My house has been destroyed by a para-military unit

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: infolurker
Holy crap! Now that is a hell of a lot of damage to get one shoplifter armed with a pistol.

To be honest, if you have a gun then you should expect this.

True. That's #ing sad though.

it's the gov't's new job creation plan,
destroy as much as you can so people will have to hire someone to clean up your mess.
really, the cops should be fired and taken to court over this!!!

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: infolurker
Holy crap! Now that is a hell of a lot of damage to get one shoplifter armed with a pistol.

To be honest, if you have a gun then you should expect this.

That's exactly the problem. One should expect this---in, say Chechnya.

As a matter of expectation of our government, we should expect better.

How does it work in other developed countries with shoplifters and pistols?

What would Canada do?

What would USA policemen do in 1963? They had pistols and shoplifters then too.

originally posted by: dr1234

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: infolurker
Holy crap! Now that is a hell of a lot of damage to get one shoplifter armed with a pistol.

To be honest, if you have a gun then you should expect this.

True. That's #ing sad though.

# that's the new accepted norm now... in America. Are we in the Middle East,etc.?! Why is it being accepted?

What a bunch of fvcking asshats!

I'm sure they even sleep well at night too. Too bad I can't say the same for the owner who is forced to stay with friends.

a reply to: infolurker

Okay lemme get this straight...
A shoplifter steals product from a multi billion dollar international(corrupt) corporation.
He then hides in an innocent civilians house.
Cops use military grade ordinance to blow up house.
About sum it up?

How is that protecting or serving the community in any way shape or form?

That seems more like protecting and serving corporate interests to me.

They blew up this innocent civilians property and won't take any responsibility?

They owe this man a new life!

As these officers sit in their nice comfy houses this evening, not a single one will have any remorse towards the whole situation. I'm sure it's high fives and promotions all around for a job well done. This is just down the road from my house I'm going to go see if I can do anything to help and witness the destruction in person.

I had to drive by that house...CRAZY! I guess they even brought in a armored vehicle. THIS is proof that our police departments are being militarized. The house is actually condemned right now. A neighbor compared it to when they went into Osama Bin Laden house....this is how the military dealt with a terror group leader's house!

Police feel they're not responsible for repair costs

kdvr.com...

originally posted by: Legman
originally posted by: vethumanbeing

Legman: with all due respect... what are you on right now? what are you talking about?
This was the police. Every police force in the US has insurance for damages to innocent people... GOOGLE IT... and stay of the stuff.
cheers.

You have never been swat team raided with both county (state) and Feds involved (you are just an armchair observant of a distant episode).

originally posted by: intrptr

The hubby says (see above for his comments and experience) that grenades can't come close to calling that kind of damage.

I know. They wouldn't use frag in a neighborhood anyway. My point was more the style of clearing rooms in a combat zone in war.

Boom, next, boom, next. The police have become the military.

When did that ever change? The Andy Griffith show filmed in the fake town 'Mayberry' was filmed on a sound stage in Hollywood CA to proclaim police departments were GOOD. There was Aunt Bea that fed the prisoners dinner, the town drunk Otis was harmless and was his second home. Barney Fife had a firearm, but unloaded. This was the 1960s era that was an unreal, a typically fake portrayal of small town policing.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

When did that ever change?

Yah, I get that. Difference is that today, they did it for one gun and one dude.

a reply to: intrptr
I do not understand one gun, one dude? Its usually 25 police officers just driving around waiting for the adrenoline rush (radio called to a potential scene) and one perp (robbed a Walmart and in hiding in someone's house) then destroyed in search of. Doesn't make any sense.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Metallicus

Actually I guess we shouldn't be surprised. They actually burned a house freeking down to get Dorner.

Holy crap, whatever we do, don't give them surplus napalm, WP grenades, or flame throwers to go with the MRAPs.

I was actually going to bring that up. In the Dorner case they had him contained to a house, he had no way out. Once that happened they threw in fire bombs, and then started knocking holes in the walls to make it burn faster and ensure the whole thing would come down rather than even the possible situation of him surrendering and them putting out the fire.

What's sick is that with the way the laws are written the guy they captured will most likely be on the hook for the financial damage rather than the department. Meaning this guy is probably going to be unable to ever collect if the insurance company voids his claim.

They should be forced to apply a standard litmus test to these situations, would a cop do this to his own house, would a cop shoot his own son in the back would a cop shoot his own dog.

If the answer is no it should be treated as a criminal act by an out of control officer.

They are trained to be professionals not cock diesel blow # up amatures.

a reply to: Aazadan
The Dorner case doesn't apply here as most people who listened to the events live knew that it was an execution by LAPD. I still wonder what was taken from his Las Vegas house given that the local FBI didn't get a crack at the files before they were removed.

The events at this house seems very different for some reason. Like I said in my other posting;

originally posted by: Guyfriday
Something else is going on here. While the police might have gone overboard, or maybe not. That's way to much damage for an explosion and some gun fight. What the house look like before hand? Why would a police force send so many bomb squad vehicles out to the house?

I find this whole issue very weird for those reasons. If the police did do this as reported, then I highly doubt they would waste the resources of the bomb squad, and allow reporters access the area.

originally posted by: FraggleRock
They will get their perp by any means necessary. Whether that requires them to kill a pet, throw explosives into a crib, shoot a 7 year old in the head as they sleep, or destroy a family's home. Their policy guides them down the most destructive route possible.

They must have succeeded in getting the guy since the place hadn't been torched; burned to the ground yet...

originally posted by: intrptr

The hubby says (see above for his comments and experience) that grenades can't come close to calling that kind of damage.

I know. They wouldn't use frag in a neighborhood anyway. My point was more the style of clearing rooms in a combat zone in war.

Boom, next, boom, next. The police have become the military.

Yeah, I figured, but wanted to clarify for others reading. He was stunned by the pics. IN this case, though, wasn't the guy shooting at them? meaning, would they have been able to go room-to-room, clearing, and if so, what the heck did they use? He was pretty certain it would have to be something major, and if not a missile, VERY well placed explosives. If the police have either missiles or C4 or military-grade TNT, that's a big problem!

I wonder if they will ever come clean on exactly what was done.

a reply to: infolurker

Op
It is called fascism.

"We'll have to basically doze it down to the foundation."


I'm sorry, I just don't see that kind of damage.

He wants a new house.

Can't say I blame him, it does seem excessive, but a new home? lol.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: intrptr

The hubby says (see above for his comments and experience) that grenades can't come close to calling that kind of damage.

I know. They wouldn't use frag in a neighborhood anyway. My point was more the style of clearing rooms in a combat zone in war.

Boom, next, boom, next. The police have become the military.

Yeah, I figured, but wanted to clarify for others reading. He was stunned by the pics. IN this case, though, wasn't the guy shooting at them? meaning, would they have been able to go room-to-room, clearing, and if so, what the heck did they use? He was pretty certain it would have to be something major, and if not a missile, VERY well placed explosives. If the police have either missiles or C4 or military-grade TNT, that's a big problem!

I wonder if they will ever come clean on exactly what was done.

Somebody filmed it. My guess is a boom with explosives attached on the front of an APC. It runs up to the house and pushes the boom into a room. Just inside the window the detonation would blow out the wall like that, leaving the roof intact. Then the APC backs up, reloads and moves forward again.

I don't know if the guy "gave up" or not, I would. Theres nothing to do but wait for the boom to be lowered, so to speak. They don't show us the tape of this because they want to do it again. This isn't unlike how they "resolved" Waco or that other dude that had explosives in his room wired to go off if someone entered.

Both times a boom was used on an APC to push into the structure.

originally posted by: Untermenschen Rebell
"We'll have to basically doze it down to the foundation."


I'm sorry, I just don't see that kind of damage.

He wants a new house.

Can't say I blame him, it does seem excessive, but a new home? lol.

Question:

Even if the damage is as you see, is this still acceptable?