Poll: Should Police Officers Face Murder Charges When An Innocent Suspect Is Killed?
For many years I’ve written about, and discussed on my show, police abuses. It’s the single greatest threat to our liberty. Unfortunately, there is still a large segment of the population (my industry in particular) who will defend a police officer who crosses the line simply because they are a cop. How very naive, dangerous, and un-American. Yet every time I bring up the issue of a police officer violating the law, or someone’s rights, I have to endure the hate mail and phone calls from people accusing me of hating the police. A baseless and false accusation.
I know many police officers who support my view, but are not able to speak up for fear of retribution in their careers. There’s even an organization that gives these good officers support. The fact of the matter is, no honest and decent officer would support police abuse. Any officer who does run to support such abuse, should be cast aside as an abuser themselves. Clearly, there is something wrong with their head.
Here’s why I’m writing this today.
A Marine who was fatally shot in his Arizona home earlier this month reportedly never fired upon the SWAT team that fired at him 70 times.
Jose Guerena, a 26-year-old father of two and veteran of the Iraq war, died on May 5 in his home near Tucson, Ariz., during an anti-drug police raid. Authorities initially reported that they thought Guerena fired upon them, but an investigation revealed that no shots were fired, ABC News reports.
Not only did he never fire at the officers, but his house was not involved in the drug ring police alleged. In other words, the police murdered an innocent man. The circumstances, and police suspicion are all irrelevant. The facts are that they got the wrong guy, at the wrong house, and killed a man who did not fire at them. A scenario that would have anyone else charged with murder, or manslaughter at the very least.
The five SWAT team members remain on active duty. No criminal charges have been filed and no disciplinary action taken.
This trend is getting particularly concerning because of the recent Indiana Supreme Court ruling that you have no right to resist an officer illegally entering your home. The US Constitution, of course, disagrees. This court only upheld the standing policy around the country that you are not allowed to resist law enforcement. I railed on that issue after hearing abominable comments by people with no conviction.
Police are also taking away your right to take pictures and video of them in public.
Again, nothing new. However, the trend is getting so common that people are finally starting to speak out against it. We have a government that tells us they can record us, install GPS devices on our cars and the like because we have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public. Yet they tell us their civil rights are being violated if we record them in public. FYI, if an officer has any recording devices on their person or car, they have already submitted to being recorded. It’s called implied consent, and the source of the recording is of no consequence.
Here in Vegas there have been several police shootings that have been controversial. Some are flat out inexcusable, but charges against the officers who perpetrated the crime are almost as rare as seeing a Dodo bird. The military charges its people who illegally shoot someone, why don’t police departments?
I know it seems a little off topic to discuss police shooting family pets, but its the hypocrisy of the law I’m illustrating.
I’ve harped on police officers unjustifiably killing family pets countless times. Here in Vegas it’s fairly common. I’ve talked about the police officers who illegally entered a yard after being told to wait until the dogs were secured by the owner, and their subsequent shooting of both dogs. Police were looking for a tagger they never had contact with. In other words, they couldn’t claim they were in pursuit. The Sheriff, Doug Gillespie, told me on my show that the officers would face no punishment because they have the right to use force if they feel threatened. The fact that they were illegally trespassing after being warned was irrelevant to him. This is interesting because if you shoot a police dog in Las Vegas, it’s a category D felony with a mandatory 1-4 year prison sentence.
In Missouri, a man was sentenced to 4 years for killing a police dog, but Missouri law enforcement face no punishment for their questionable killing of pets (do a Google search, you’ll know what I mean).
A justifiable shooting is just that. If there is a legitimate threat to the officer, then they should be allowed to use force. Things get murky when you have a law abiding citizen who is the victim of bad police work. You can’t just pay a settlement to the family, and say ‘stuff happens.’ Can you? If bad police work leads to the death of an innocent person, law enforcement should be held accountable. The question for you is … to what degree?
Posted on May 27, 2011, in Big Government, Censorship, Constitution, Military, Police Abuse and tagged Doug Gillespie, Indiana Supreme Court, Police, Police officer, SWAT. Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.