Fire In The Soul: Cops Throw Grenade Into Baby's Crib
Options
Comments
-
@Vibe why the ? do u always give cops the benefit of the doubt? Like always, no matter what.
Pigs didnt survey the house & used excessive force (regardless of procedure, u dont HAVE to use grenades at 3am) yet and u blame the parents 1st and foremost
look at that babies face^^^^ its scarred for life and still in a coma as we type.
Cops fault. Heads should roll over this. -
Did the ends justify those means....
Doubtful.
What were the ends
Aside from a very palpable life changing effwct on this child and the family -
My stance on surveying a home then doing a raid doesn't change had this happened that way.
But, according to the info provided by HLN/CNN, apparently, the house was under surveillance. They got a warrent after getting a tip from an informant that they bought ? at the location hours earlier.
They head over, try to break the door down but it's not working, door cracks open, they toss in a grenade and go in full force.
I'll change my stance just a little. Parents are still at fault if they knew, homeowners are at full fault, police are at partial fault.
Now, notice I never said the cops weren't at fault, I left that open until more information came up.
I'll say they were negligent in their entry to the home. They should've taken a look around. But, again, it is a raid and a raid is supposed to be 'bang bang' done in quick fashion.
It's definitely a ? up situation. Blame can easily be put on both.
-
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »So, y'all think it was intentional for the cop to throw the grenade into the playpen?
You can't be this dense, my G. Of course it wasn't intentional. But that's the kinda the point, they be throwing them ? ? nilly in the crib not really caring one way or the other. Is it a dangerous job? Sure. Are flash bangs needed sometimes? Sure.
Does that mean the police should be absolved of any wrong doing if they throw a grenade in a baby's crib? No. Their at fault, nothing wrong with just saying their at fault. There's no deeper, philosophical ? behind it. The cops were negligent and threw a grenade in a baby's crib.
? is pretty simple, fam.
Here's my problem w the whole thing..
Let's say this wasn't a visting family. Let's say they lived there. While the cops survey the house, they would realize there are children in the house. Therefore their tactics in raiding the house would be different. They wouldn't throw any type of grenade in the house.
BUT, this is a VISITING FAMILY.
This was a wrench in the gears. They had no clue this was going to happen. It was an accident.
Which is why if the visiting family knew, it's their fault and they shouldn't have been there like that.
If not, it's the home owners fault. Shouldn't allow your family w children to stay.
Fam, you are arguing a point that no one is disputing. OF COURSE IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!! But does the fact that it was an accident and the fact that either the parents of the homeowner should have been wiser negate the fact that the cops threw a live grenade in a kids crib?
You say 'Yes'.
All the rational people say 'No'.
If you believe that, then using that same logic...who's fault was it that Oscar Grant was killed; shot in the back as he lay on the ground handcuffed?
The cops fault, even though it was an accident? (And I DO think it was an accident)
or
Oscar Grants fault for getting into a scuffle on the train and talking slick when he was pulled off the train?
By your logic, it stands to reason that that young man was responsible for his own death. Right or wrong? If you don't think that, tell me the difference in that scenario and the grenade scenario.
I think what happened to Oscar Grant was an accident as well, but it's the cops fault. Grant did nothing wrong at that point in time to be shot or even tased. (like the cop said he was gonna do) -
But its police procedure @vibe
-
Well as dude said on hln.. their should have been adequate surveillance...
Yes the execution of a raid is suppose to be bang bang but the blueprint phase aka the planning.. depending on what it is sometime takes months
They didnt do their due diligiencw -
But its police procedure @vibe
Yup, it is, but maybe a little precaution wouldn't hurt.
I just have no sympathy for people who want to deal drugs or allow their house to be used as a drug house and then bug out when cops come through and something unfortunate happens.
These adults are at fault, whether you believe the cops are too or not isn't the big picture.
The adults know the dangers.
But, what if this wasn't a police raid?
What if this were people breaking in to steal drugs, money or weapons?
If the child were still hurt, by gunfire or whatever, would the robbers be to blame as much as the police?
Don't give me that "cops are held to a higher standard" ? either, because no one holds them to those standards.
-
NO.My stance on surveying a home then doing a raid doesn't change had this happened that way.
But, according to the info provided by HLN/CNN, apparently, the house was under surveillance. They got a warrent after getting a tip from an informant that they bought ? at the location hours earlier.
They head over, try to break the door down but it's not working, door cracks open, they toss in a grenade and go in full force.
I'll change my stance just a little. Parents are still at fault if they knew, homeowners are at full fault, police are at partial fault.
Now, notice I never said the cops weren't at fault, I left that open until more information came up.
I'll say they were negligent in their entry to the home. They should've taken a look around. But, again, it is a raid and a raid is supposed to be 'bang bang' done in quick fashion.
It's definitely a ? up situation. Blame can easily be put on both.
Blame the cops, who's job it is to serve and PROTECT, yet they are preoccupied with making arrests at the expense of the lives of the innocent.
Aint the first time either. Remember Aiyana Jones? Police fired a flash grenade through the front window and killed her, then blamed her grandmother.
They ignored the TOYS that littered the front lawn which indicate kids are present. And they had the wrong house anyfuckingway!
Blame the pigs.
-
What if this were people breaking in to steal drugs, money or weapons?
They'd be charged with murder ? ,
And the cops should be too - if nobody was shootin' at them. -
I'm not sure if y'all are absolving the parents. Police are at fault, parents are at fault too.
If you are doing dirt, there is NO telling how much you endanger your own family. -
Murder? The baby isn't dead, is he? The baby being comatose doesn't = for sure death. -
Tryin to respond to the titangraphs of hypotheticals you wrote earlier.
Bottom line is they'd be charged with something ? , and the cops should be held responsible in the same way.
You defeated your own argument. -
NO.My stance on surveying a home then doing a raid doesn't change had this happened that way.
But, according to the info provided by HLN/CNN, apparently, the house was under surveillance. They got a warrent after getting a tip from an informant that they bought ? at the location hours earlier.
They head over, try to break the door down but it's not working, door cracks open, they toss in a grenade and go in full force.
I'll change my stance just a little. Parents are still at fault if they knew, homeowners are at full fault, police are at partial fault.
Now, notice I never said the cops weren't at fault, I left that open until more information came up.
I'll say they were negligent in their entry to the home. They should've taken a look around. But, again, it is a raid and a raid is supposed to be 'bang bang' done in quick fashion.
It's definitely a ? up situation. Blame can easily be put on both.
Blame the cops, who's job it is to serve and PROTECT, yet they are preoccupied with making arrests at the expense of the lives of the innocent.
Aint the first time either. Remember Aiyana Jones? Police fired a flash grenade through the front window and killed her, then blamed her grandmother.
They ignored the TOYS that littered the front lawn which indicate kids are present. And they had the wrong house anyfuckingway!
Blame the pigs.
Supposed "responsible parents" are at a known drug house that openly deals or uses drugs, hard, heavy drugs at that. (? )
None of those adults are responsible for the well-being of ANY children in the house?
-
1. Did the visting family know about the drug dealing? If so, why would you subject your child to even being around such activity? Any type of danger is looming when this type of ? is going on.
2. If the parents knew about this situation, then, ultimately, it's their fault for bringing their child around this ? . Granted, you don't think a raid would happen and a grenade would be thrown in the window, but I would have at least thought about a midnight robbery. I wouldn't have been there like that w my kids.
3. How would the police know about the visting family and the fact that they have a kid in the living room? We know that cops do surveillance on the house before a raid. So, from what they knew, only the family lived there, not the visiting family.
4. Precautions should've been taken but I don't know police protocol for this type of bust. Neither do you. They handled it in a non-leathal way but it's unfortunate that the non-leathal weapons resulted in a babies severe injuries.
All in all, if the parents knew, it's their fault. If they didn't know, it's the home owners fault.
you're a ? . -
Tryin to respond to the titangraphs of hypotheticals you wrote earlier.
Bottom line is they'd be charged with something ? , and the cops should be held responsible in the same way.
You defeated your own argument.
I agree that the cops are at fault, I put them at partial fault. I put more blame on the parents.
Do you think the parents are to blame at all? They did endanger their children by allowing them in a house w drug activity after all. -
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »So, y'all think it was intentional for the cop to throw the grenade into the playpen?
You can't be this dense, my G. Of course it wasn't intentional. But that's the kinda the point, they be throwing them ? ? nilly in the crib not really caring one way or the other. Is it a dangerous job? Sure. Are flash bangs needed sometimes? Sure.
Does that mean the police should be absolved of any wrong doing if they throw a grenade in a baby's crib? No. Their at fault, nothing wrong with just saying their at fault. There's no deeper, philosophical ? behind it. The cops were negligent and threw a grenade in a baby's crib.
? is pretty simple, fam.
Here's my problem w the whole thing..
Let's say this wasn't a visting family. Let's say they lived there. While the cops survey the house, they would realize there are children in the house. Therefore their tactics in raiding the house would be different. They wouldn't throw any type of grenade in the house.
BUT, this is a VISITING FAMILY.
This was a wrench in the gears. They had no clue this was going to happen. It was an accident.
Which is why if the visiting family knew, it's their fault and they shouldn't have been there like that.
If not, it's the home owners fault. Shouldn't allow your family w children to stay.
Fam, you are arguing a point that no one is disputing. OF COURSE IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!! But does the fact that it was an accident and the fact that either the parents of the homeowner should have been wiser negate the fact that the cops threw a live grenade in a kids crib?
You say 'Yes'.
All the rational people say 'No'.
If you believe that, then using that same logic...who's fault was it that Oscar Grant was killed; shot in the back as he lay on the ground handcuffed?
The cops fault, even though it was an accident? (And I DO think it was an accident)
or
Oscar Grants fault for getting into a scuffle on the train and talking slick when he was pulled off the train?
By your logic, it stands to reason that that young man was responsible for his own death. Right or wrong? If you don't think that, tell me the difference in that scenario and the grenade scenario.
I think what happened to Oscar Grant was an accident as well, but it's the cops fault. Grant did nothing wrong at that point in time to be shot or even tased. (like the cop said he was gonna do)
Oscar Grant got pulled off the train for fighting and cuffed for talking slick. At the moment he was shot, he wasn't doing anything wrong. The parents got raided for selling drugs. At the moment that the cops maimed the baby, the parents were't doing anything wrong.
Explain the difference to me. -
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »So, y'all think it was intentional for the cop to throw the grenade into the playpen?
You can't be this dense, my G. Of course it wasn't intentional. But that's the kinda the point, they be throwing them ? ? nilly in the crib not really caring one way or the other. Is it a dangerous job? Sure. Are flash bangs needed sometimes? Sure.
Does that mean the police should be absolved of any wrong doing if they throw a grenade in a baby's crib? No. Their at fault, nothing wrong with just saying their at fault. There's no deeper, philosophical ? behind it. The cops were negligent and threw a grenade in a baby's crib.
? is pretty simple, fam.
Here's my problem w the whole thing..
Let's say this wasn't a visting family. Let's say they lived there. While the cops survey the house, they would realize there are children in the house. Therefore their tactics in raiding the house would be different. They wouldn't throw any type of grenade in the house.
BUT, this is a VISITING FAMILY.
This was a wrench in the gears. They had no clue this was going to happen. It was an accident.
Which is why if the visiting family knew, it's their fault and they shouldn't have been there like that.
If not, it's the home owners fault. Shouldn't allow your family w children to stay.
Fam, you are arguing a point that no one is disputing. OF COURSE IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!! But does the fact that it was an accident and the fact that either the parents of the homeowner should have been wiser negate the fact that the cops threw a live grenade in a kids crib?
You say 'Yes'.
All the rational people say 'No'.
If you believe that, then using that same logic...who's fault was it that Oscar Grant was killed; shot in the back as he lay on the ground handcuffed?
The cops fault, even though it was an accident? (And I DO think it was an accident)
or
Oscar Grants fault for getting into a scuffle on the train and talking slick when he was pulled off the train?
By your logic, it stands to reason that that young man was responsible for his own death. Right or wrong? If you don't think that, tell me the difference in that scenario and the grenade scenario.
I think what happened to Oscar Grant was an accident as well, but it's the cops fault. Grant did nothing wrong at that point in time to be shot or even tased. (like the cop said he was gonna do)
Oscar Grant got pulled off the train for fighting and cuffed for talking slick. At the moment he was shot, he wasn't doing anything wrong. The parents got raided for selling drugs. At the moment that the cops maimed the baby, the parents were't doing anything wrong.
Explain the difference to me.
Grant possessed no threat; no weapons or drugs were found on him. He was visibly on the ground and not resisting.
The house has drugs and weapons inside. The homeowner is known for carrying firearms. They're in a house and no one knows who is where.
Oscar Grant died due to officer negligence.
The baby was severely injured due to officer negligence.
Oscar Grant isn't at fault. The cop is.
The parents are at fault and so are the cops. -
Tryin to respond to the titangraphs of hypotheticals you wrote earlier.
Bottom line is they'd be charged with something ? , and the cops should be held responsible in the same way.
You defeated your own argument.
I agree that the cops are at fault, I put them at partial fault. I put more blame on the parents.
Do you think the parents are to blame at all? They did endanger their children by allowing them in a house w drug activity after all.
1. Unlike you, I don't assume everything the cops say to be truth. I haven't read anything that said drugs / weapons were actually found. I'd think that would be the first thing cops would say if they wanted to make themselves look good.
2. If the drug accusations were true, faulting the parents for doing it around their kid is a separate issue than saying it's OK for cops to do a reckless, dangerous, half-ass job. You seem not to be able to separate the two. -
ThirdEyeFive wrote: »1. Did the visting family know about the drug dealing? If so, why would you subject your child to even being around such activity? Any type of danger is looming when this type of ? is going on.
2. If the parents knew about this situation, then, ultimately, it's their fault for bringing their child around this ? . Granted, you don't think a raid would happen and a grenade would be thrown in the window, but I would have at least thought about a midnight robbery. I wouldn't have been there like that w my kids.
3. How would the police know about the visting family and the fact that they have a kid in the living room? We know that cops do surveillance on the house before a raid. So, from what they knew, only the family lived there, not the visiting family.
4. Precautions should've been taken but I don't know police protocol for this type of bust. Neither do you. They handled it in a non-leathal way but it's unfortunate that the non-leathal weapons resulted in a babies severe injuries.
All in all, if the parents knew, it's their fault. If they didn't know, it's the home owners fault.
you're a ? .
We know.
-
so we have a baby in a coma, tax payers dollars spent, and what else?
what good came of this?
raids are ineffective strategies... hold up...
Professor Five wrote:Research suggests that in some cases, violent crimes have increased in the aftermath of the implication of crackdown strategies. According to Sherman, two out of the six crackdowns in his study may have increased crime. Crackdowns have also been shown to be ineffective at decreasing the use of drugs. Despite increased and sustained police presence, pre-crackdown levels of violence and other crimes return rather quickly after the initial decline. In some cases the drug problem and related crime problems became worse after crackdowns. Critics of crackdowns have posited that in some cities crackdown were responsible for increases in violence for two reasons. Fear of law enforcement attention may have increased the willingness of actors to use violence and pushing dealers indoors may have increased danger to nonparticipants (Sherman). -
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »So, y'all think it was intentional for the cop to throw the grenade into the playpen?
You can't be this dense, my G. Of course it wasn't intentional. But that's the kinda the point, they be throwing them ? ? nilly in the crib not really caring one way or the other. Is it a dangerous job? Sure. Are flash bangs needed sometimes? Sure.
Does that mean the police should be absolved of any wrong doing if they throw a grenade in a baby's crib? No. Their at fault, nothing wrong with just saying their at fault. There's no deeper, philosophical ? behind it. The cops were negligent and threw a grenade in a baby's crib.
? is pretty simple, fam.
Here's my problem w the whole thing..
Let's say this wasn't a visting family. Let's say they lived there. While the cops survey the house, they would realize there are children in the house. Therefore their tactics in raiding the house would be different. They wouldn't throw any type of grenade in the house.
BUT, this is a VISITING FAMILY.
This was a wrench in the gears. They had no clue this was going to happen. It was an accident.
Which is why if the visiting family knew, it's their fault and they shouldn't have been there like that.
If not, it's the home owners fault. Shouldn't allow your family w children to stay.
Fam, you are arguing a point that no one is disputing. OF COURSE IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!! But does the fact that it was an accident and the fact that either the parents of the homeowner should have been wiser negate the fact that the cops threw a live grenade in a kids crib?
You say 'Yes'.
All the rational people say 'No'.
If you believe that, then using that same logic...who's fault was it that Oscar Grant was killed; shot in the back as he lay on the ground handcuffed?
The cops fault, even though it was an accident? (And I DO think it was an accident)
or
Oscar Grants fault for getting into a scuffle on the train and talking slick when he was pulled off the train?
By your logic, it stands to reason that that young man was responsible for his own death. Right or wrong? If you don't think that, tell me the difference in that scenario and the grenade scenario.
I think what happened to Oscar Grant was an accident as well, but it's the cops fault. Grant did nothing wrong at that point in time to be shot or even tased. (like the cop said he was gonna do)
Oscar Grant got pulled off the train for fighting and cuffed for talking slick. At the moment he was shot, he wasn't doing anything wrong. The parents got raided for selling drugs. At the moment that the cops maimed the baby, the parents were't doing anything wrong.
Explain the difference to me.
Grant possessed no threat; no weapons or drugs were found on him. He was visibly on the ground and not resisting.
-The people posed no threat. Nor did the baby. They were all asleep
The house has drugs and weapons inside. The homeowner is known for carrying firearms. They're in a house and no one knows who is where.
-Who says guns and drugs were found? Even if there were, how does that absolve the police? If we're talking about legality and danger, having guns in your house isn't illegal.
Oscar Grant died due to officer negligence.
-The baby was harmed due to officer negligence.
The baby was severely injured due to officer negligence.
-Correct. So because he hasn't died...the cops aren't at fault
Oscar Grant isn't at fault. The cop is.
The parents are at fault and so are the cops.
-Earlier you made no mention of the cops being even partly to blame. Now they are. Interesting.
Stop it, B. -
Wow.
-
I really dont believe they found anything...
-
So....were there even drugs found in this "raid".
-
Tryin to respond to the titangraphs of hypotheticals you wrote earlier.
Bottom line is they'd be charged with something ? , and the cops should be held responsible in the same way.
You defeated your own argument.
I agree that the cops are at fault, I put them at partial fault. I put more blame on the parents.
Do you think the parents are to blame at all? They did endanger their children by allowing them in a house w drug activity after all.
1. Unlike you, I don't assume everything the cops say to be truth. I haven't read anything that said drugs / weapons were actually found. I'd think that would be the first thing cops would say if they wanted to make themselves look good.
2. If the drug accusations were true, faulting the parents for doing it around their kid is a separate issue than saying it's OK for cops to do a reckless, dangerous, half-ass job. You seem not to be able to separate the two.
Your weakness is the bias against ALL cops, you're try to villianize them too much.
I've put blame on cops, such as the Oscar Grant case, or the cops who beat the mentally-ill homeless man.
Cops are far from perfect and I don't hold any of them to any type of higher standard. But I know that not all cops are equal - some bad cops don't = all cops are bad. That's a horrible generalization.
The fact that a child was hurt is what makes this case as big as it is. Had an adult been injured, this wouldn't be that big of a deal. The stun grenade or raid style wouldn't be questioned.
I say the cops are to blame as well, never said they weren't, and you guys get your panties in a bunch because I also blame the parents.
If there weren't drugs in the house, would this have happened?
If there wasn't active drug dealing going on, would this have happened?
The parents, or homeowners, have to have a part of the blame.
Unless all test negative for drugs and no drugs or guns are found, then I'll blame the cops in full.
