Police don't have to knock, justices say

Abookamongstthemany

chopitdown wrote:

again, do you honestly think the cops are now going to ram down every door in every circumstance and not knock in every circumstance?

where is the line where they will or won't knock?

farfromglorified

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

where is the line where they will or won't knock?

Wow...kudos for the good question Abook. Most seriously.

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

Wow...kudos for the good question Abook. Most seriously.

I try.

You say that as if it was the only good thing I've ever asked/said on this board. lol

surferdude

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

where is the line where they will or won't knock?

Professional judgement. Much in the same way I'm sure much of your job depends on your professional judgement. Much like police don't pull over every speeder, they use professional judgement.

Abookamongstthemany

surferdude wrote:

Professional judgement. Much in the same way I'm sure much of your job depends on your professional judgement. Much like police don't pull over every speeder, they use professional judgement.

so which are the ones they should pull over?

farfromglorified

surferdude wrote:

Professional judgement. Much in the same way I'm sure much of your job depends on your professional judgement. Much like police don't pull over every speeder, they use professional judgement.

You're comfortable arming someone on behalf of society and then giving them "professional judgement"? Seems like the gun in their hand already contradicts the first part of that term.

miller8966

farfromglorified wrote:

You're comfortable arming someone on behalf of society and then giving them "professional judgement"? Seems like the gun in their hand already contradicts the first part of that term.

I have no problem with giving people especially law abiding citizens guns

farfromglorified

miller8966 wrote:

I have no problem with giving people especially law abiding citizens guns

And do you agree with the professional judgement comment?

MLC2006

farfromglorified wrote:

And do you agree with the professional judgement comment?

yes. it is unlikely that police are going to use this judgement to kick in a door to serve a trespassing or forgery warrant. or a bag of marijuana. or pissing in public. but when someone has a warrant for trafficking hard drugs (these are usually the ones with guns) or someone with a long and violent history, I'm all for the 'professional judgement' that calls for kicking the door in without knocking.

chopitdown

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

where is the line where they will or won't knock?

do they ram every door down now? why would they start doing that now. The last things cops need is to put even more questions in peoples mind and have people more suspect of them than they already are. They will ram down the wrong doors a few times and there would be such a public outcry for busting down the door's of people every time. And as i saw surferdude answer...they are professionals and they are allowed judgement.

chopitdown

MLC2006 wrote:

yes. it is unlikely that police are going to use this judgement to kick in a door to serve a trespassing or forgery warrant. or a bag of marijuana. or pissing in public. but when someone has a warrant for trafficking hard drugs (these are usually the ones with guns) or someone with a long and violent history, I'm all for the 'professional judgement' that calls for kicking the door in without knocking.

well said.

farfromglorified

MLC2006 wrote:

yes. it is unlikely that police are going to use this judgement to kick in a door to serve a trespassing or forgery warrant. or a bag of marijuana. or pissing in public.

Why not? You've completely sanctioned the behavior if you simply think it's is a matter of "professional judgement". If your entire belief rests on a hope that this won't be used in those situation, I suspect you'll end up being disappointed.

but when someone has a warrant for trafficking hard drugs (these are usually the ones with guns) or someone with a long and violent history, I'm all for the 'professional judgement' that calls for kicking the door in without knocking.

Ok. Would you therefore be willing to codify that, rather than making it a matter of "professional judgement"? Otherwise you're just setting up a contradiction in the statment above by basically saying:

"I'm all for professional judgement if that judgement matches my own standards" -- that doesn't make much sense.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

"I'm all for professional judgement if that judgement matches my own standards" -- that doesn't make much sense.

I'm all for professional judgement if that judgement is from people who are more trained than I, more knowledgeable than I and more experiened than I, and are legally allowed to make those decisions. That's why it's PROFESSIONAL judgement and not the avg publics judgement.

farfromglorified

chopitdown wrote:

I'm all for professional judgement if that judgement is from people who are more trained than I, more knowledgeable than I and more experiened than I, and are legally allowed to make those decisions. That's why it's PROFESSIONAL judgement and not the avg publics judgement.

I'm all for professional judgement too...for professionals who earn their money based on mutual exchange.

I'm not all for professional judgement for a man whose job it is to potentially hold a gun in my face (or your face) supposedly based on our own interests.

You all seem to be advocating two conflicting interests here: the law, and professional judgment. You can't have both.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

I'm all for professional judgement too...for professionals who earn their money based on mutual exchange.

I'm not all for professional judgement for a man whose job it is to potentially hold a gun in my face (or your face) supposedly based on our own interests.

You all seem to be advocating two conflicting interests here: the law, and professional judgment. You can't have both.

I'm sure some police will take this as open license to kick down every door; but i'm willing to bet that most aren't going to abuse this change in procedure.

I am definitely for professional judgement for a man whose job allows tehm to possibly hold a gun in my face. That man also is allowed to make a professional judgement on whether or not simply ask me a question, talk with me to get more information and then he can determine (professional judgement) if he needs to make an arrest or if a warning is better off. I may have a different definition for professional judgement but police are professionals and they are allowed decisions b/c of that. It so happens their decisions can be life and death...but i'd venture to say that most of their decisions on the day to day things are far from pulling guns.

The law and professional judgement always play together. Ask a doctor, lawyer, surveyor, architecht.

surferdude

farfromglorified wrote:

You all seem to be advocating two conflicting interests here: the law, and professional judgment. You can't have both.

Wrong. You can certainly apply professional judgement while upholding the law. Millions of professional people use professional judgement everyday in their professional life. They don't require a rulebook for how to go about every moment of their job. But they are held accountable for lapses in their professional judgement.

Just because you give somebody the ability to use professional judgement does not mean they are not accountable for their actions.

farfromglorified

chopitdown wrote:

I'm sure some police will take this as open license to kick down every door; but i'm willing to bet that most aren't going to abuse this change in procedure.

Ok. Kicking down one door in error is enough for me.

I am definitely for professional judgement for a man whose job allows tehm to possibly hold a gun in my face. That man also is allowed to make a professional judgement on whether or not simply ask me a question, talk with me to get more information and then he can determine (professional judgement) if he needs to make an arrest or if a warning is better off. I may have a different definition for professional judgement but police are professionals and they are allowed decisions b/c of that. It so happens their decisions can be life and death...but i'd venture to say that most of their decisions on the day to day things are far from pulling guns.

If I'm going to pay for the gun, pay for the uniform, pay for the badge, pay for the man, I'll be damned if I'm going to allow his judgement to determine his rights to use them.

The law and professional judgement always play together. Ask a doctor, lawyer, surveyor, architecht.

But the difference is I can choose my doctor, my lawyer, my surveyor, my architect. I am not at the mercy of those professionals. We have not allowed doctors to hold a monopoly on medical knowledge. We have not allowed lawyers to hold a monopoly on the law. We have not allowed surveyors to hold a monopoly on where our property lines are drawn. We have not allowed architects to hold a monopoly on the laws of physics.

We have allowed the police to hold a monopoly on force.

farfromglorified

surferdude wrote:

Wrong. You can certainly apply professional judgement while upholding the law. Millions of professional people use professional judgement everyday in their professional life. They don't require a rulebook for how to go about every moment of their job. But they are held accountable for lapses in their professional judgement.

See above response on "millions of professional people".

Just because you give somebody the ability to use professional judgement does not mean they are not accountable for their actions.

On what grounds do you hold them accountable?

surferdude

farfromglorified wrote:

We have allowed the police to hold a monopoly on force.

We have a military. We have several seperate law enforcement groups. Law enforcement groups all have oversight type committees. We have a constitution right to bear arms. The law does not stop you from using force.

Police can use force to kick in a door. If they are found to have used poor professional judgement in doing so they will be held accountable for their actions. You can kick in the same door if you so desire and if you are found guilty of breaking a law you will be held accountable for your actions. The option to use force is there for us all to use. The accountability for using said force is there on any who use it.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

Ok. Kicking down one door in error is enough for me.].

they are also human don't forget, i understand what you're saying but it's also not a reasonable expectation, imo...if they kick down the wrong door they are held accountable it's not like cops can do whatever they want and get away with it.

farfromglorified wrote:

If I'm going to pay for the gun, pay for the uniform, pay for the badge, pay for the man, I'll be damned if I'm going to allow his judgement to determine his rights to use them.

You do every day. And everyday his judgement is used to not harm you unless you have given him reason.

farfromglorified wrote:

But the difference is I can choose my doctor, my lawyer, my surveyor, my architect. I am not at the mercy of those professionals. We have not allowed doctors to hold a monopoly on medical knowledge. We have not allowed lawyers to hold a monopoly on the law. We have not allowed surveyors to hold a monopoly on where our property lines are drawn. We have not allowed architects to hold a monopoly on the laws of physics.

but we have allowed doctors (and other health care workers) to hold a monopoly on applying medical knowledge. WE have allowed lawyers to hold a monopoly on practicing law. The law allows professionals to act in a certain way, that's just how it is. The law restricts certain activities to certain people.

farfromglorified wrote:

We have allowed the police to hold a monopoly on force.

that's right, the police also know that which is why they should take even greater precaution in executing their own professional judgment...if they excercise poor judgement they can lose that ability and privaledge to make those decisions. There is a series of checks and balances with all professions. Cops aren't immune from discipline.