Video: LA Sheriffs kill 80-year-old man in bed in meth raid gone bad

posted at 2:01 pm on February 16, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

How did an 80-year-old man end up shot to death in his own bed by Los Angeles County deputy sheriffs? Reason’s Zach Weissmuller takes an in-depth look at the death of Eugene Mallory, who died in a hail of bullets triggered by supposedly challenging the deputies with a gun in the hallway of his own home during a meth raid. Only Mallory didn’t get shot in the hallway — he got shot in his bedroom, and the bullets came before the deputy warned him to put his gun down. Did Mallory pick up the gun at all? And what were deputies doing by raiding the house in the first place? Mallory’s widow wants answers:

Deputies approached the house, and what happened next is where things get murky. The deputies said they announced their presence upon entering and were met in the hallway by the 80-year-old man, wielding a gun and stumbling towards them. The deputies later changed the story when the massive bloodstains on Mallory’s mattress indicated to investigators that he’d most likely been in bed at the time of the shooting. Investigators also found that an audio recording of the incident revealed a discrepancy in the deputies’ original narrative:

Before listening to the audio recording, [Sgt. John] Bones believed that he told Mallory to “Drop the gun” prior to the shooting. The recording revealed, however, that his commands to “Drop the gun” occurred immediately after the shooting.

When it was all over, Eugene Mallory died of six gunshot wounds from Sgt. John Bones’ MP-5 9mm submachine gun. When a coroner arrived, he found the loaded .22 caliber pistol the two deputies claimed Mallory had pointed at them on the bedside table.

Mallory had not fired a single shot. The raid turned up no evidence of methamphetamine on the property.

The raid was conducted on the strength of a confidential informant and an investigator who claimed to have detected a “strong chemical odor” while downwind of the house. That apparently justified a military-style raid on the property, even though Mallory had no criminal history, let alone any indication of violence. Why not have Pate let them in and get Mallory out of bed to conduct their search?

This case demands some answers — and some changes, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

So…just about everything that could possibly go wrong with a no-knock warrant…went wrong here.

In the County’s fervent pursuit of the devil-drug that is Methampetimine, an innocent old man is dead.

In trying to keep police officers and sheriff’s deputies safe from people who manufacture, deal in, and often use a drug that puts your capability for human logic and reasoning on par with Tony Montana; an old man is dead.

Because a judge accepted what appears to be rather weak rationale from a police officer who was by some unknown authority granted “expert” status at recognizing meth labs, just by ‘being down wind of them’…An Old man is dead.

Because a Sheriff’s deputy, with stripes yet, entered a house that he imagined was far more dangerous than it in fact was, and he was so terrified of an old man in bed…that old man is dead.

As a former officer, I can tell you…intel makes or breaks the action. Unless you absolutely, positively have to make entry somewhere, don’t. I’d be curious to see what kinds of complaints had been made of this property before the raid was drawn up. If you can take someone down when everyone is out in the open, on a large property, (which this appears to be), then by all means do so. (I’d much rather be the Bolivian Army at the end of Butch and Sundance, than the Ill-fated title characters.)

This is a tragedy. I wasn’t there, so I won’t Monday-Morning QB it.
that is considered a cardinal sin in Law Enforcement also.

What I will say, is that this thing was a total Goat-ph*k, and the investigation on this had better serve as apt warning for *ALL* those that would commit the same mistakes again, in this and other jurisdictions. Any agency that refused to learn from this tragic cock-up had better prepare to eat it.

a5minmajor on February 17, 2014 at 10:21 AM

My Dad in his 80′s, very hard of hearing lived in an area of the Central Valley of California that had gone downhill. He and mom had bought and lived in this 1 acre plot for over 50 years. He had been an avid hunter and fisherman his entire life. For that reason he had a large amount of guns in his house. I worried for ten years that something just like this would happen to him. Cops serving search warrants, etc. in the dark of night wearing camo and ski masks. I can tell you without a doubt, if you had broken into his house he could not have heard a thing you said and he would have tried to protect himself and my Mom. And they would have been justified because he would have died with the gun in his hand. That does not make it right. It does not make it right that a judge would have signed off on this. To enter a man’s home with no criminal history. But it happens here all the time. I hope this woman sues the bejeppers out of the LA Sheriff. Money is the only thing that will stop this continued militarization of our local police forces. No one in this country should live in fear of them

helenjune on February 17, 2014 at 10:41 AM

This is a policy and training problem in LA. Don’t blame the war on drugs, blame those that would have it look this bad.

Fleuries on February 17, 2014 at 10:45 AM

What Happens:

Sgt. John Bones gets month long paid vacation, then is punished for machine gunning an 80 year old man in his bed with having to work in the office for 6 months. Get nick name like “the Bones Maker”.

After some months the widow is offered 1.2 million dollar settlement from LA County or 10 years of court cases with endless appeals by County.

Wallythedog on February 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM

OH yeah, fire these guys and bring them up on charges. Also demote all those who enabled the fabricated story.

jake49 on February 17, 2014 at 10:51 AM

When law enforcement and firefighters make mistakes, people die. Law enforcement officers and firefighters also die…a lot. It is a risky business, and sorrow follows each and every one of those mistakes.

But…lying is not a mistake. Oh, if based on the example of our politicians, it may be acceptable now. But it shouldn’t be. And it seems more than clear that the initial report was not the truth.

I can’t say how or what to change to lessen the chance of this kind of tragedy ever happening again. But someone in that police force should. And whatever the needs are, and I suspect that culling of trigger-happy officers might turn out to be part of the solution, as well as those administrators prone to citing statistics while ignoring the well-being of people, may be part of what is needed.

But whatever, let us hope and even demand that changes are determined and made promptly. Delay is denial of justice, both in protection and in punishment.

TKPedersen42 on February 17, 2014 at 11:07 AM

Police also have no right to DEMAND a man put his gun down IN HIS OWN HOME that they have invaded! They have no rights WHATSOEVER until they PROVE they belong there.

ConstantineXI on February 16, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Actually, they have every right to make that demand. Police don’t have to place themselves in danger by allowing someone to shoot them before they respond.

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM

If they’ve properly identified themselves as police, then you have a duty to cooperate.

But if they invade your home without warning in the middle of the night, without even giving you the chance to know what is happening, then they should accept the risk of being shot and killed.

Having a warrant is only relevant if they tell you about it.
Every no-knock warrant that results in a death should be prosecuted as murder. The police can say that they were in reasonable fear for their lives, but the same could be said for the homeowner who gets shot. And the police had an alternative to a no-knock invasion.

Actually, cops have no right to just break into any house they want.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 16, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Actually, they do when (from the article):

The deputies crashed through the front gate and began executing a search warrant for methamphetamine on the property.

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2014 at 2:16 PM

If the police notify you that they have a warrant, then your responsibility is to comply. But if you don’t know anything about the warrant before you’re confronted by a band of armed men in your own home, then how can you be expected to comply?

This was a home invasion, warrant or not.

There Goes the Neighborhood on February 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Most meth is from factories in Mexico. The easier and cheaper that stuff made far away is, the better. And I don’t care about meth users. If one commits a crime to support a habit, lock him up.

Destroying the self with amphetamines is immoral but it should not be a crime. When real crimes are committed, that’s the time to remove the perpetrator to a warehouse to live away from the rest of us.

SarahW on February 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM

I hear a lot of people say this type of collateral accident is justified because meth is real bad.

Like, I hear, “I’ve seen family members ruined by meth.” And: “The drug war is bad, but in the case of meth, it’s worth it.” Well, what about alcohol? Have any of us seen family members ruined by alcohol? Killed or spurred to crime by alcohol?

Crystal Meth is said to be the shining example of a drug that is so bad that we need to continue the prison & police state that is caused by the war on drugs. A couple of things on that. Truth is that that majority of meth users are also occasional recreational users, not addicts. And if a person directly harms others in the process of taking a drug (as with DUI), than that is a crime. But regardless of how bad a drug is, individuals need to take responsibility for their own education on what to put into their own body, and if they get the word that it’s bad and they do it anyway, then we are almost powerless to do anything about it. It’s like a Humpty Dumpty type situation: all the King’s men and all the king’s horses are not going to stop that person. And it’s not going to stop the supply either: virtually no matter how many people we arrest and put in costly prison guard union supported prison, there are always going to be low income people on the fringe that are willing to break the law to make a lot of money.

“Meth labs” and all the crime and craziness associated with that is a product of the drug’s illegality. If “crazy meth” were legal, you wouldn’t have meth labs. You wouldn’t have crimes committed by desperate addicts because those crimes are a function of its illegality. What you would have is some recreational users just as we have now, and some addicts, just as we have now. But those addicts would be much more likely to get treatment, and become productive citizens again. Look at Portugal, where, according to this Business Insider article:

On July 1st, 2001, Portugal decriminalized every imaginable drug… The result: a dramatic reduction in addicts… One more outcome: a lot less sick people. Drug related diseases including STDs and overdoses have been reduced even more than usage rates.

anotherJoe on February 17, 2014 at 11:42 AM

The Police had bad intel. They failed to investigate. They lied in their report and changed their story. They murdered an innocent man while he was in bed. There is evidence they shot 1st and warned after the shots fired.

I support the police, crime is rampant and the police are the thin blue line protecting society, however. They killed an innocent man. The platitudes well we want to come home at night, we take risks are not going to cut it. If you are not willing to discipline your fire and make a assessment of who to shoot, then you should not be a cop. The shooter should be tried for murder. He is a “trained” law enforcement officer. You know the guys who get to carry guns to protect “themselves” not the public? (so they can go home at night).

If the old man had been a person of color, I suspect Jessie and Al and Obama (if I had a father he would have looked like that) would be calling for Eric Holder to conduct a federal investigation.

The police just shot an innocent old man in his bed, move along, nothing to see

PSD_Steve on February 17, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2014 at 2:16 PM

Any/every person doing an armed home invasion should ID themselves (falsely) as police; so every armed person who thinks like StoicPatriot will not even attempt to defend themselves.

If the police don’t do anything meaningful to differentiate themselves from home invaders, why should they be treated differently from home invaders? Clearly they can NOT be treated differently as you can’t know which is which.

Either the position must be, the police are acting in a criminal manner OR that nobody should ever try to defend themselves against home invaders.

I don’t see a third option that is workable.

gekkobear on February 17, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Bye bye freedom, bye bye.

F_This on February 17, 2014 at 12:05 PM

What I will say, is that this thing was a total Goat-ph*k, and the investigation on this had better serve as apt warning for *ALL* those that would commit the same mistakes again, in this and other jurisdictions. Any agency that refused to learn from this tragic cock-up had better prepare to eat it.

a5minmajor on February 17, 2014 at 10:21 AM

The problem here was not the no knock warrant, or the way the police handled the entire situation. The mentality behind the police authoritarian posture is the problem.

I have a news flash for every single police officer or otherwise Law Enforcement Organization personal that has ever lived. You are not God or even demi-gods, your authority is not absolute or unquestionable.

The Gestapo, The KGB and the Stasi, were all, at their inception, legitimate Law Enforcement Organizations. The paths that those organizations followed, is the exact same path that every single Law Enforcement Organization on earth is on and the place they eventually ended up, is the exact same place every single Law Enforcement Organization on earth will end up, IF the communities that they serve and the governments that confer authority to them do not exercise sufficient restraint over them.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely is not just a saying or proverb. It is a documented observational reality.

The Rise of the Praetorian Class

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 12:12 PM

So criminal home invaders should just yell “Police!” when they bust in…?

Akzed on February 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Being in uniform also helps.

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2014 at 3:00 PM

Great, so they went to U.S. Cavalry or Cheaper than Dirt and bought some nice little vests that say POLICE or SWAT on the front…No. I will be shooting anyone who busts through my door. Let’s see if your little vests can stop 7.62X39…Oh, didn’t buy the trauma plates? Sucks to be you.

Battlecruiser-operational on February 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM

If the police notify you that they have a warrant, then your responsibility is to comply. But if you don’t know anything about the warrant before you’re confronted by a band of armed men in your own home, then how can you be expected to comply?

This was a home invasion, warrant or not.

There Goes the Neighborhood on February 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Exactly. That is why “no knock” forced entry invasions, REGARDLESS of what courts say (the judge that issued this warrant was corrupt or incompetent, no third possibility) are Unconstitutional.

That “magic” piece of paper in your hand does not, just because it exists, constitute the END of what has to happen to LEGALLY apply it. The person being served HAS TO KNOW ABOUT IT.

And blowing down a door and rushing in with armed men dressed as the “super elite black ops special forces” they imagine themselves to be (but aren’t) is not notification.

You know, I’ve often dreamed of what kind of home I’d build if I had the money to (ie: won the lottery) and in the design WOULD be a safe room, as well as a SWAT proof entrance. My home would be so hardened that these arseholes would be UNABLE to serve a warrant in an uncivilized manner.

Which in this day and age would in and of ITSELF “justification” for an all out gestapo type raid…

ConstantineXI on February 17, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Great, so they went to U.S. Cavalry or Cheaper than Dirt and bought some nice little vests that say POLICE or SWAT on the front…No. I will be shooting anyone who busts through my door. Let’s see if your little vests can stop 7.62X39…Oh, didn’t buy the trauma plates? Sucks to be you.

Battlecruiser-operational on February 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Exactly. Anyone who blows down my door is a criminal AND WILL BE SHOT. I don’t care who you are. No exception. No hesitation.

If you don’t want to get shot, try identifying yourself like a civilized person.

ConstantineXI on February 17, 2014 at 12:33 PM

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 12:12 PM

For the most part; I couldn’t possibly agree more.

That being said; Do not despair entirely. There are plenty of ‘Good People’ still in Law Enforcement. Your ‘news flash’ is wasted on most officers, especially seasoned officers, who know that it is a job, no more or less than garbage collector, plumber, doctor, waiter, etc. You learn that the piece of anodized brass on your shirt, doesn’t give you the right to treat any other human being with any less respect than you would a family member…even someone laying in a puddle of their own piss, that has scabs on their knees and elbows from constant falls brought on from the repeated huffing of paint behind a 7-11 dumpster.

Thank God that in this Country, currently, the conditions do not exist for a KGB, Geheimestaatspolizei, etc to form unchecked.

But that doesn’t mean it’s not possible, and incidents like this, unpublished and unpunished, are the warning bell we ignore at our own peril.

(I’d also like to see the judge that issued this warrant unseated and disbarred; assuming the information in the story is accurate as to the warrant’s content. I’m sure it was edited for the story, but I’ve seen search warrants before…I’ll bet a nickel it was pretty vague, and cost a man his life.)

a5minmajor on February 17, 2014 at 12:44 PM

soundingboard on February 17, 2014 at 1:57 AM

sure hope that was a joke.

Otherwise my late grandmother’s joke comes to mind about the best sounding boards being extraordinarily hollow, old to the point of decrepit, and overly tightly strung.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Great, so they went to U.S. Cavalry or Cheaper than Dirt and bought some nice little vests that say POLICE or SWAT on the front…No. I will be shooting anyone who busts through my door. Let’s see if your little vests can stop 7.62X39…Oh, didn’t buy the trauma plates? Sucks to be you.

Battlecruiser-operational on February 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Yep. The technique for a bust-in is to go in late at night, in the dark, when most people will be in bed, and to blind you with flash-bangs or bright lights.

At that point you have no opportunity to check for proper labeling on uniforms.

slickwillie2001 on February 17, 2014 at 12:49 PM

If they identify as police (i.e., shout “Police!” as mentioned previously), or you see them wearing police uniforms, then yes, I expect you to not simply shoot them.

Stoic Fascist on February 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM

Well, waking from a sound sleep, I keep my glasses real close to my gun.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 12:54 PM

Shump on February 16, 2014 at 11:31 PM

You’re right about where we disagree, and I respect that. I would disagree with your assertion that “the sole occupant of the house was an 80-year-old man with little capacity to provide serious resistance.” He was evidently armed, and guns are a great equalizer. That’s why we encourage young women to carry them so that they don’t get assaulted. In hand-to-hand combat though, yeah, an 80-year old is a pushover. But once armed he’s just as formidable as a 30-year old with the same weapon.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:03 PM

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:03 PM

they have really great vision, reflexes, hearing, and mental abilities too.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:04 PM

A cop who just blew down the front door who is threatening the homeowner with firearms is nothing but a common criminal and should be shot dead for it.

Blowing down a door is NOT serving a warrant. It is NOT a legal means of service. Assuming the warrant itself was legal, which in this case, it was clearly not. Everyone involved in this travesty from the JUDGE who didn’t do his job as a SAFEGUARD, who accepted unattributed hearsay “evidence” as probable cause to the shooters should be tried for MURDER.

ConstantineXI on February 17, 2014 at 8:12 AM

Wrong. Blowing down a door is a legal means of serving a warrant, and occupants who shoot cops dead upon entry should expect to be shot dead themselves. Demanding that the judge be tried for murder is preposterous. The only person who deserves to be tried for murder is the officer who discharged his weapon.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Hahahahahahahahahahaha…..lol…hahahahahahahahaha oh man,…that was a good one. There is nothing like going from one big government douche-bag (Obama) to another big government douche-bag like Huckabee.

MoreLiberty on February 17, 2014 at 8:50 AM

He’s far better than your beloved windbag Rand Paul, who evidently thinks that gay marriage is great and drug legalization is great… just like Obama.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:06 PM

If the police notify you that they have a warrant, then your responsibility is to comply. But if you don’t know anything about the warrant before you’re confronted by a band of armed men in your own home, then how can you be expected to comply?

This was a home invasion, warrant or not.

There Goes the Neighborhood on February 17, 2014 at 11:11 AM

I agree with what you’re saying. Until you know, you have to act in self-defense and treat the police like home invaders. Once they’ve identified themselves as police though, at that point you must cease resisting.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Wrong. Blowing down a door is a legal means of serving a warrant, and occupants who shoot cops dead upon entry should expect to be shot dead themselves. Demanding that the judge be tried for murder is preposterous. The only person who deserves to be tried for murder is the officer who discharged his weapon.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:05 PM

And ALL of this could be avoided by changing police operating procedure. Notice how the term “swatting” has made it into the lexicon lately?

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Wrong. Blowing down a door is a legal means of serving a warrant, and occupants who shoot cops dead upon entry should expect to be shot dead themselves. Demanding that the judge be tried for murder is preposterous. The only person who deserves to be tried for murder is the officer who discharged his weapon.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Courts may have said this is legal, but it is incredibly wrong.
What part of innocent until PROVEN guilty do you not understand?
How are you supposed to know they’re really cops if it’s dark and they have bright lights in your face?
You keep these cops were wrong, and yet you keep trying to justify what they did.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:11 PM

Any/every person doing an armed home invasion should ID themselves (falsely) as police; so every armed person who thinks like StoicPatriot will not even attempt to defend themselves.

If the police don’t do anything meaningful to differentiate themselves from home invaders, why should they be treated differently from home invaders? Clearly they can NOT be treated differently as you can’t know which is which.

Either the position must be, the police are acting in a criminal manner OR that nobody should ever try to defend themselves against home invaders.

I don’t see a third option that is workable.

gekkobear on February 17, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Of course if we followed your paranoid logic, the cop pulling you over for speeding might only be impersonating an officer and be out to take your wallet, in which case that will lead you to conclude that you have every right to speed away or shoot him as he approaches your vehicle.

You have to go off of the information you have, and if need-be, change that reaction once it becomes evident that the information is incorrect.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:13 PM

And as I hear them shooting the dogs, yes, my first thought will be that they are the good guys.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:13 PM

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 12:12 PM

For the most part; I couldn’t possibly agree more.

That being said; Do not despair entirely. There are plenty of ‘Good People’ still in Law Enforcement.

a5minmajor on February 17, 2014 at 12:44 PM

I don’t know about plenty, though I do admit that there are some good ones out there. I have a friend who is a 20 something year veteran of the SDPD. Good man, good human being, and a respectable member of the Law Enforcement Community.

But I also know that my friend is not the rule here in California, he is rather, the exception to the rule. Even he knows that and finds it both depressing and frustrating.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:14 PM

I agree with what you’re saying. Until you know, you have to act in self-defense and treat the police like home invaders. Once they’ve identified themselves as police though, at that point you must cease resisting.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:09 PM

And according to your own prior comments that will get you “justifiably” killed.
You appear to be very confused about this issue.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Great, so they went to U.S. Cavalry or Cheaper than Dirt and bought some nice little vests that say POLICE or SWAT on the front…No. I will be shooting anyone who busts through my door. Let’s see if your little vests can stop 7.62X39…Oh, didn’t buy the trauma plates? Sucks to be you.

Battlecruiser-operational on February 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM

See the 1:13 reply about paranoid logic.

And ALL of this could be avoided by changing police operating procedure. Notice how the term “swatting” has made it into the lexicon lately?

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Sure, you can avoid all killing of innocent civilians if you completely disable the cops from being able to do anything. Then you get plenty of other problems.

SOPs here don’t need to change. What needs to be addressed is the fact that the cops killed a man without adequate provocation — a killing that happened outside of the bounds of existing protocol.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Well, waking from a sound sleep, I keep my glasses real close to my gun.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 12:54 PM

It’s morbidly amusing that you want to go after cops for a shoot first, ask questions later mentality, but show no qualms about doing that yourself.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:17 PM

Courts may have said this is legal, but it is incredibly wrong.
What part of innocent until PROVEN guilty do you not understand?
How are you supposed to know they’re really cops if it’s dark and they have bright lights in your face?
You keep these cops were wrong, and yet you keep trying to justify what they did.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:11 PM

Entering a home is not the same as a criminal sentence. And while I am more than willing to support the entry on the part of the officers, I am not willing to support the discharge of the weapon (i.e., the killing act) in this case.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:19 PM

It’s morbidly amusing that you want to go after cops for a shoot first, ask questions later mentality, but show no qualms about doing that yourself.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:17 PM

I didn’t break into THEIR house at 2am and kill THEIR dogs.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:19 PM

And according to your own prior comments that will get you “justifiably” killed.
You appear to be very confused about this issue.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Hence why if a few rounds are fired and you then realize they’re police, shouting something like “I surrender!” or “I give up!” would be to your benefit.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Of course if we followed your paranoid logic, the cop pulling you over for speeding might only be impersonating an officer and be out to take your wallet, in which case that will lead you to conclude that you have every right to speed away or shoot him as he approaches your vehicle.

You have to go off of the information you have, and if need-be, change that reaction once it becomes evident that the information is incorrect.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:13 PM

No, that’s why people have been instructed to go to a well lit and populated area (if possible) before you pull over and stop if it’s at night. And you should not roll your window down all the way or get out of your car until you see valid ID.
But when you’re in your own home at night, and they come busting in, you don’t have a chance to do any similar kinds of things to verify their ID, do you?
This home invasion type approach by police is equivalent to having a cop ram your car and knock you off the road just to give you a speeding ticket – because, well, cops sometimes get shot when they approach cars for traffic stops.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Entering a home is not the same as a criminal sentence. And while I am more than willing to support the entry on the part of the officers, I am not willing to support the discharge of the weapon (i.e., the killing act) in this case.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:19 PM
It is in fact a potential death sentence – as it clearly was in this case.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:21 PM

SOPs here don’t need to change. What needs to be addressed is the fact that the cops killed a man without adequate provocation — a killing that happened outside of the bounds of existing protocol.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:16 PM

The fact that there are people who could even think like you, proves you’re wrong. This is happening more and more often.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:21 PM

I didn’t break into THEIR house at 2am and kill THEIR dogs.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:19 PM

No, but you sure have sounded off in support of shooting any cop who enters a home legally executing a warrant. That’s what’s morbidly amusing.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM

Hence why if a few rounds are fired and you then realize they’re police, shouting something like “I surrender!” or “I give up!” would be to your benefit.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM

I don’t see that happening after each of the 20 or so pseudo-commandos has fired several rounds, do you?

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:23 PM

No, but you sure have sounded off in support of shooting any cop who enters a home legally executing a warrant. That’s what’s morbidly amusing.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM

You just said YOUR idea of legally executing a warrant is to blow down my door and shoot my dogs.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

No, that’s why people have been instructed to go to a well lit and populated area (if possible) before you pull over and stop if it’s at night. And you should not roll your window down all the way or get out of your car until you see valid ID.
But when you’re in your own home at night, and they come busting in, you don’t have a chance to do any similar kinds of things to verify their ID, do you?
This home invasion type approach by police is equivalent to having a cop ram your car and knock you off the road just to give you a speeding ticket – because, well, cops sometimes get shot when they approach cars for traffic stops.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM

It’s easy to fake an ID though, so when does the paranoia end? And yes, we’re talking about incidents here that are going to require very quick reactions on the part of all parties. In order to preserve lives the cops should go in heavy, but not simply blow everyone away inside. This is common sense.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

Hence why if a few rounds are fired and you then realize they’re police, shouting something like “I surrender!” or “I give up!” would be to your benefit.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM

You’re already dead at that point.
If there’s gun fire in progress, do you seriously think anyone s going to hear you?

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

It’s easy to fake an ID though, so when does the paranoia end? And yes, we’re talking about incidents here that are going to require very quick reactions on the part of all parties. In order to preserve lives the cops should go in heavy, but not simply blow everyone away inside. This is common sense.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

Better yet, if you really want to preserve lives, the cops shouldn’t be doing this at all.
Are you unable to read the news reports?
Whenever the cops “go in heavy” this is what happens.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:28 PM

You just said YOUR idea of legally executing a warrant is to blow down my door and shoot my dogs.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

I said I had no problem with the entry. I did object to the discharging of a weapon. As for dogs, I see no mention of them in the article. If they were present and attacked the officers, it would be wholly appropriate to shoot them. Otherwise, there’s no reason to kill them.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:28 PM

You’re already dead at that point.
If there’s gun fire in progress, do you seriously think anyone s going to hear you?

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

That depends on the amount of gunfire and the weapons being used. But yes, depending on how you’re situated and everyone’s reaction time, there’s a distinct possibility that people end up dead.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Better yet, if you really want to preserve lives, the cops shouldn’t be doing this at all.
Are you unable to read the news reports?
Whenever the cops “go in heavy” this is what happens.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:28 PM

I am not so eager to preserve life that I think it should be done by refusing to enforce the law. If people want to resist with deadly force because otherwise they’re going to be arrested for something minor (like say, streaking), then I have no pity for them. In this case though the cops killed a guy without cause, and that itself merits criminal charges.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:31 PM

I said I had no problem with the entry. I did object to the discharging of a weapon. As for dogs, I see no mention of them in the article. If they were present and attacked the officers, it would be wholly appropriate to shoot them. Otherwise, there’s no reason to kill them.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:28 PM

If the cops didn’t conduct armed home invasions, there would be no reason to kill anyone – dogs or people.
And ten they wouldn’t these cases where they killed innocent people, or dogs.

As you libtards love to say “If we can save just one life” and all….

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:31 PM

That depends on the amount of gunfire and the weapons being used. But yes, depending on how you’re situated and everyone’s reaction time, there’s a distinct possibility that people end up dead.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Exactly – INNOCENT people are dead.
But apparently you’re ok with that.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM

I am not so eager to preserve life that I think it should be done by refusing to enforce the law.
Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:31 PM

So it’s perfectly fine that innocent people get killed by government forces, because well ya gotta let the cops do their job – even if they’re doing it wrong…

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:34 PM

If the cops didn’t conduct armed home invasions, there would be no reason to kill anyone – dogs or people.
And ten they wouldn’t these cases where they killed innocent people, or dogs.

As you libtards love to say “If we can save just one life” and all….

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:31 PM

1.) I’m not a liberal, unless those people have become anti-abortion, anti-amnesty, anti-drug, anti-gay marriage types.

2.) If the cops didn’t conduct home invasions, we’d also get a lot more crime happening inside the home.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Exactly – INNOCENT people are dead.
But apparently you’re ok with that.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Except that I’m not. That’s why I’ve said criminal charges should be filed. Duh.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:35 PM

So it’s perfectly fine that innocent people get killed by government forces, because well ya gotta let the cops do their job – even if they’re doing it wrong…

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:34 PM

See the 1:35 reply.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM

1.) I’m not a liberal, unless those people have become anti-abortion, anti-amnesty, anti-drug, anti-gay marriage types.

2.) If the cops didn’t conduct home invasions, we’d also get a lot more crime happening inside the home.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:34 PM

1) BS – you are clearly on the side of oppressive fascist government – and that sure as he11 is not conservative or libertarian.
2) BS – there are many other ways for cops to do their jobs, properly, without risk of killing innocent people.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Exactly – INNOCENT people are dead.
But apparently you’re ok with that.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM

There are a great many who are incapable of understanding this phrase, they always think that somehow it does not apply to them, or that somehow the circumstance are different.

They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM

Except that I’m not. That’s why I’ve said criminal charges should be filed. Duh.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:35 PM

And yet you keep justifying the cops doing what caused this death, and you keep saying people who shoot at home invaders deserve to die.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Check me on this.

If there is a big kaboom at your front door in the morning and armed men are in your house you have … how long to make a determination that they are criminals or police? Can’t be more than a few seconds. While you’re asleep, disoriented, and frightened.

If it’s criminals, you’re dead if you don’t shoot.

If it’s police, you’re dead if you DO shoot. Whatever the technicalities are, if I fire so much as one round at a police officer, even in my own home, I can expect to die in a hail of bullets.

So what it sounds to me is that it is not possible to both permit homeowners to defend themselves AND to allow no-knock raids. If homeowners are going to defend themselves, that means police need to properly identify themselves even if it does mean drugs get flushed down the toilet. Not kicking in the door with flashbangs, the entire point of which is to disorient to the target so s/he doesn’t know what’s going on.

The alternative, which does NOT appeal to me, is to confiscate all guns and say homeowners have no right to defend themselves from invaders, lest it turn out to be the police. That would require a constitutional amendment — if anyone in government actually cared about it any more.

The reason we execute no-knock is for the safety of the officers and to prevent evidence being destroyed. Thus, I believe we should legalize drugs. Thus we no longer care about the destruction of evidence down a toilet , and there is no reason for officers to be kicking down a door in the middle of the night in the first place. Stolen property and so forth is a lot harder to destroy, so pre-war on drugs knock-and-search will be adequate.

If someone’s meth-head neighbor burns down a house or kills someone’s dog than that is a crime they should be punished for, but given the choice between throwing methheads in jail, and throwing meth-heads in jail while also shooting 85-year-old men in bed, I’ll take the first option.

Thus my reasoning. At which points am I wrong?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

pendell2 on February 17, 2014 at 1:40 PM

1) BS – you are clearly on the side of oppressive fascist government – and that sure as he11 is not conservative or libertarian.
2) BS – there are many other ways for cops to do their jobs, properly, without risk of killing innocent people.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM

1.) I do favor government intervention in many matters. I’m a social conservative. I am most definitely not a lover of cop-killers like so many libertarians are though.

2.) It might not risk *them* killing innocent people, but alternative methods can also get an increasing number of them killed by very bad people. It’s known as a tradeoff, and one that I think you folks are dead wrong on.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:41 PM

See the 1:35 reply.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM

Go back and read every other comment you’ve made.
You are clearly in favor of government forces doing things like this that result in innocent people getting killed.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

And yet you keep justifying the cops doing what caused this death, and you keep saying people who shoot at home invaders deserve to die.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Wrong. I never said I was okay with the discharging of the weapon. Without shooting him, he doesn’t die. The bullet fired from the officer’s weapon, not the act of entering the home, is what killed him.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:43 PM

Go back and read every other comment you’ve made.
You are clearly in favor of government forces doing things like this that result in innocent people getting killed.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Again, based on what’s been described in the article, I have no problem with any of it until the cops shot first and asked questions later.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:44 PM

2.) It might not risk *them* killing innocent people, but alternative methods can also get an increasing number of them killed by very bad people. It’s known as a tradeoff, and one that I think you folks are dead wrong on.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:41 PM

I’ll take the trade-off where innocent people don’t get killed.
As was once said about our justice system, as it was SUPPOSED to be – “better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail” – or be executed in his own home in the middle of the night without the benefit of a trial.

That’s enough for me. Got other things to do, so no more time to argue with fascists.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM

For it to have been a “meth raid,” shouldn’t there have been some meth around?

Akzed on February 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM

Sorry, you’re not paranoid if they’re really out to get you. And if someone is busting down my door and entering aggressively, I cannot assume they are the “good” guys. That is what is wrong with no-knock raids. If they are the bad guys, whether I resist or not, I may be killed. If they are the “good” guys, whether I resist or not, I may be killed. So, bad guys or “good” guys, I would rather go down fighting than be on my knees and hope against hope that the aggressors are going to spare my life…If you would rather take your chances on your knees, that’s your deal…

Battlecruiser-operational on February 17, 2014 at 1:48 PM

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM

But yet it’s what happened here and you keep justifying it.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:50 PM

I’ll take the trade-off where innocent people don’t get killed.
As was once said about our justice system, as it was SUPPOSED to be – “better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail” – or be executed in his own home in the middle of the night without the benefit of a trial.

That’s enough for me. Got other things to do, so no more time to argue with fascists.

dentarthurdent on February 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM

That’s the point. There is no tradeoff where innocent people don’t get killed. Give criminals time to prepare, and you get more just-doing-their-duty, innocent cops killed. What I’m claiming is that you’re going to have more cases where a tip given to the cops is right, but because you’ve erected more onerous rules on how they can proceed, a lot more of them die.

As was once said about our justice system, as it was SUPPOSED to be – “better that 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail”

I’ve never bought into that line — especially given that many of those 100 guilty men who go free will go on to prey upon more than 1 innocent man.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:51 PM

But yet it’s what happened here and you keep justifying it.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:50 PM

And as I keep saying, you’re wrong about my position.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:52 PM

I said I had no problem with the entry. I did object to the discharging of a weapon. As for dogs, I see no mention of them in the article. If they were present and attacked the officers, it would be wholly appropriate to shoot them. Otherwise, there’s no reason to kill them.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Disingenuous. You KNOW it’s SOP to kill the dogs. None here? No matter. You agree with the procedure. You don’t mind setting up these situations.

Let me know what state (I only ask state) you’re a cop in, so I can never be there.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:53 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities, you mean, those like George Washington, or Benjamin Franklin? Who recognized that the authorities of their day had become repressive, totalitarian and corrupt and had to go, even if violence was required to evict them?

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:54 PM

For it to have been a “meth raid,” shouldn’t there have been some meth around?

Akzed on February 17, 2014 at 1:47 PM

Ahhh, they had a warrant, so it’s all good.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:54 PM

Again, based on what’s been described in the article, I have no problem with any of it until the cops shot first and asked questions later. Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:44 PM

So you like it when cops break in rather than knock? You like them wearing intimidating body armor and carrying military grade weapons? You like them getting warrants based on no recognizable attempt at evidence gathering? This whole thing was a giant fustercluck before the trigger finger got involved.

“Asked questions later”? They lied later, saying they shot him in the hall, and apparently left a drop gun on the man’s bed stand.

To me, this is evidence that these Nazi clowns were Nazi clowns before during and after they shot the man, not just good cops that made a mistake.

Akzed on February 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM

I’ve never bought into that line — especially given that many of those 100 guilty men who go free will go on to prey upon more than 1 innocent man.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Considering that was the moral and ethical principal of America’s Founding Father’s nearly to a man, that indicates that while you may well be Stoic, you are in fact, not much of a patriot or particularly conservative.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Stoic Patriot? More like Stolid Idiot.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities, you mean, those like George Washington, or Benjamin Franklin? Who recognized that the authorities of their day had become repressive, totalitarian and corrupt and had to go, even if violence was required to evict them?

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:54 PM

If you plan on starting a revolution to overthrow the U.S. and kick out Barack Obama, let me know (and be sure to give specific reasons). ‘Til then, I ain’t interested in attempted parallelisms that aren’t parallel.

And as for Franklin, I hold that philanderer in very low esteem.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

None of which you have the right to bestow, or take away

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Stoic Patriot? More like Stolid Idiot.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 1:57 PM

WryTrvllr? More like Vacuous Circumlocution.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life. Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Of what country are you supposedly a “stoic patriot”? The USSR?

Akzed on February 17, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Of what country are you supposedly a “stoic patriot”? The USSR?

Akzed on February 17, 2014 at 1:59 PM

The United States of America. You know, that country whose police you keep expressing such contempt for.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:59 PM

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 1:54 PM

If you plan on starting a revolution to overthrow the U.S. and kick out Barack Obama, let me know (and be sure to give specific reasons). ‘Til then, I ain’t interested in attempted parallelisms that aren’t parallel.

And as for Franklin, I hold that philanderer in very low esteem.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:57 PM

I wouldn’t give a totalitarian azzhole like you advanced notice that I was planning on crossing my t’s let along crossing a street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:00 PM

I wouldn’t give a totalitarian azzhole like you advanced notice that I was planning on crossing my t’s let along crossing a street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:00 PM

I couldn’t care less if you want to cross the street. Knock yourself out.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Well, I’ll grant you bad speller, but you are a dangerous fool.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 2:02 PM

I wouldn’t give a totalitarian azzhole like you advanced notice that I was planning on crossing my t’s let along crossing a street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:00 PM

I couldn’t care less if you want to cross the street. Knock yourself out.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Typical totalitarian azzhole, I don’t need your permission or approval to cross the street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:14 PM

What a tragedy that things lke this are happening in America. A mistaken search can be understood but not lying about key elements of the shooting.

DaMav on February 17, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Well, looks like there will be a few more incidents like this in the near future.

Look for the dead labs.

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 2:19 PM

Typical totalitarian azzhole, I don’t need your permission or approval to cross the street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:14 PM

And as I said before, I don’t care. Knock yourself out.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Typical totalitarian azzhole, I don’t need your permission or approval to cross the street.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:14 PM

And as I said before, I don’t care. Knock yourself out.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Like I said, typical totalitarian azzhole. Absolutely insistent on giving that which is neither required nor desired. Once again, I do not need your permission, go knock yourself out.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Those who knowingly fight the authorities as many here are apt to do deserve neither liberty, nor safety, nor life.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Good thing you weren’t one of the Founders

LastRonin on February 17, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Many of you are failing to recognize the foundation for Stoic Patriot’s argument, and that is the importance in his mind of our engaging in the Drug War.

If you accept his premise about the importance of the Drug War, with all of the loss of freedom being in war entails, then these kinds of home invasions become necessary to engage in that war, and these kinds of mistakes will happen. They are collateral damage in the very important war.

Upon seeing that this kind of thing, our loss of liberty, is the direct and unavoidable consequence of continuing the war, most of us realize just how insane continuing to pursue this forty year war has become. Stoic Patriot does not.

You can see why many conservatives who don’t particularly like libertarian thinking also don’t particularly like social conservative thinking either.

All three groups, progressives, libertarians and social conservatives, are ideological loons hung up on their ’causes.’

Let’s just stop doing stupid things.

fadetogray on February 17, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Like I said, typical totalitarian azzhole. Absolutely insistent on giving that which is neither required nor desired. Once again, I do not need your permission, go knock yourself out.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:24 PM

I gave you nothing, nor did I make any claims about permission. I indicated that I had no objection to your crossing the street. Hence, knock yourself out. Duh.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:32 PM

Good thing you weren’t one of the Founders

LastRonin on February 17, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Same for you guys. We’d live in utter anarchy where the Whiskey Rebellion would be fondly remembered.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Upon seeing that this kind of thing, our loss of liberty, is the direct and unavoidable consequence of continuing the war, most of us realize just how insane continuing to pursue this forty year war has become. Stoic Patriot does not.

fadetogray on February 17, 2014 at 2:28 PM

If you’re going to legalize every activity that you encounter violent resistance on, you’ll end up with Somalia.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:38 PM

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:24 PM

I gave you nothing, nor did I make any claims about permission. I indicated that I had no objection to your crossing the street. Hence, knock yourself out. Duh.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:32 PM

On the contrary, your insane insistence on condescendingly suggesting that I “Knock myself out and do what ever I want” is in fact nothing less than a arrogant dismissive totalitarian grant of permission. Only a totalitarian azzhole used to dismissing others as less than themselves and requiring that their actions be approved fails to see how condescending and totalitarian your attitude is.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:42 PM

If you’re going to legalize every activity that you encounter violent resistance on, you’ll end up with Somalia.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:38 PM

You think I said we should legalize every activity that we encounter violent resistance on? Hardly.

Use your brain, Stoic.

Let’s just stop doing stupid things.

fadetogray on February 17, 2014 at 2:45 PM

On the contrary, your insane insistence on condescendingly suggesting that I “Knock myself out and do what ever I want” is in fact nothing less than a arrogant dismissive totalitarian grant of permission. Only a totalitarian azzhole used to dismissing others as less than themselves and requiring that their actions be approved fails to see how condescending and totalitarian your attitude is.

oscarwilde on February 17, 2014 at 2:42 PM

Ah, going back to the paranoid delusion route, eh? Saying knock yourself out is certainly dismissive. I make no claim to superiority with it, only that I harbor no objection — a point that you seem utterly incapable of comprehending. Lacking objection is not the same as granting permission.

As for bemoaning a condescending attitude, uh, who’s been referring to who as “azzhole” repeatedly, hm?

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:47 PM

You think I said we should legalize every activity that we encounter violent resistance on? Hardly.

Use your brain, Stoic.

Let’s just stop doing stupid things.

fadetogray on February 17, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Where we disagree is on whether or not the drug war qualifies. I contend that it does not. If you’re concerned about brain functionality though, a variety of drugs are known to cause drops in IQ.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Same for you guys. We’d live in utter anarchy where the Whiskey Rebellion would be fondly remembered.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:34 PM

And a dollar bill still worth something

WryTrvllr on February 17, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Where we disagree is on whether or not the drug war qualifies. I contend that it does not. If you’re concerned about brain functionality though, a variety of drugs are known to cause drops in IQ.

Stoic Patriot on February 17, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Which brings us to the real argument most here are having with you, including me.

You think the loss of liberty illustrated by this no knock smashing into this innocent old man’s place is a reasonable trade off so we can engage in the Drug War.

Most of us here do not. We hold liberty in significantly higher esteem than you apparently do.

Wars should be fought only for BIG reasons. Especially civil wars like the Drug War.

fadetogray on February 17, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4