undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfc417fc8027d ago0 comments

If you break in with little to no notice or with a lack of manpower or if the occupant has nothing to lose, sure. This is why no knock raids are incredibly dangerous for all involved and generally a terrible practice.

With the number of officers they often have in most cases it would make more sense to start off slowly and unarmed, making an earnest attempt to communicate with the target. People won't usually choose to fight a suicidal battle. Even if they're extremely upset and disagreeable almost everyone will go along with it if calmly presented with a warrant and given some time to think things through.

0 comments

luxuryballs7d ago

and I would argue no knock is unconstitutional, the whole point of a warrant is to prove you’re allowed to search me and the law was written in a time where everything was on paper, we’re suppose to be secure in our papers short of a warrant, if you can’t show a warrant how do I know I’m not being robbed and need to defend myself? it’s totally bonkers

BurningFrog7d ago

If you're there to arrest people, that seems reasonable. But if the goal is to collect evidence, you can't give them time to destroy it.

I do have the presumption that when professionals do things that seem weird, they probably have reasons that I as an amateur don't immediately understand.

I've also read enough Radley Balko to know cops often get away with doing awful and stupid things...

coryrc6d ago

> But if the goal is to collect evidence, you can't give them time to destroy it.

Unless it's proven someone is on imminent harm, then they should find another way to collect evidence, or just not do it.

fc417fc802OP7d ago

I'm aware, but there seem to be an awful lot of instances where "high stakes high priority evidence collection" doesn't apply.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse