HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » Cops do 20,000 no-knock r...

Wed Oct 29, 2014, 02:34 PM

Cops do 20,000 no-knock raids a year

Most swat teams spend their time carrying out home raids"

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from "unreasonable search," meaning police can't bust into your home whenever they feel like it they need a warrant, granted by a judge. Even a search warrant doesn't give police the right to enter your home by force they're supposed to knock, announce themselves, and give you a chance to open the door.

But as the war on drugs ramped up in the 1970s and 1980s, police argued that criminals and drug dealers were too dangerous to be granted the typical courtesy of knocking first. In the early 1970s, the federal government made it legal for federal law enforcement agents to conduct no-knock raids but the law was so widely abused that it was repealed a few years later.

Since then, though, a series of court decisions and state laws have carved out a set of circumstances that make it legal for police to raid a house without announcing their presence beforehand. This has happened at the same time that SWAT teams have proliferated around the country."

* In 2003, the commissioner of the NYPD estimated that, of the more than 450 no-knock raids the city conducted every month, 10 percent were wrong-door raids. That estimate came after a wrong-door raid resulted in the homeowner's death: when police broke into the home of 57-year-old Alberta Spruill and threw in a flash-bang grenade, the shock gave her a fatal heart attack."


1 replies, 1015 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 1 replies Author Time Post
Reply Cops do 20,000 no-knock raids a year (Original post)
damnedifIknow Oct 2014 OP
unblock Oct 2014 #1

Response to damnedifIknow (Original post)

Wed Oct 29, 2014, 02:51 PM

1. these seem stupid and dangerous as well. let's say the homeowner shoots and kills a policeman

as the article says, this is easily seen as self-defense.

if i were on a jury, i'd have a tough time seeing it as anything other than reasonable self-defense, even if i knew the homeowner was guilty of whatever crime they were busting him for in the first place.

unless the crime were something like holding a hostage at that location.

but for something like drug possession, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread