Charlotte Shootout

[Ernie]

When our military clears houses in Iraq or Afghanistan, often the lead guy faces extreme risk of death due to being the first guy in. Making an effort to identify friend or foe before shooting increases the likelihood of getting shot.

Hypothetically, if they had an armored car, what would they have done with it? how would they have been able to serve the warrant?
Would they drive it into the house to begin with? start out with tear gas before even knowing if he would resist?

We would have sent in a drone which could have taken him out remotely but then the idea of using a drone for police enforcement has its own problems too.

Very well considered.

Imagine this: I drive into Ernie's house with an armored vehicle. The person I encounter does not look at all like the suspect. Ooops. Or I cause great damage to the person's house, but in court, they are found innocent. Oooops ....

Do we want a police state? Do we want the police to look like a standing army that fights citizens here?

I'm a person that likes to think outside of the box... I don't automatically buy, "This is the way we've always done it." I want someone to defend why the way something is always done, is better than any alternatives.

I am aware of the "excessive force" mentality, but it doesn't seem logical to me that officers need to serve warrants on foot.

So to brainstorm a bit...

Three armored vehicles could show up on the road and park in a way so that those in the first vehicle and those in the third vehicle would be able to see the back yard.

Then the middle one in front of the house could call for the criminal over a loud-speaker, and tell him to come around to the back side of the vehicle with his hands in the air to be arrested. Once he is arrested, the armored vehicles can drive away, the criminal is transferred to a police car, and it is finished. Society would just come to expect this.

Yes, there might be scenarios whenever officers need to be outside of the armored vehicle, in a helicopter, in the neighbors' yard, etc. but it doesn't seem logical to me for an officer to offer himself as low hanging fruit.

[ken_sylvania]

When our military clears houses in Iraq or Afghanistan, often the lead guy faces extreme risk of death due to being the first guy in. Making an effort to identify friend or foe before shooting increases the likelihood of getting shot.

Hypothetically, if they had an armored car, what would they have done with it? how would they have been able to serve the warrant?
Would they drive it into the house to begin with? start out with tear gas before even knowing if he would resist?

We would have sent in a drone which could have taken him out remotely but then the idea of using a drone for police enforcement has its own problems too.

Very well considered.

Imagine this: I drive into Ernie's house with an armored vehicle. The person I encounter does not look at all like the suspect. Ooops. Or I cause great damage to the person's house, but in court, they are found innocent. Oooops ....

Do we want a police state? Do we want the police to look like a standing army that fights citizens here?

I'm a person that likes to think outside of the box... I don't automatically buy, "This is the way we've always done it." I want someone to defend why the way something is always done, is better than any alternatives.

I am aware of the "excessive force" mentality, but it doesn't seem logical to me that officers need to serve warrants on foot.

So to brainstorm a bit...

Three armored vehicles could show up on the road and park in a way so that those in the first vehicle and those in the third vehicle would be able to see the back yard.

Then the middle one in front of the house could call for the criminal over a loud-speaker, and tell him to come around to the back side of the vehicle with his hands in the air to be arrested. Once he is arrested, the armored vehicles can drive away, the criminal is transferred to a police car, and it is finished. Society would just come to expect this.

Yes, there might be scenarios whenever officers need to be outside of the armored vehicle, in a helicopter, in the neighbors' yard, etc. but it doesn't seem logical to me for an officer to offer himself as low hanging fruit.

Is this really how you would want it to go down if you forgot to pay a traffic ticket and ended up with a warrant for your arrest?

I'm of the opinion that the scenario you are suggesting would only exacerbate the existing police vs. suspect mindset and result in more citizen casualties.

[Ernie]

Is this really how you would want it to go down if you forgot to pay a traffic ticket and ended up with a warrant for your arrest?

Traffic ticket arrests wouldn't need to be handled this way.

I'm of the opinion that the scenario you are suggesting would only exacerbate the existing police vs. suspect mindset and result in more citizen casualties.

Possibly so. But governments all over the world are trying a variety of ways to handle criminals and other social ills. Those who discover a better, but previously unconventional way of going about things, are not generally those who are defending the older way of doing things.

My suggestion may not be better but it is fun to brainstorm...

[Soloist]

Three armored vehicles could show up on the road and park in a way so that those in the first vehicle and those in the third vehicle would be able to see the back yard.

Then the middle one in front of the house could call for the criminal over a loud-speaker, and tell him to come around to the back side of the vehicle with his hands in the air to be arrested. Once he is arrested, the armored vehicles can drive away, the criminal is transferred to a police car, and it is finished. Society would just come to expect this.

Let’s consider this scenario, criminal doesn’t respond. What now?
You could just text the guy if he is that compliant and tell him to show up at the county jail.

[Ernie]

Let’s consider this scenario, criminal doesn’t respond. What now?
You could just text the guy if he is that compliant and tell him to show up at the county jail.

But they don't know if he is going to be compliant.

Officers could do the same thing that they currently do, or call in more help. But at least they would not need to first offer themselves as a sacrifice.

[Soloist]

But they don't know if he is going to be compliant.

Officers could do the same thing that they currently do, or call in more help. But at least they would not need to first offer themselves as a sacrifice.

No they don’t. In this scenario though, someone has to approach the door. Now you have a “tactical” situation that may or may not be necessary. The guy could be sleeping, or could be getting ready his arsenal.

The vehicle provides a bunker, but they still need to take the enemy line.

Generally if they expect problems, a no knock raid is ideal.

[Bootstrap]

Possibly so. But governments all over the world are trying a variety of ways to handle criminals and other social ills. Those who discover a better, but previously unconventional way of going about things, are not generally those who are defending the older way of doing things.

My suggestion may not be better but it is fun to brainstorm...

Helpful to start with a solid understanding of why things are currently done the way they are, though. Warning: GPT output ...

Why Warrants Need to be Served in Person

Warrants need to be served in person primarily to ensure that the legal rights of the individual being served are upheld, and to maintain the integrity of the legal process. Here are the main reasons why this personal service is crucial:

• Notification: Serving a warrant in person ensures that the individual is directly informed about the legal actions being taken against them. This includes the nature of the allegations, the authority under which the warrant is issued, and their legal rights moving forward. Personal service guarantees that the individual cannot claim ignorance of the legal proceedings.
• Identification: Serving in person allows law enforcement to verify the identity of the person to whom the warrant is addressed. This is crucial to prevent mistaken identity or wrongful arrest/search.
• Explanation and Instructions: When a warrant is served in person, the serving officer can explain the details of the warrant, including what it covers and what is expected of the individual. For example, in the case of an arrest warrant, the officer can explain the charges and the process that will follow. For a search warrant, the officer can outline the scope of the search. This helps ensure that the process is transparent.
• Legal Compliance: Personal service helps to ensure that the warrant is executed in compliance with legal standards, which can include the timing of the execution and adherence to specific conditions set out in the warrant. This is important for the admissibility of evidence and the legality of the arrest or search.
• Record of Service: Serving a warrant in person allows officers to create a clear record of when and how the warrant was served. This documentation is important for legal proceedings as it provides proof that the individual was informed and that the law was followed correctly.
• Immediate Action: In many cases, especially involving arrests or searches, immediate action may be required to prevent the destruction of evidence, escape of suspects, or continuation of criminal activity. Personal service ensures that actions can be taken swiftly and directly.

These factors collectively ensure that the process is not only effective but also respects the legal rights of all parties involved. Personal service of warrants is a foundational aspect of law enforcement procedures designed to maintain fairness, transparency, and accountability within the judicial system.

[Bootstrap]

More GPT to describe the way things are currently done:

How Warrants are Served with Potentially Dangerous Suspects

Yes, warrants generally need to be served in person. The process of serving a warrant involves law enforcement officers presenting the warrant to the individual named in the document, informing them of the charges or reasons for the warrant, and often executing the terms of the warrant, which could include searching premises or making an arrest.

Here’s how it's typically handled, especially when dealing with potentially dangerous suspects:

• Planning and Preparation: When law enforcement anticipates that serving a warrant could be dangerous due to the suspect's history or the nature of the charges, they undertake extensive planning. This includes gathering intelligence about the suspect’s behavior, whereabouts, and whether they possess weapons.
• Risk Assessment: Officers perform a risk assessment to determine the level of threat. This assessment influences decisions about the timing of serving the warrant, the number of officers involved, and whether specialized units like SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) are needed.
• Using Specialized Teams: In high-risk situations, specialized teams like SWAT are often deployed. These teams are equipped with tactical gear and trained to handle dangerous situations, including serving high-risk warrants. Their training includes methods to enter buildings securely, use shields for protection, and subdue suspects with minimal harm to officers, suspects, and bystanders.
• Surveillance and Timing: Surveillance is often conducted to determine the best time and place to serve the warrant. Serving a warrant at a time when the suspect is likely to be less guarded or in a location where there is minimal risk to others is preferred.
• Announcement and Entry: Law enforcement officers typically announce their presence and purpose before entering a home or building to serve a warrant, although in some cases (like no-knock warrants), they might enter without prior announcement if announcing could lead to evidence destruction, the suspect's escape, or harm to the officers.
• Detention and Search: Once the area is secured, officers will detain the suspect and any other individuals present to ensure safety while they perform any necessary searches as stipulated by the warrant.
• Documentation: After serving the warrant, officers document the operation .....

Ooops, reached my cap for now ... but I wonder how much of this was actually done in Charlotte. From what I read, they assumed they had to deal with only one armed person, and that wasn't true.