Page 1 of 1

Was it really worth it?

PostPosted: Mon May 17, 2010 3:32 pm
by Panther
You'll have to go read the entire story, but there are a few things that caught my attention. They're listed after the link...

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/7-year-old-shot-and-killed-by-dpd

DETROIT - DETROIT (AP) -- Seven-year-old Aiyana Jones was asleep on the living room sofa in her family's apartment when Detroit police searching for a homicide suspect burst in and an officer's gun went off, fatally striking the girl in the neck, family members say.


1) "...an officer's gun went off..." WTF?!?! Forget what you think you know about firearms, guns don't just "go off"! And if it was holstered, then it would have struck the officer, not a 7 year old child. If it was not holstered, a confrontation was expected...

2) They were searching the house for a suspect in a homicide and they had a warrant. How does endangering an innocent 7 year old child become acceptable even under those circumstances?

3) There was "some level of physical contact" with a 46 year old woman in the house. If you raid a house at nearly 1AM, start the raid with a flash-bang grenade, and kick in the front door, don't you expect to encounter disoriented, confused people instinctively fighting back to protect their home and family?

4) The homicide suspect was caught in the house, but was it really worth the life of an innocent 7 year old? Whatever happened to "we believe the suspect is hiding at this residence, surround the residence, secure the safety of innocent people, WAIT for the suspect to come out OR knock on the door and execute the warrant to insure the safety of innocent people inside"?

5) What do YOU think?

PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 6:23 pm
by Panther
Well some folks voted in the poll. Interesting results actually. But no one wanted to make a comment on the story. Interesting again...

PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 3:07 am
by Jason Rees
Detroit schools are incompetent. Their mayor was jailed. The Detroit Police Dept killing an innocent girl? I'm shocked. Truly. :roll:

Should the DPD engage in raids of this kind to apprehend dangerous people? I think they should. Should training and performance reviews eliminate stupidity? I think they should. Do I ever expect the DPD to get their act together? Not really. Detroit is the armpit of Michigan. 'Nuff said.

I didn't like any of the poll answers.

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 2:41 pm
by Panther
Jason Rees wrote:I didn't like any of the poll answers.


So what would you have liked to see for a poll answer?

Would your position be along the lines of:

"Yes, but it wasn't the police's fault?"

Or something else?

I do realize that my own bias was in the poll answers and tried to say as much in the original post.

Do you believe that the only option to apprehend the suspect was the 12:30 AM forced entry raid? Was there some other way to do this that would have not put innocent children in harm's way?

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 3:53 pm
by Jason Rees
Of course there was another option: the dangerous felon should not have been staying there. Another possibility is mandating better training and accountability for police tactics.

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 4:09 pm
by Panther
Jason Rees wrote:Of course there was another option: the dangerous felon should not have been staying there.


I could agree with an innocent adult who decided to remain in the house rather than either leave or make the perp leave being viewed somehow as "collateral damage" in that case, but...

An innocent 7-year-old child, by any stretch of imagination does not have either the understanding of the situation or the ability to act.

Another possibility is mandating better training and accountability for police tactics.


Why is it necessary to have a dynamic entry in a situation where children are present rather than waiting and picking up adults as they are safely outside away from the children?

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 7:45 pm
by Jason Rees
If you are seen, or they're tipped off, you end up with a hostage situation, which is even more dangerous for the innocents involved.

Pre-emptive entry should always be an option, IF the training regime is adequate.

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 8:05 pm
by Panther
That answers why you believe dynamic entry is needed, but I'm not sure I agree that it is necessary at all. I can't agree with tossing flash-bangs into a home where children are and I don't believe that the occupants would take their own family hostage either. It seems that simply picking up adults as they head out to run errands or go to work, and waiting for children to be out of the house for school or with adults is much safer than a dynamic entry... for everyone involved. I just don't see the need for kicking in someones door with guns drawn when there are innocent children around. I would expect any reasonable person to react to protect their home and family from the intruders.

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 8:08 pm
by Jason Rees
I think Detroit SWAT/PD needs to cease and desist until they can fix their training/performance issues.

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 8:12 pm
by Panther
I agree with that, but I would expand it to every PD across the country. I still think there are ways to apprehend a suspect without the police endangering innocent children. But don't misunderstand... if the suspect is in any way threatening innocent children, then neutralize the threat.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 12:12 am
by Jason Rees
I don't think it's a national problem. LAPD, NYPD, those guys set the standard, and I think most departments listen and emulate. Detroit... Ugh. They're 'special.'

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 3:21 am
by Panther
LAPD & NYPD have both had their own major problems over the years. I'm not so sure that's the highest standard tolive up to. I still think that protecting the lives of children is more important than being macho and throwing flash-bangs into a house that is known to contain children. Then again, I guess the collateral damage for children has become "acceptable" since Waco. I just happen to disagree that collateral damage of children can ever be acceptable. Harm a child, pay the price. But that's the Daddy in me talking.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 5:55 am
by Jason Rees
I don't think the girl's death was acceptable. I place the blame fully on the officer whose gun went off, and the training and rating program officers that deemed him qualified to be part of that kind of operation.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 1:04 pm
by Panther
Thanks Jason. I agree completely. IMNSHO, there are far too many who feel that they or their compatriots are qualified and that puts too many innocents in harm's way unnecessarily. Like I said, it's the Daddy in me that, even tho I have no relation to this child whatsoever, goes through the emotional roller-coaster when I hear of preventable things such as this. I get sad, then mad... tho nothing can be done to "make it right" at this point. I just can't help but think how I'd feel if it were my child. Then again, I wouldn't be willingly having a fugitive as a house-guest, especially where it could put my children in danger.

Take care...