Griping about Games, Government, and Guns
What if they’re a bunch of criminals dressed up like the police so that home invasion robberies are easier to pull off?
This is yet another reason why no-knock warrants ought to be abolished.
If the police are never allowed to bust in, guns at the ready, then you won’t have to worry about people pretending to be the police kicking in your door. If someone does kick in your door, you know that they’re criminals.
Instead of criminals who also happen to be the police.
Especially when they result in tragedies like the Pima County SWAT team’s killing of Jose Guerena.
I’ve mentioned the incident in passing a time or two before, and the more information that comes to light, the worse the SWAT team looks.
I’d like to blame this on the war on drugs, but when every federal department has its own SWAT unit and is itching to use them, the problem is deeper.
I don’t know that I’m as ready to stick a fork in the republic as Linoge is (Update: Linoge clarified in the comments that he doesn’t think the republic isn’t dead yet, just that the decline is inevitable at this point), but unless there’s a major turnaround in the next several years, I’m afraid the US’s transition to police state will be unavoidable.
It used to be that you could assume that as long as you were law-abiding, the police would leave you alone. That’s no longer the case; when non-violent crimes draw down the wrath of the mall ninjas, no one is safe.
Because if you have no right to resist an unlawful police entry into your home (H/T Kevin), and all you can hear are guys banging on the door, yelling “Police! Open up!”, then how might you defend yourself?
If they’re legit police, raiding the wrong house through negligence (it happens all the time), then you’ve just made your situation far worse.
If they’re just a bunch of criminals dressed up like the police, then you’re in just as bad of a position.
From what I understand of the case itself, it looks like in this specific instance the police were okay to enter the man’s house and arrest him; however, this ruling seems to be far too sweeping.
Cause if he hadn’t, the home invaders could have killed him and his wife.
There is no way, barring cyborgs or alien technology, that people in their 80s can reliably defend themselves against criminals in their 20s or 30s.
The invader was probably emboldened by Chicago’s harsh gun control laws, and expected the occupants to be unable to defend themselves. Those same laws obviously didn’t prevent him from carrying a gun around; this time, though, he wasn’t the only one breaking the law.
If this man and his wife are charged for defending themselves, it’s a case tailor-made for jury nullification; they may have broken the law, but it is a bad law, and should be struck down.
