Grand Jury does not indict Texas man

Jeeper

CaliFFL wrote: »

I have asked this question of other cops, both here and in person. They all said the same thing. They would arrest me and then I can have my day in court. The law is the law. Cops do not decide constitutionality. That is for the courts.

This is a LARGE part of the problem. All too often they are just "following orders", but Cops ARE charged with enforcing the law of the land. They have to be damn near a constitutional scholar to do this correctly when we have so many conflicting laws.

Police officers need to remember that "following orders" is NOT a defense when they violate someone's rights.

Luis

Jeeper

Buford wrote: »

They need the funding from the war on drugs to survive.

THIS. So many of our problems can be traced back to Federal Funding. We REALLY need to get the Federal Gov't out of the State's financing.

Luis

Jeeper

Eli wrote: »

My opinions are already known on the subject, but what the hell, let's go over it again. It doesn't matter if the cops had been buying barns full of weed there for the last four hundred and thirty-two years, unless someone was in the act of being harmed inside the abode when the cops showed up, there is NO FREAKING REASON to do a no-knock entry.

It sucks that Deputy Sowders lost his life and I feel sorry for his family and friends. However, when it comes down to shots exchanged between a home invader and the occupants of the home, I'm generally going to root for the guy who's NOT kicking in someone's door.

I totally agree with you on this Eli.

Luis

Vic's Viewpoint

What Eli said. Call me an anarchist if it makes you feel better, but somebody's got to put a cap on police powers re no-knock. And five days between snitch and SWAT equals too little surveillance to learn much of anything. That whole deal stinks.