02-04-2022, 04:57 PM
This post is for the benefit of others reading this thread. A "no knock" warrant is only executed when the risk of announcing yourself before the breach would likely make the situation far more dangerous. Given armed and violent criminals extra time to prepare, e.g. grab a long gun, set up a barricade or other cover, will only serve to increase the risk of a violent confrontation for everyone involved. They are usually served in the early morning, as this was, because your standard criminal tends to keep late hours and doesn't get up early for work (yes, the last bit was sarcasm). A sleeping criminal is far less likely to react violently.
Now it can, as it did here, happen that someone is awake and they may react with understandable confusion. This can, of course, include arming themselves against what they perceive as a threat. As an aside, a no knock always includes the announcing of law enforcement as the ones entering, but I understand this will not always be quickly processed by those in the home. So, yes, there is always a chance that a no knock can result in exactly what happened here, but far, far, more often it achieves its exact goal, which is surprise and a relatively uneventful outcome.
Law enforcement policies and procedures are not produced in a vacuum or created from whole cloth. There is a lot of experience and empirical data that goes into crafting them, along with constant input from local counsel. No knock warrants prevent far more violence than they cause, but you will only hear about the ones that go south. For every story like this or Breanna Taylor you'll have literally thousands that go off without a hitch. However, this thread does serve an excellent, albeit unintended, purpose. It perfectly illustrates how the opinions and perceptions of people with zero knowledge of the profession can have an enormous impact on LEO procedure.
Imagine OP is an elected official trying to score points with the woke crowd by condemning no knock warrants and attempting to eliminate them, based on this incident. In the long run you will actually create far more violence then you prevent because those decisions, or more accurately political grandstanding, are grounded in an utterly imperfect understanding of the issue. You're seeing this everywhere with left leaning politicians, they make laws based on public outcry and imperfect perception and end up causing far more damage by hindering law enforcement's ability to operate properly. One need look no further than Washington state to see a perfect example of this.
https://www.kuow.org/stories/wa-lawmakers-may-restore-police-power-to-use-for
https://apnews.com/article/health-police-seattle-washington-mental-health-77fd27ab9fa27ec036ad02458db2569b
Note, I am not saying you have to put blind trust in law enforcement agencies or their policies. Policy can, and should, change to reflect new data. It's completely OK, IMO necessary, to ask questions and discuss alternatives. What is not OK, and is horrible for any area that implements it, is knee jerk decision making based on a lack of understanding and to appease a vocal mob. Unless what you want is law enforcement's hand's tied and a rising crime rate. Which is exactly what many urban areas have received over the past few years.
Now it can, as it did here, happen that someone is awake and they may react with understandable confusion. This can, of course, include arming themselves against what they perceive as a threat. As an aside, a no knock always includes the announcing of law enforcement as the ones entering, but I understand this will not always be quickly processed by those in the home. So, yes, there is always a chance that a no knock can result in exactly what happened here, but far, far, more often it achieves its exact goal, which is surprise and a relatively uneventful outcome.
Law enforcement policies and procedures are not produced in a vacuum or created from whole cloth. There is a lot of experience and empirical data that goes into crafting them, along with constant input from local counsel. No knock warrants prevent far more violence than they cause, but you will only hear about the ones that go south. For every story like this or Breanna Taylor you'll have literally thousands that go off without a hitch. However, this thread does serve an excellent, albeit unintended, purpose. It perfectly illustrates how the opinions and perceptions of people with zero knowledge of the profession can have an enormous impact on LEO procedure.
Imagine OP is an elected official trying to score points with the woke crowd by condemning no knock warrants and attempting to eliminate them, based on this incident. In the long run you will actually create far more violence then you prevent because those decisions, or more accurately political grandstanding, are grounded in an utterly imperfect understanding of the issue. You're seeing this everywhere with left leaning politicians, they make laws based on public outcry and imperfect perception and end up causing far more damage by hindering law enforcement's ability to operate properly. One need look no further than Washington state to see a perfect example of this.
https://www.kuow.org/stories/wa-lawmakers-may-restore-police-power-to-use-for
https://apnews.com/article/health-police-seattle-washington-mental-health-77fd27ab9fa27ec036ad02458db2569b
Note, I am not saying you have to put blind trust in law enforcement agencies or their policies. Policy can, and should, change to reflect new data. It's completely OK, IMO necessary, to ask questions and discuss alternatives. What is not OK, and is horrible for any area that implements it, is knee jerk decision making based on a lack of understanding and to appease a vocal mob. Unless what you want is law enforcement's hand's tied and a rising crime rate. Which is exactly what many urban areas have received over the past few years.
