The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Ooops: San Antonio SWAT hits the wrong house

mrat · November 30, 2002, 03:16 AM

They were discussing no-knocks specifically in relationship to drug busts, because the conference was focused on police ethics re the drug war.

You just confirmed the point I made when I said this: "As I already said I think it is possible you are equating no knocks to all "normal" forced entries and these chiefs were talking specifically about no knocks."

1) You don't like Joe McNamara and assumed he said it.

Sigh. I never said I thought McNamara said it. I simply said I didn't like him.

3) They still do no-knocks or forced entries, or something like that, but you aren't able to discuss the policies under which they do them, if any.

I am supposed to get a SJPD policy manual and post relevent sections on the internet? Okay. And where is your postings of relevent policies under which they DON'T do any kind of forced entries?. And no, their chief saying he doesn't want his officers doing no knocks that are conected to the WOD count as a blanket no forced entries policy. How I know they still do forced entries is from working with their guys when I was still working up there and from still keeping in touch with some of them. Honestly I don't know if they do no knocks that are connected to the WOD, I doubt it if their chief specifically stated he is against it.

I can see why you don't want to cut and paste. You weren't addressing the issues, anyway.

The issue I am addressing is this conference that you sated you attended. I have seen you post about this conference several times here and at Glocktalk. What you were posting about what was said by all these LEO brass did not sound right to me so I wanted to ask some questions of you to get some clarification. I am actually sorry I did because you are a bit touchy about being asked about it, I quess people should just take what you say as gospel. But I did get the clarification I wanted. By your own admission this presentation was about no knocks specifically in regards to the WOD, not "regular" warrants, forced entries, etc. The problem was that your previous posts on this conference state that these chiefs were against ALL forced entries. Now that I know what was actually being said I understand what they were talking about and what their concerns were.

November 30, 2002, 03:16 AM	#122
mrat Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 2000 Posts: 863	They were discussing no-knocks specifically in relationship to drug busts, because the conference was focused on police ethics re the drug war. You just confirmed the point I made when I said this: "As I already said I think it is possible you are equating no knocks to all "normal" forced entries and these chiefs were talking specifically about no knocks." 1) You don't like Joe McNamara and assumed he said it. Sigh. I never said I thought McNamara said it. I simply said I didn't like him. 3) They still do no-knocks or forced entries, or something like that, but you aren't able to discuss the policies under which they do them, if any. I am supposed to get a SJPD policy manual and post relevent sections on the internet? Okay. And where is your postings of relevent policies under which they DON'T do any kind of forced entries?. And no, their chief saying he doesn't want his officers doing no knocks that are conected to the WOD count as a blanket no forced entries policy. How I know they still do forced entries is from working with their guys when I was still working up there and from still keeping in touch with some of them. Honestly I don't know if they do no knocks that are connected to the WOD, I doubt it if their chief specifically stated he is against it. I can see why you don't want to cut and paste. You weren't addressing the issues, anyway. The issue I am addressing is this conference that you sated you attended. I have seen you post about this conference several times here and at Glocktalk. What you were posting about what was said by all these LEO brass did not sound right to me so I wanted to ask some questions of you to get some clarification. I am actually sorry I did because you are a bit touchy about being asked about it, I quess people should just take what you say as gospel. But I did get the clarification I wanted. By your own admission this presentation was about no knocks specifically in regards to the WOD, not "regular" warrants, forced entries, etc. The problem was that your previous posts on this conference state that these chiefs were against ALL forced entries. Now that I know what was actually being said I understand what they were talking about and what their concerns were.