Fire In The Soul: Cops Throw Grenade Into Baby's Crib
Options
Comments
-
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.
House was under surveillance, but they didn't know that the suspect was not even there?! A lot can happen in 3 hours. The element of surprise is and force is NOT always needed.
You're blaming the parents who were visiting. How do they know what goes on there? That's like blaming the patrons of a store for eating there and not knowing they possibly employ illegal aliens. Maybe there were not there 3 hours ago when the informant was served.
How do the police get partial fault for throwing the flash grenade? If proper surveillance was conducted they should have known the status of the house and the number of occupants. Then we get back to the fact that the suspect was NOT there. The amount of possible narcotics should have also played a factor. It's not like they found a ? stash house because they would have surely justified it by telling the large quantities they found in the residence.
They need to change their procedures like they did in Seattle! See if they still throw flash grenades in residential buildings without knowing a little more information. -
mryounggun wrote: »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.
No mention of blaming or not blaming doesn't mean I was not going to put no blame on to them.
Based off the article, we can see that it was accidental. There's many factors to take in.
-
Cops will continue to abuse their power and cause harm to innocents as long as ppl like @Vibe remain ignorant about their tactics. Blindly excepting things because its "protocol" is foolish.
-
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.
House was under surveillance, but they didn't know that the suspect was not even there?! A lot can happen in 3 hours. The element of surprise is and force is NOT always needed.
You're blaming the parents who were visiting. How do they know what goes on there? That's like blaming the patrons of a store for eating there and not knowing they possibly employ illegal aliens. Maybe there were not there 3 hours ago when the informant was served.
How do the police get partial fault for throwing the flash grenade? If proper surveillance was conducted they should have known the status of the house and the number of occupants. Then we get back to the fact that the suspect was NOT there. The amount of possible narcotics should have also played a factor. It's not like they found a ? stash house because they would have surely justified it by telling the large quantities they found in the residence.
They need to change their procedures like they did in Seattle! See if they still throw flash grenades in residential buildings without knowing a little more information.
I've said over and over that IF the visiting family knew, they're at fault as well.
As for Seattle, all police departments should operate under those rules.
-
@VIBE, let's stick to this specific case. All that other ? is irrelevant.
Were any drugs / weapons found ?
Who says it only matters because it was a baby - you ?
-
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.
House was under surveillance, but they didn't know that the suspect was not even there?! A lot can happen in 3 hours. The element of surprise is and force is NOT always needed.
You're blaming the parents who were visiting. How do they know what goes on there? That's like blaming the patrons of a store for eating there and not knowing they possibly employ illegal aliens. Maybe there were not there 3 hours ago when the informant was served.
How do the police get partial fault for throwing the flash grenade? If proper surveillance was conducted they should have known the status of the house and the number of occupants. Then we get back to the fact that the suspect was NOT there. The amount of possible narcotics should have also played a factor. It's not like they found a ? stash house because they would have surely justified it by telling the large quantities they found in the residence.
They need to change their procedures like they did in Seattle! See if they still throw flash grenades in residential buildings without knowing a little more information.
I've said over and over that IF the visiting family knew, they're at fault as well.
As for Seattle, all police departments should operate under those rules.
Word! -
Welp. Somebody gettin paid.
-
Then there's the fact that you haven't noted anything wrong with the way they're doing ? , just that it's protocol.
It's also protocol to tap your phone, doesn't mean you should be ok with the ? . -
Imagine if an elderly person with an oxygen tank was where that baby was house prolly would have blown the ? up
-
Recaptimus_Prime360 wrote: »Welp. Somebody gettin paid.
Truth be told it will probably NEVER be enough. Unless they negotiate all future medical expenses included with pain and suffering, then the settlement is hush money. I'm sure they haven't tested his hearing, sight, or sense of taste and ? sensitivity. I'm sure he'll be traumatized for the rest of his life. Yes he'll get paid, but sometimes that ? just isn't worth it or about the money. -
@VIBE, let's stick to this specific case. All that other ? is irrelevant.
Were any drugs / weapons found ?
Who says it only matters because it was a baby - you ?
Currently, we don't know.
It was just a question. Would the actions by the police still be questioned? Babies and elderly people are soft spots for us. -
How you don't know...when you JUST said the house has weapons and drugs inside?
-
mryounggun wrote: »How you don't know...when you JUST said the house has weapons and drugs inside?
That's what the report is.
He's a drug dealer - they keep drugs and drug money on them. A purchase had been made earlier that night by an informant.
He's known to carry weapons, drug dealers carry weapons.
^ not only is it logical to think that way, the police stated this
now whether or not that's all in the house for sure is unknown. They haven't confirmed or denied any evidence. -
@VIBE, let's stick to this specific case. All that other ? is irrelevant.
Were any drugs / weapons found ?
Who says it only matters because it was a baby - you ?
Currently, we don't know.
It was just a question. Would the actions by the police still be questioned? Babies and elderly people are soft spots for us.
So cops haven't announced finding any drugs / weapons in these reports, and you're still adamant on blaming the occupants of the house ? With the type of arguments you're making, that should be the first thing you worry about - "did they even have drugs ?"
As many threads / reports there are about cops using unnecessary force on anyone (from 8 - 80), you bring up that this is only a story because it's a baby ? Irrelevant and false. -
@VIBE, let's stick to this specific case. All that other ? is irrelevant.
Were any drugs / weapons found ?
Who says it only matters because it was a baby - you ?
Currently, we don't know.
It was just a question. Would the actions by the police still be questioned? Babies and elderly people are soft spots for us.
So cops haven't announced finding any drugs / weapons in these reports, and you're still adamant on blaming the occupants of the house ? With the type of arguments you're making, that should be the first thing you worry about - "did they even have drugs ?"
As many threads / reports there are about cops using unnecessary force on anyone (from 8 - 80), you bring up that this is only a story because it's a baby ? Irrelevant and false.
Would you expect a drug dealer to have drugs/weapons on them or at their house?
Yes or no. -
@VIBE, let's stick to this specific case. All that other ? is irrelevant.
Were any drugs / weapons found ?
Who says it only matters because it was a baby - you ?
Currently, we don't know.
It was just a question. Would the actions by the police still be questioned? Babies and elderly people are soft spots for us.
So cops haven't announced finding any drugs / weapons in these reports, and you're still adamant on blaming the occupants of the house ? With the type of arguments you're making, that should be the first thing you worry about - "did they even have drugs ?"
As many threads / reports there are about cops using unnecessary force on anyone (from 8 - 80), you bring up that this is only a story because it's a baby ? Irrelevant and false.
Would you expect a drug dealer to have drugs/weapons on them or at their house?
Yes or no.
Obviously.
The point is that the cops usually state that they found drugs and weapons in the article, which didn't happen here. That's not a problem for you ? -
Well, the main point in the article isn't the drugs or weapons, it's moved over to the baby and how the raid was conducted.
That information will come forward eventually, though. It has to.
If there is drugs and weapons found in the house, does that change your view on blaming the parents?
Because if there is no drugs or weapons in the house, I can admittedly say that I'll gladly place the full blame onto the police rather than any of the parents. -
mryounggun wrote: »How you don't know...when you JUST said the house has weapons and drugs inside?
That's what the report is.
He's a drug dealer - they keep drugs and drug money on them. A purchase had been made earlier that night by an informant.
He's known to carry weapons, drug dealers carry weapons.
^ not only is it logical to think that way, the police stated this
now whether or not that's all in the house for sure is unknown. They haven't confirmed or denied any evidence.
All I'm saying is let's use facts, my G. You can't one minute say that drugs and money was found. Then the next say I dunno if drugs and money were found. -
Yall stay falling into the vibe trap
-
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »How you don't know...when you JUST said the house has weapons and drugs inside?
That's what the report is.
He's a drug dealer - they keep drugs and drug money on them. A purchase had been made earlier that night by an informant.
He's known to carry weapons, drug dealers carry weapons.
^ not only is it logical to think that way, the police stated this
now whether or not that's all in the house for sure is unknown. They haven't confirmed or denied any evidence.
All I'm saying is let's use facts, my G. You can't one minute say that drugs and money was found. Then the next say I dunno if drugs and money were found.
If you think I said they found drugs/weapons, you're wrong. I'm going off the fact that they're supposed drug dealers and the fact that a buy was made that night and the fact that the police know it's a drug house.
If it wasn't safe for me to assume that, then that's on me.
-
Yall stay falling into the vibe trap
No troll, no trap. I just see ? differently. While everyone always wants to villianize and blame cops, I see both situations and call it as fair as possible. -
CoonKillaThird wrote: »Every day I hear of some more ? that makes me despise all of humanity. I wouldn't blame ? if he flooded this mifucka tomorrow.
Co ? sign.
-
Emotions and bias aside...all parties are at fault. The residents of the house are at fault for creating the criminal environment where something like this could happen in the first place. If it wasn't the cops kicking in the door lobbing grenades, it could have been some B&E boys kicking in the door on some other ? . It's not like the cops were raiding the house of a law abiding citizen.
Assuming the child's mother knew her in-laws were drug dealers, she is at fault for bringing her child in that environment. If she didn't know what they were doing then that's another story.
The cops are at fault for not doing their due diligence and insuring their weren't any innocents or minors in the house. I understand that they have a certain protocol that they adhere to in these situations, but just because it's protocol doesn't make it right, practical, logical or necessary in every instance.
What's sad is that you have an innocent child scarred for life just for being at the wrong place @ the wrong time....smh....fml -
The parents didn't have a grenade around the kid.
You can argue the other dangers of supposedly selling drugs around your kid, but that's not what happened here.
What happened was, "The cops through a grenade into a child's crib.". -
Doesn't matter.
We see it how we see it and we're doing way too much going back and forth. We aren't changing stances. It is what it is.
