Don’t Bother To Knock

December 12, 2005
7:10 AM CST

I have little time for laws which allow the police to act like an invading army, simply because it makes their job easier.

I especially loathe the so-called “no-knock” laws which allow police to storm a house, even with a warrant, simply on the off-chance that the period of time during which they are kept waiting outside will allow the house’s inhabitants to get rid of incriminating evidence.

More important, however, are these simple questions:

1.) When police storm a house, what if they have the wrong address? That’s bad enough.
2.) What if, during their invasion, someone gets shot dead?
- a.) The innocent householder?
- b.) A police officer?

And don’t give me any guff about “reasonable doubt” and that crap. If someone forcibly enters my house without announcing their presence, you may take it on faith that bullets are going to fly. Lots of bullets.

So let me answer any quibbles from LEOs who visit this website with the following:

1. I will grant, very reluctantly, the fact that occasionally the police will require extraordinary powers in order to catch serious criminals.
2. However, on the basis that extreme measures also require extreme caution, I will also stipulate that if a LEO (or more than one LEO) gets shot during a no-knock raid which has been made at the wrong address, that the homeowner MAY NOT BE CHARGED with any felony.

Let me be even more specific.

When a law enforcement officer raids the wrong address, he has passed from being law enforcement to a law breaker. Source: U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV, which reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.—Note the emphasis, because it’s important.

So when Officer Krupke raids 209 Maple Avenue instead of 207 Maple Avenue, and gets shot dead by the terrified householder of #209, that should be classed as “tough titties” (I believe that’s a legal term, I heard it from a lawyer buddy); and under no circumstances should the householder be charged with any offense—and most especially, not with capital murder.

Shouting “Search warrant! Police!” does not excuse the cops from raiding the wrong house and getting shot. Under the First Amendment, anyone can shout anything—and a moment’s thought will prove that anyone can shout “Search warrant! Police!”, even when they have no warrant, or are not the police. In circumstances like this, homeowners are not going to be operating at their peak—they’ve just woken up to the appalling sound of a violent home invasion, with a screaming spouse, barking dog, and strange men shouting stuff which may or may not be intelligible.

Little wonder that the first response of the homeowner is to let fly with the 12-gauge or .357 Magnum.

And when the issue is compounded by law enforcement saying, “He should have been more careful”, that’s when I get an RCOB of appalling dimensions, because it’s the cops who should have been more careful in the first place.

You see, it’s stuff like this which drives a wedge between the police and the public, and it’s a wedge which has no business being there.

Radley Balko makes an excellent point:

And therein lies the problem with hyper-militarized, highly-weaponized drug raids. Citizens on the other end of these raids are expected to behave perfectly rationally. They’re supposed to be cognizant, alert, and aware that it is police, and not illegal intruders, who are storming their homes. At the same time, police typically justify the tactics used in no knocks—including raiding late at night or just before dawn, and deploying dangerous “flashbang” grenades designed to confuse and bewilder a house’s occupants—for the precise reason that they catch drug suspects off guard, and disorient them. How, then, can they turn around and say that the innocent victim of a no-knock who shoots back should have known better?—his emphasis.

Enough, already.

Oh, another thing. I don’t care if after the fact, the police discover a ton of cocaine or twenty unlicensed machine-guns in the house which they raided by mistake. That does not excuse their shoddy work, and should have nothing to do with anything.

Here’s my final point. Any police department which raids an address not specifically listed on the search warrant should have to pay an immediate, no-appeal spot fine of $5 million to the homeowner, regardless of what transpired during the “raid” ($10 million to the householder’s estate if the householder is killed during the raid).

And if law enforcement doesn’t want to pay the fine, then they might not like my alternative: the LEO who fired the killing shot must be charged with premeditated murder, and the supervisor who authorized the raid charged as an accessory.

Extreme? I don’t think so. Remember what I said above: “Extreme measures also require extreme caution.” So far, I’ve seen too much argument for the former, and not enough for the latter. It’s an egregious abuse of police power, and it has to stop, now.

Here are Radley’s posts dealing with but one case of egregious injustice:

Episode 1.

Episode 2

Episode 3

Episode 4

Episode 5

Episode 6

Episode 7

Now tell me why your blood should not be boiling…