                  "Keep enough cash on hand"

                  If you do this, your cash maybe guilty of ... idk - something where is needs to be arrested and incarcerated in the police bank account.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                DoubleWhumpus, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Then insurance policies should be carefully read before any agreements are made. The problem is no one ever reads the fine print.

                Yeah, sure, we should. The Norwegian consumer protection agency recently sponsored (on live TV!) people reading the TOS for 22 apps commonly found on smartphones. The reading lasted 30 hours. When I bought a house, it took me 2-3 hours just to lightly skim all the documents I was asked to sign (none of which I had copies of before), and the title company staffers were pissed that their schedule had been broken so badly. And that's just lightly skimming, to read carefully with reflection and completeness would have taken at least a day even if I'd brought a lawyer with me.

                "Agreements" have gotten out of hand. If it's going to be necessary to read them in their entirety, they should be limited to no more than 1000 words in plain language. Alternatively, since an agreement in theory is a negotiated meeting of minds, the signer should be able to change the terms as they see fit.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:31am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title company, house purchase documents

                  Whenever a staffer gets annoyed about that, I point out that they are the ones who provided such a long and complicated document. If they would like to provide - and be bound by - a simpler one, we could use that one instead. I have not gotten any takers yet.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  PRMan (profile), 19 Aug 2016 @ 5:25pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Every document in that 80-page package is there because of a lawsuit or two.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                John Fenderson (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 9:18am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                "The problem is no one ever reads the fine print."

                That's certainly a problem, but there's an equally bad problem that happens when you do actually read the fine print: you probably don't understand it properly.

                Those agreements are full of deceptions and obfuscations, and if you aren't an attorney qualified in this field and you haven't hired one to review the agreement, the odds are very high that you think the agreement is saying things that it is not saying.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  David, 11 Jun 2016 @ 1:57pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Those agreements are full of deceptions and obfuscations, and if you aren't an attorney qualified in this field and you haven't hired one to review the agreement, the odds are very high that you think the agreement is saying things that it is not saying.

                  I don't know about the situation in the U.S., but a contract in Germany is a fixation and expression of a common understanding and agreement even if written up by one party. If you reasonably can be expected to be led to think the agreement is saying things that it is not saying, then for all practical legal purposes you are not bound by the things it is saying in lawyer-speak.

                  You have to exercise due care to make yourself acquainted with the conditions proposed by the other side, yes. But you are not required to learn what amounts to a completely different language.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    Uriel-238 (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 2:38pm

                    Terms of service.

                    I envy Germany in that regard.

                    We used to have consumer protections here in the US, primarily stating that contracts with odious elements could be considered null and void. Bit by bit, we've seen those protections whittled away, so that now corporations can take ownership of anything you create with their device (e.g. sell images of your child take with a device camera to third parties for advertising), or brick it without cause or warning, or force you into arbitration if you feel the service is not what it was advertised to be.

                    Business models these days seem to be more focused around ensnaring consumers into lengthy commitments to terms-of-service rather than providing a service themselves that a customer might want to use to facilitate her own life. They're more predatory or parasitic than symbiotic.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      David, 12 Jun 2016 @ 1:03am

                      Re: Terms of service.

                      Well, that's a different problem. In Germany, AGB (General Commerce Conditions), namely stock contracts applied to general customers, must not contain surprising or frivolous terms: those are essentially void exactly because people as a rule do not proof-read such conditions before every transaction.

                      However, no such restriction exists for individually drafted contracts.

                      In either situation, however, a contract is supposed to constitute a mutual agreement (which includes blanket acception).

                      The protection against surprising and frivolous clauses of course depends on their unexpectedness but since today's EULAs are all one big piece of incredibly offensive absurdly frivolous crap, it's becoming hard to pin down anything as obviously not binding any more.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            John Fenderson (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:29am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Insurance companies are no answer to this. Even if they don't fight paying the claim (ha!), the money paid very rarely comes close to making you whole.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Richard (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 4:17pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Why is the insurance company even an issue here.

              The police should have rebuilt their house to a better standard than before and taken them on an all expenses paid holiday whilst the job was done. In the meantime they should have paid the man's employer to hire a temporary worker to keep his job "warm" while he was away. Since he was absolutely not at faiult here and they were totally responsible and have the resources to do this it would only have been fair. His insurer should not have been involved.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:14pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                His insurer should not have been involved.

                Not his, but this would seem to be a good scenario for the police department's insurer to get involved.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            nasch (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:05am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Do you always blame the victim or is this a one time thing?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        alternatives(), 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:23am

        Re: Re:

        call an elephant because of a mouse infestation in your china store

        Perhaps the cause-effect chain of Wal-Mart calling the elephants means Wal-Mart gets to be part of the lawsuit?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        John Fenderson (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:27am

        Re: Re:

        "You have to execute common sense when to call them."

        True. And common sense says that you should never call them, period. They are too dangerous and often provide little to no actual help.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Bruceybruce, 10 Jun 2016 @ 3:06pm

          Re: Re:LEO

          Current day law enforcement is actually unconstitutional.The constitution never intended that there be an armed authoritarian entity like the modern day militarized police state ruling over We the People.
          Other points to ponder.
          1.Driving is a right under the constitution ( from which the rule of laws are applied to a society)driving is not a privilege bequeathed to you by the criminal state in which you reside.Therefore your payment of monies to the state to
          Possess a valid drivers license on your persons when you drive is a violation by the state of your constitutional right to move freely about your town,city or the whole country for that matter.
          2.Registration of your personal vehicle to the state is another constitutional violation by the state or federal govts.
          3.Having to acquire auto insurance is another.
          4.Being ticketed for speeding is another.Speed limit signs only apply to commercial drivers and vehicles involved in interstate or intrastate commerce not the general driving public.
          5.All the above apply to commercial operators only not the general driving public.
          6.Research and know what your rights are concerning driving without a license,insurance,registration and even plates for that matter are a civil rights violation.
          7.I don't portend to know everything about these listed examples but do your homework concerning your civil rights freedoms and liberties.You will be arrested for violating their (law enforcements,local,state and federal criminal laws) like driving without a license or insurance whatever the case may be.Eventually when stopped by Leo and with proper documentation,Leo will see a person who knows their rights under the correct law and not their brainwashed criminal law and will have no choice but to send you on your way.
          Traditions are blinding,I did the same as my parents and they did the same as their parents not knowing their civil rights and just doing what the govt. told them to do without question,you gotta pay for this,you gotta pay for that
          You gotta pay for these and you gotta pay for them.Its criminal taxation of We the People by the minority in power over us and it needs to stop.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 4:12pm

            Re: Re: Re:LEO

            Speed limit signs only apply to commercial drivers and vehicles involved in interstate or intrastate commerce not the general driving public.


            Um, no. You could argue that the federal government setting local speed limits is unconstitutional. But the federal government doesn't set local speed limits. States and local governments do. The commerce clause is only a federal government thing, not a state government thing.

            Registration of your personal vehicle to the state is another constitutional violation by the state or federal govts.


            Which part of the constitution says that state governments can't require registration?

            Eventually when stopped by Leo and with proper documentation,Leo will see a person who knows their rights under the correct law and not their brainwashed criminal law and will have no choice but to send you on your way.


            You're delusional. Even if you were correct in your constitutional arguments, the fact remains that you *will* be convicted for speeding or driving without a license or without insurance. They aren't going to release you because of the arguments you list.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:48am

        Funny how we still teach children that police are the go-to good guys

        Even after they did a drive-by of a playing 13-year-old in a park.

        When police don't keep the peace and serve the public, that's also how gangs get started.

        Soon it will be Jets AND Sharks week.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:03pm

          Re: Funny how we still teach children that police are the go-to good guys

          Not only did they do a drive by in the park, they did it in a state where open carry of a firearm is legal.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Lord jim, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:28pm

        Re: Re:

        Common sense when to call them? Seriously, you're giving them a free pass? You think it's reasonable to blow a man's home to pieces to catch a shoplifter? Really?

        Note also that he did not call them. He wasn't even home, or he'd probably be dead. They showed up and nuked the man's home.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 4:29am

      Re:

      This is why Freddie Gray and others run from cops: they're well aware that they may be beaten or murdered (as Gray was: he was perfectly fine before police laid hands on him and decided to torture him to death with a "rough ride").

      This is why I -- an innocuous middle-aged white guy with no weapons, no drugs, nothing of interest to police -- would probably also run. If I allow them to take control of me, they might kill me just because they can, and because many of them are violent sociopaths who LIKE killing people.

      The six thugs in Baltimore who killed Freddie Gray are probably going to walk. Nobody will held accountable for Freddie Gray's murder, and every cop watching will see that and realize that they too can kill with impunity. Just like every cop watching this story will realize that they can destroy property and lives at will because they won't be held accountable.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Jeremy Tarone, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:27pm

      Re: Flattened

      You hear about people who refuse to help the police and you wonder what happened to them to behave that way.
      Here we see just another example of police behaving more like an occupying army than a police officers there to serve and protect.

      The more we see of American police, the more we understand why so many minorities refuse to talk to them. Police unilaterally seizing (stealing) money, destroying property, shooting unarmed people in the back. The very same people who are part of the justice system never take responsibility for what they've done.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        John Fenderson (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:34pm

        Re: Re: Flattened

        "The more we see of American police, the more we understand why so many minorities refuse to talk to them."

        This can't be overstated. I find it a pretty grim commentary that all of these police behaviors have been a problem for longer than I've been alive -- but weren't taken at all seriously until the cops started treating middle class white people in the same fashion.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:02am

    They Followed The Standard US Law-Enforcement-Dealing-With-Bad Guys Manual

    A.k.a. Hollywood.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:23am

      Re: They Followed The Standard US Law-Enforcement-Dealing-With-Bad Guys Manual

      Yeah, I was also going to comment that this made all those siege action movies believable. Not realistic, because apparently, here in reality, we go even further!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Frost (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:02am

    Military tech doesn't belong with police.

    The military-industrial complex are no doubt thrilled that they can sell even more stuff to the nation for grotesquely overinflated prices, but when you give the police military equipment, they start thinking they need military equipment. Against a lone drug use who shoplifted?

    If the ACTUAL military used tactics like these they'd be censured or prosecuted, most likely. But apparently cops can do it at home with impunity.

    American policing is incredibly broken. And this is just one facet, another would be the for-profit policing where the cops are literally armed bandits who stop citizens and drain their cash cards on the spot now in Oklahoma. Highway robbery, by any definition.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:20am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      And this is just one facet, another would be the for-profit policing where the cops are literally armed bandits who stop citizens and drain their cash cards on the spot now in Oklahoma. Highway robbery, by any definition.

      Actual highway robbers wouldn't let the upper class get away unscathed.

      Consider the police as social justice warriors: for trickle-down economy to work, you need to secure a drought below the top or the poor get swamped.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:01am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      I believe this tech has it's place in the police department, it should be with specialize groups, and no I don't mean conventional SWAT. That being said, since this guy was not John Rambo I doubt this hardware needed to be used in this case...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:12am

        Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

        The occasional John Rambo does less damage than the police departments do. So this tech does not have a place in the police department, period.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        John Fenderson (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:31am

        Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

        I'm curious -- what do you think the legitimate role for war-making equipment is when it comes to law enforcement? This is an honest question, because I don't see one at all.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:37am

          Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

          How else are you going to arrest Skeletor when he resists?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:53am

          Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

          Hostage-Barricade situations. The original purpose for SWAT.

          That is to say, situations that involve hostages AND barricades, or some other similarly dire situation.

          Certainly not warrants, and certainly not a petty-larceny shoplifter who's gone to ground.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            John Fenderson (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 9:25am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

            Hostage situations seem like the worst ones to use military weaponry in.

            I'm not saying there shouldn't be a SWAT with specialized equipment. I'm saying that the equipment needed for those situations is rather different from the equipment that cops are getting from the military.

            I do agree that even if they were correctly trained and equipped, the way they are currently being used would still constitute an abuse of the public.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Uriel-238 (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 12:48pm

              The cross-section between police and military gear.

              It depends on the military weaponry.

              There's a lot of crossover between Hostage-Barricade and anti-terror, which is where the intersection lies regarding equipment. The tools you need to infiltrate a situation, sort out suspects from hostages and bystanders, and neutralize threats with minimal collateral damage, and all the while not get killed, are all useful in both fields.

              But granted, Bearcats are ridiculous. As is camouflage (subdued police identification patches! How does anyone think this is a good idea?). As are high explosives and heavy weapons. What would police use these for?

              Some precincts have lethal nerve gas. Why?

              Mostly we see armaments, which doesn't do a SWAT team any good without a fuckton of training.

              I submit that's where SWAT turned into a bad joke. Rather than an urban specialist team that trains all year (continuously) for a few incidents, we have volunteer groups that do a couple of weekends (if that!) and are issued a rifle. ...And then are sent to serve common warrants.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:36am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      police desperately need military grade equipment when they act as if they are part of a police state. It is by design that they harass intimidate and brutalize the citizens, not by mistake.


      Police are being trained to treat their fellow citizens as a foreign militant enemy. We are not something to be protected but something they feel they must safeguard their lives against, even if it means they have to kill a lot of us to get "home safely"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      dobbie606 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:40am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      'This is a small reflection of a larger reality
      that exists in U.S. law enforcement,
      one that helps explain
      the
      brutality and militarization that now characterizes so many police forces. 

      Since 9/11, cops have been traveling abroad
      to learn
      from one of the most repressive and dangerous
      State forces in the world today
      --the Israeli military and intelligence apparatus.

      Political commentator John Miranda recently stated
      that
      police brutality is directly linked to the training
      some officers receive in Israel.

      "As for the increase in police brutality within the United States,
      I think this definitely
      can be pointed towards the Israeli training
      that the Department of Homeland Security is giving all of American police officers.

      Some police officers are actually being flown to Israel
      for the training, not all of them but some,
      and then those that are flown to Israel, they come back home
      and they train
      the head officers in the training
      that they've gotten in Israel.

      All these incidents, it is not just happening to African Americans.
      Police are literally being brutal with all Americans."

      At least 300 high-ranking U.S. sheriffs and police from all over the country,
      as well as FBI and US Customs and Border Protection agents,
      have traveled to Israel to learn first-hand the most efficient means of subduing populations.

      The purported reason is counterterrorism,
      but protests and crowd control methods are commonly discussed [...]

      http://henrymakow.com/2016/06/%20US-Police-Nascent-Zionist-Army-of-Occupation.html

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:51am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      And not a single word about it this election. A bit scary I'd say.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:05pm

        Not being discussed in the election.

        The police state
        The surveillance state
        The CIA drone strike program
        The CIA torture and detention program
        Asset Forfeiture
        FBI Overreach
        Overclassification and government opacity.

        Essentially, all hallmarks of an evil Hollywood dystopia, realized right here in the US.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      asdf, 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:39am

      Funny thing is even military doesn't do this

      Seen the pictures of Bin Laden's Pakistan complex post-raid? Not even close to this picture. And yet, two SEAL teams raided it with a small shoot out. Sooo..... yeah... just asshats with gear in Greenwood Village. Apparently the village idiots roll deep and wear badges.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:30am

        Re: Funny thing is even military doesn't do this

        Seen the pictures of Bin Laden's Pakistan complex post-raid? Not even close to this picture. And yet, two SEAL teams raided it with a small shoot out.

        To be fair, there was greater loss of life in the Bin Laden raid, which is what the police were trying to avoid. Also the Bin Laden raid was a stealth attack and this police action was anything but. Now they could have avoided all the property damage too and just waited the guy out, but it's not really a direct comparison.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Not for em', 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:54am

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      New world order writes the policies. They have usurped the American government systematically over the last century. America will soon become a wasteland at their hands. Police don't care that there wasn't a casket. Its only better for their conscience when they sit down to dinner and explain to honey, what they did at work today.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Monday (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:07pm

      Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

      Great response! Policing absolutely is broken.

      Your comment
      ... If the ACTUAL military used tactics like these they'd be censured or prosecuted...
      is insight in that the "Actual Military" would not use these tactics on a Civilian Target. Let's recall a comment made Dem Nominee Clinton on the safety and security of the Children, and Women on the Abbottabad Bin Laden Compound raid by US Navy SEAL Team 6.

      There was nothing Military about this confrontation. It was conducted by untrained, Police playing with Military Technology - yes, it is technology that you need to be specifically trained in.

      I say bankrupt that Police Department - they won't have a budget for grown-up toys.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:03pm

        Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.

        I say bankrupt that Police Department - they won't have a budget for grown-up toys.

        They won't need a budget, the feds will give the toys to them.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:03am

    Betcha if it was Police Cmdr. Dustin Varney's house that the suspect had holed up in the outcome would have been different.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:22am

    If you give a child a toy, they will find the first chance they get to use it.
    What good is military gear if they can't play army men like that saw in that movie?
    Someone else gets to clean up the mess and bear the costs.

    The elected officials of this town should put the citizens first and maybe try to get someone who isn't an un superives 10 yr old to run the police force before he decides to try out dynamic entry to get back an overdue library book.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:24am

    Well color me surprised

    They destroyed the house and didn't execute the suspect. Given how... 'enthusiastic' they clearly were I'm rather surprised a round or two(dozen) didn't make it into him before the day was over, especially given for once the suspect was armed and had apparently taken some pot-shots at them.

    Yes, it has in fact reached the point where I'm pleasantly surprised when cops don't kill someone, isn't police work in the US grand? /s

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:26am

      Re: Well color me surprised

      It was an unfortunate fluke. They were playing Angry Birds with the house, trying to kill the man by bringing the house down. They barely made it to one star.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:40am

      Re: Well color me surprised

      especially given for once the suspect was armed and had apparently taken some pot-shots at them.

      Apparently. "This is your gun. It's empty: we already scattered the shells. Are you going to "hand it over" quietly or do you prefer to be shot in self-defense?"

      Sounds like a bad movie plot but so far I've seen little to suggest that the police here are not acting from a bad script.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:32am

    Let's put this into perspective.

    It starts with the alleged theft of two belts and a single shirt. The cost of these would be about $5 to $10 for Wal-Mart (that is being generous). So we then add to that the cost of having a unknown number of police officers chase the defendant some distance through the town to the specific house involved. Then they bring in an unknown number of SWAT members and their equipment. Then we add the expended ordinance of the various members of the LEO's and the cost of repairs to the house.

    If the local police cannot find a way to solve the very first event in this train of events without the escalation we have seen, then every one of them from the MIAH at the top to the MIAH's at the bottom need to be sacked and never allowed to do any position that requires any iota of nous and sense, including never being allowed to be night cart operatives.

    For those not recognising MIAH, it is the AOFL for Moron-in-a-hurry.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:58am

      Re: Let's put this into perspective.

      The last belt I bought at Wal-Mart was $10. So we'd be looking at roughly $25 worth of merchandise - assuming the suspect stole the cheapest possible shirt and belts available.

      Now the police's decision is starting to look pretty reasonable, isn't it?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:19am

        Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.

        Oh wow, if you put it that way. The thief could have taken down the U.S. economy with that kind of damage.

        The isle of Manhattan was more affordable than that at one time. Who knows whether this guy wasn't planning to use the T-shirt and the belts for purchasing the mining rights on a Native American reservation, then build an unstoppable drug cartel with the proceeds? I mean, he already had a backpack with substances, right?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:55am

        Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.

        What you pay Wal-Mart for your belt is different from the cost they incurred for it. Since you paid $10, and Wal-Mart's markup is probably in the order of 500% to 1000% for an item of that of price, we can probably put their base cost at maybe $1 to $2 for each belt. The shirt will have been made in Bangladesh so we have another couple of dollars.

        Well for a cost of say maybe $10 dollars (let's be generous), the police's decision is looking like they should be sacked for not even being able to count let alone anything else.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:06pm

        Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.

        Now the police's decision is starting to look pretty reasonable, isn't it?

        You're kidding, right?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward2, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:00am

      Re: Let's put this into perspective.

      The worst part is that they can just put out a warrant, and if this particular perp gets caught doing anything else anywhere else, they can add the shoplifting charges to it. Sometimes it is better to let them get away

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Red in the face but not all over, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:00pm

      Re: Let's put this into perspective.

      And just where do the $30 Billion in profits go that Walmart makes each year?? You guessed right.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:11am

    So... they had to use a Bearcat to catch Mr. Seacat. Gotcha thanks!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Beech, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:14am

    " And then they walked away from the total destruction patting themselves on the back for taking the suspect alive."

    Well, after demolishing half the building he was in and deploying an amount of tear gas that I assume would be enough to cover en average-sized football stadium...the suspect still being alive IS pretty amazing.

    Seriously, 72 "chemical grenades"?!?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:43am

      Re:

      maybe they wanted to slowly poison him to death instead of charging in and risking taking a bullet to their kevlar covered bodies.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Techno, 10 Jun 2016 @ 3:49am

    I'm reminded of the old adage

    You broke it, you bought it. And by you I mean the police. Is it really impossible to have waited the kid out and played annoying music? Would have been cheaper and safer. At no point should a bearcat be brought in for a shoplifter holed up in a house. I mean kudos for not killing him I guess, since apparently *not* killing someone is a hard thing for a police officer?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 3:52am

    and the USA is supposed to be a safe place to live and raise a family? yeah! right! seems to be more to fear from the police than anyone else, even when you're not at home!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Capt ICE Enforcer, 10 Jun 2016 @ 4:15am

    Wal Mart

    Let us not forget Wal Mart. Who now has to spend money to prosecute this thief and recover their losses after their property was destroyed... Sad sad day to be a mega corporation.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    pronky pronked pronk, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:05am

    idiot Americans

    Bring on the Trump he will fix this mess and go say to the police officer, "You're Fired !!!"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    ac, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:27am

    lucky

    I suppose he's lucky they didn't charge him for harboring a fugitive and an accomplis to the other guys crimes.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    JWH (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:44am

    I'm actually OK with the police destroying the house if the shoplifter was shooting at them. But the city government should have immediately found other shelter for this family and paid them fair market value (pre-police ventilation) for the home.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:37am

      Re:

      Shoplifting - now punishable by destruction of anything within your proximity.

      If you lift something, destroy something.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:35am

      Re:

      "paid them fair market value"

      No. "Fair market value" would mean that the homeowner would still be suffering an enormous loss. The city should, at a minimum, provide the replacement cost for the property destroyed and for the denial of the use of the property prior to replacement.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Cynyr (profile), 14 Jun 2016 @ 5:10pm

        Re: Re:

        and don't forget a payment(s) to cover alternate comparable living accommodations, additional travel/commuting expenses until such time as the repairs/replacement are "substantially complete" and "accepted by the owner". I'd also argue that a warranty of 5-15 years could be argued for to keep the city from simply sheetrock-ing over the mess and bidding it out to the lowest cost provider.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:13am

      Response to: JWH on Jun 10th, 2016 @ 5:44am

      Exactly. theyre response was basically saying "sucks to be you. But you didn't get shot"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:51am

    Just when you actually need a SWAT team, they suddenly chicken out!

    This is EXACTLY the sort of situation that the whole concept of the police SWAT team was custom-designed for. But with nothing to do most of the time, the huge surplus of SWAT teams infesting every police department in the country (and sucking up countless tax dollars) end up being reassigned to doing routine police work, like serving ordinary arrest warrants and search warrants.

    Yet ironically, in these rare circumstances that actually justify sending a SWAT team into the building, that's not what they do, instead opting for the total destruction of the building rather than risking the safety of the SWAT officers (who give the impression of being too scared to face any real danger).

    If police departments insist on routinely using SWAT teams for totally unjustified raids that endanger and kill countless numbers of innocent people, yet are too scared to deploy them for the very situations when their use is actually justified, then maybe SWAT teams should be abolished -- now and forever.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 10:30am

      Re: Just when you actually need a SWAT team, they suddenly chicken out!

      Yet ironically, in these rare circumstances that actually justify sending a SWAT team into the building, that's not what they do, instead opting for the total destruction of the building rather than risking the safety of the SWAT officers (who give the impression of being too scared to face any real danger).

      Great point. Why are they on a SWAT team if they're unwilling to risk being shot at?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 6:32am

    any excuse to use explosives should be seen as an act of a psychopath, that should be locked up for the safety of the community.

    I bet the people in this town feel less safe now seeing how their "law enforcement" blew up this house just because they could"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    John Fenderson (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:25am

    And the cops wonder why

    The police continue to insist this couldn't have been handled any other way


    And yet the cops continue to wonder why so many people consider them to be one of the biggest threats around.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 7:47am

    Don't *Shoot At* Police

    Shoot or shoot not. There is no try.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    OldMugwump (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:03am

    This happens becuase cops are cowards

    Candy asses.

    If they had any balls, they'd have gone inside and arrested the guy.

    But that might involve some risk.

    Or, they could have just waited the guy out. But that would be boring and tedious.

    So, let's destroy a completely innocent citizen's house.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Armed in gaheddon, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:21pm

      Re: This happens becuase cops are cowards

      Let's not forget the Great Wall mart who are going to be donating the stores they close to Law enforcement and FIMA for shakedown, processing, torture and executions of the masses.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:05am

    Yet more evidence ...

    ... that many, many American police officers and commanders do not have the intellect, temperament, and judgment to be entrusted with police work.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 9:28am

      Re: Yet more evidence ...

      I wouldn't trust them to pump gas at the pump the way they act when they know they will not be held accountable

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      I don't hate cops, 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:09pm

      Re: Yet more evidence ...

      ... that many, many American police officers and commanders do not have the intellect, temperament, and judgment to be entrusted with police work.

      No, that is exactly why they are chosen to run things..

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:21pm

        Re: Re: Yet more evidence ...

        If your main legal recourse is "good faith", every idiot looks like police officer material to you.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 10:04am

    Way to go guys, cause tens of thousands just in damage and at least that much in equipment and cops on the scene all over a few bucks worth of crap shoplifted but hey you got to play with your fancy military toys so everything worked out great huh.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    John85851 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 10:31am

    Where are the good cops

    When I read stories like this, people are usually quick to point out that the events happened because of "bad cops" or "overzealous cops".

    So where are the "good cops"? Did not one single person think it was a bad idea to destroy the house like this? Did no one speak up to say there should be another way of handling the situation? Were they all "following orders" to get the suspect at any cost?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Coyne Tibbets (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:08am

    Pay attention class

    The homeowner just missed the stress on the word "some." The officer clearly said, "There's some damage," in the same sense as one might say, "That was some storm last night."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Eponymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:10am

    According to the article, the actual homeowner (the tenant's father) is totally ok with the $5k settlement. It's that kind of boot licking that will ensure this happens again in the future.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 11:11am

    I would almost argue that some level of destruction is not unwarranted given the suspect firing at police. it looks like they really went overboard with it though the exact amount of acceptable damage is nebulous.
    He's firing at the cops, so they need to get him out somehow (peacefully or not)

    The real travesty is that after completely and thoroughly trashing an innocent third parties house they did not want to accept any responsibility. The government can't come in, destroy everything you own, then say "that sort of sucks...not my fault. Heh, at least we didn't shoot you"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:38pm

      Re:

      "The government can't come in, destroy everything you own, then say "that sort of sucks...not my fault. Heh, at least we didn't shoot you""


      Well, obviously the government can do exactly this, since they just did.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:25pm

    "At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."

    Something tells me this isn't one of those crack city SWAT teams intended to handle actual hostage-barricade situations.

    This sounds like a bunch of drunk guys on the range with a gun collector's arsenal.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:46pm

      Re: "At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."

      Ah, you remind me of a really great semi-independent German road movie "Wir können auch anders" where a retard points a gun at some people and says "down!" and some Russian deserter behind him takes a sharp look at the gun, reaches over, casually flips off the security and steps back again while the retard regains composure and rebrandishes the gun.

      Makes the situation considerably more tense. Exactly because now everybody knows that the person pointing the gun has no experience whatsoever.

      Which gets me back to your "bunch of drunk guys on the range with a gun collector's arsenal". Maybe the effect is intentional.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Coyne Tibbets (profile), 11 Jun 2016 @ 12:20am

        Re: Re: "At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."

        Reminds me of the Keystone Kops (documentary about the movies).

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Max (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 12:54pm

    As an ex-communist-block resident...

    ...we used to dream about America as a bastion of freedom and All That Is Good. Well, that was then. There's no amount of money you could possibly pay me to convince me to move from my miserable post-communist hellhole to "the land of the free". NO THANKS.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:41pm

    Keystone Koppers

    Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own

    So much for the sanctity of a persons home.

    Was the police response proportionate to the crime?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 10 Jun 2016 @ 2:18pm

      Re: Keystone Koppers

      With an overall decline in crime rate, you will not be able to evade budget cuts without stepping up the response. The important question is whether the police response was proportionate to the budget, not the crime.

      So with an increase in civil asset forfeiture, you can be sure you'll get an accompanying increase of "Demolition Man" reenactments like this.

      Like anybody applying for project funding will tell you, administration loves blowing big wads on few mostly idiotic but expensive prestige projects rather than distributing across a whole bunch of small improvements: the latter is much more work while being less flashy. Or flash bangy.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 1:52pm

    Where were these guys a few months ago?

    I'd like to know how these guys would have handled the Oregon Militia's siege. Either way, taxpayers would foot the bill.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 10 Jun 2016 @ 5:12pm

    How many Swat Officers are needed:

    How many swat officers to screw in a LIGHT BULB??
    100
    1 to hold the bulb
    99 to run around destroying the house to find the outlet...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:14pm

    Tatical Battlefield Nukes?

    Otherwise known as suitcase nukes. Come on, you know the cops want them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    frank, 10 Jun 2016 @ 8:24pm

    house what house

    hope that he wins big time money!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2016 @ 7:49am

    this is so over the wall and through the woods that i have to assume the whole point was destroying this guy's house. why is what i'd want to know next.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2016 @ 1:40pm

    Jaywalking citizen? The punishment is a 1kt nuke to your babies nursery....

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 11 Jun 2016 @ 2:02pm

      Re:

      That's not punishment but securing of the perimeter as a consequence of your jaywalking. Meaning that the effects of the 1kt nuke are added to the debit side of your punishment tab.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2016 @ 1:41pm

    Least they're living up to their name

    Ever seen whats left of a fly after you SWAT it?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John, 12 Jun 2016 @ 1:00am

    Never our fault

    The thing I love about government justifying their actions is that it’s never their fault and there was nothing else they could do.

    Perhaps they could have walked away?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 12 Jun 2016 @ 1:13am

      Re: Never our fault

      He shoplifted two belts. Are you the one going to tell a mother that you cannot track down the guy who strangled her kids with unregistered belts because you were too chicken to break a fourth wall when you already had him trapped?

      And if the shoplifted shirt is used as the fuse of an atomic bomb, are you going to sweep up the rubble of New York?

      Those parts could have been key to building a Rube Goldberg Doomsday Device.

      And instead you choose to let a perfectly gorgious wall-punching ram gather dust?

      You, Sir, are no police officer.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Jun 2016 @ 6:19am

    Power corrupts

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Monday (profile), 12 Jun 2016 @ 10:54am

    Accountability

    Police have been increasingly held accountable for fatalities incurred during high speed pursuits - better calls have been made during these 'car chases', but they still, the unnecessary deaths that is, occur. Although the two are incomparable, there are definite psychological and physiological side effects from losing everything you have worked so hard for your family, and yourself.

    Enforcement needs to be held accountable each and every time incidents that can, and obviously, be treated or handled on an entirely different approach/level.

    It comes down to accountability. If somebody writes you a suicide note, lives, you get them to professionals; you don't wait for the next time for it to happen, and then have an assessment of the conclusions, or have a brief discussion on what methods were used, over coffee. Treat the problem now.

    This is a huge problem because it seems alarmingly to happen now 'all the time. We are really, more aware of these events happening at increased frequencies, because of our connectivity, but it seems to be bred into the Law Enforcement Culture. It is abhorrent mutations that have somehow survived this Law Enforcement Zeitgeist.

    Accountability...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Philly Bob, 12 Jun 2016 @ 8:14pm

    Burn down the house to kill the spider...
    I get it now!
    Or... they could have blasted some Nikki Manaj music.
    He's have come out screaming.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.