Live data from Hacker News

Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

npr.org

71–80 of 163 posts

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#71
post #6

I'm just amazed at how the theft of two belts and a shirt from Walmart escalated to the point where a house blew up. It's like something out of a comedy calamity movie. How common is escalation like this during the course of law enforcement? (I'm hoping this is an extreme case?)

This may be an extreme outcome but excessive escalation by the police in America is also the norm. Look at recent encounters with NYPD in the subway over a man not paying the fare (value less than 5$).

>but excessive escalation by the police

No one can challenge the authority of the state and all its tentacles like a Giant Squid. Take common law (case law) which partly governs the 5eyes countrys, its a legal framework which are moving goal posts based on future events and decisions made by a judge or judges (ala UK Supreme Court for Brexit) which no one can predict except Dr Who travelling in his Tardis! Common Law sets everyone up to fail, so why doesn't the state recognise its own weaknesses and failings by insisting on tarring everyone with the same brush? I'm sure that person would have bought a ticket if their circumstances were different ala Eddie Murphy's Trading Places. We don't know the full in's and out, but only now with the help of technology can we start to learn what someone has been taught and understood learnt from various sources (parents, schools, peers, religions etc.) and then work out better if the act was intended or not. This relies heavily on medicine stepping up to the plate in order to quantify better our exposure to chemicals and environmental stimuli which control our decision making processes. Understand this and you have built a general AI.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#73

> Authorities say the suspect stole two belts and a shirt from a Walmart. After he left the store, police say, he broke into Lech's house for protection and was firing at officers with a handgun. Eventually, SWAT officers entered the home and apprehended him. ... > The court noted that if police officers "willfully or wantonly" destroy property, they can be sued in a civil tort case. Lech tried to pursue that legal a…

Why do they deserve massive power? That was not constitutionally mandated, it is local, state, and national politics related to drugs and motor traffic that seems to have given cops now more violence and also more ubiquity. What if police didn't have outsized reactions to recreational drug use or minor non violent offenses? What if they weren't getting their revenue from seizing assets and catching motorists for arbi…

> Why do they deserve massive power?

They don't. We've given it to them willingly.

It has been granted to them by every person who has chosen to "outsource" dealing with their problems to the police. Loud neighbor? Call the cops. Something doesn't look right at the house down the street? Call the cops. Someone breaking into your home? Call the cops.

As a society, many, many of us have forgotten how (or even why) we ought to fight, defend ourselves, or interact with society. So we call the cops and go back to our Netflix or whatever it is we are doing that we don't want to be bothered with.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I think assault rifles cannot be legally owned by civilians in the US. I'm not from, or living there so corrections are welcome but I remember that the Texas gunman had a special setup that allowed his weapons to fire in automatic mode, or something close to.

They can be retained by people who had bought them before 1994 them but buying one is incredibly difficult in terms of money and paperwork.

No. There is no federal “assault weapons” laws, they expired in 2004.

In most states you can purchase one, some states (CA, NY,CT) have banned them.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#75
post #69
post #46

If we were to distribute the costs across different parties, how could we do it, and who could be included in this distribution? - The suspect - Mr Lech (owner of damaged property) - Mr Lech's insurance - The police department / other involved agencies / city - The store from which the belt was stolen - Insurance for the store from which the belt was stolen - Individual police officers or superiors who made a call fo…

Nit: "The store from which the belt was stolen" should probably go under Mr Lech - or at least equivalent.

I place it right above Mr. Lech. They were a victim. But they also had a minor amount of [well justified) agency in taking the first steps to create this situation--calling police for minor theft. I am not saying they are wrong in doing so. There are other ways of handling minor theft.

Mr. lech was a victim who was completely passive here.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they deserve massive power? That was not constitutionally mandated, it is local, state, and national politics related to drugs and motor traffic that seems to have given cops now more violence and also more ubiquity. What if police didn't have outsized reactions to recreational drug use or minor non violent offenses? What if they weren't getting their revenue from seizing assets and catching motorists for arbi…

> Why do they deserve massive power? They don't. We've given it to them willingly. It has been granted to them by every person who has chosen to "outsource" dealing with their problems to the police. Loud neighbor? Call the cops. Something doesn't look right at the house down the street? Call the cops. Someone breaking into your home? Call the cops. As a society, many, many of us have forgotten how (or even why) we o…

If you have a loud neighbor you personally fight them? The problem here is not that police are carrying out violence that should be enacted by citizens. I think you have misunderstood the need for accountability, not self reliance when it comes to using force.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#78
post #25

> Authorities say the suspect stole two belts and a shirt from a Walmart. After he left the store, police say, he broke into Lech's house for protection and was firing at officers with a handgun. Eventually, SWAT officers entered the home and apprehended him. ... > The court noted that if police officers "willfully or wantonly" destroy property, they can be sued in a civil tort case. Lech tried to pursue that legal a…

I think it's a little strange they'd even chase someone over two belts and a shirt... I wonder if they knew he was armed, since it was shoplifting and not like a bank robbery, but escalated though from there anyways. Just really surprised they'd prioritise such low value items. I know I've heard in some cities like San Francisco, the police are so busy with everything else even cars being broken into or stolen isn't…

My brother had his phone stolen years ago from a gym locker in middle school. The thief was identified within a day and the phone confiscated by police, who kept in in an “evidence” lockup.

We tried again and again to get the phone back but they refused. We had to buy a new one. As far as I’m concerned, those cops stole my brother’s phone.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#79
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do they deserve massive power? They don't. We've given it to them willingly. It has been granted to them by every person who has chosen to "outsource" dealing with their problems to the police. Loud neighbor? Call the cops. Something doesn't look right at the house down the street? Call the cops. Someone breaking into your home? Call the cops. As a society, many, many of us have forgotten how (or even why) we o…

If you have a loud neighbor you personally fight them? The problem here is not that police are carrying out violence that should be enacted by citizens. I think you have misunderstood the need for accountability, not self reliance when it comes to using force.

No, my point here is that a lot of people don't interact with their neighbors at all. I've had loud neighbors in the past and when I've had a problem gone directly to them and asked them to rectify said issue. They have generally complied.

The point is that if we were all better in "public relations" and de-escalation, we wouldn't need the cops at all. But if the default answer is just simply "call the cops" then people do feel attacked and they tend to get defensive.

Re: Police Owe Nothing to Man Whose Home They Blew Up, Appeals Court Says

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it common for the police to resort to explosives and military vehicles to handle a single armed person? Or maybe they have just too much leftover military toys and are eager to play with them?

If your employer had an option available which could significantly reduce your risk of dying on the job, what would you prefer that they prioritise above taking that option? A) The lives of bystanders B) The property of bystanders C) The cost of equipment D) The aesthetics of equipment Personally, say: - Definitely A. - B & C at some point if the cost/risk is above a certain amount...but what is that number? - Never…

Are they going to be held responsible for destroying the property?
Post reply on HN