Amir Locke was ‘executed’ by Minneapolis police during no-knock raid

[km1125]

There is certainly an argument that can be made relative to the 'no knock' warrants, and whether they are indeed necessary relative to the 4th Amendment considerations. Perhaps changes need to be made in how and when they are authorized. I'm not sure of the exact policies in MN on when and how these are attained.

However, once issued, the cops responsible for pulling it off are put into an extremely risky situation and deserve every ounce of restraint in judgement until an investigation is completed. Unless they have done something egregious, no charges should even be filed.

[FakeAndyStuart]

Punctuation is important.

Only when you want to nit pick. I'm trying to understand where you are coming from, and you're trying to batter me into agreeing with you. I'm very concerned about the state of violence in America, and if you want police to be respected and trusted, you have to address matters like this. I can't brush them off because they are over reported. Crimes committed by undocumented aliens are also way over reported, but that doesn't mean we don't have a problem that has to be addressed.

you also suggest that just being a good guy with a gun is not enough. Should training be required before you qualify to own one?

"Required"? No. I believe such a requirement would violate the 2nd Amendment. You have the right to "Keep and bear arms." That means that mere possession is a right, as is bearing your arm. Nowhere are either of those rights contingent on training. This would be akin to asking me if I believe sensitivity training should be required before I can exercise my First Amendment right to free speech.

But exercising your First Amendment rights don't kill people.

Is there any common ground / common sense discussion about guns in America with you and those who hold similar opinions. Here's my take - yes, the Second Amendment protects your right to "bear arms" - any chance of discussion what that meant in 1776? The Constitution also said that a black person were 3/5 of a person... after some serious incidents we changed that. I'm sure there were a lot of people who were just as diehard as you about their rights to "own someone else". Why does every discussion about guns end with "Second Amendment"?

I believe that one of the biggest dividers in this country today is the inability to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I'm willing to hear what you have to say and consider the fact that I'm not 100% right. I'm a firm believer in the "third solution" - your side, my side, and a "third side" that helps us solve the problem and can be considered a win win. Are you willing to meet there?

[Lester The Nightfly]

Likewise, you can't use the existence of some bad apples in the force to categorically refer to police as a group as "piggies." Your use of that word makes you as much of a bigot as would anybody be deemed a racist for calling all black people by the N-word every time a black person burns, riots, loots, or shoots people.

One is a comment about vocation, something one has a choice in life about. The other is about ethnicity which no choice is afforded. That's the difference chump.

[bmw]

Likewise, you can't use the existence of some bad apples in the force to categorically refer to police as a group as "piggies." Your use of that word makes you as much of a bigot as would anybody be deemed a racist for calling all black people by the N-word every time a black person burns, riots, loots, or shoots people.

One is a comment about vocation, something one has a choice in life about. The other is about ethnicity which no choice is afforded. That's the difference chump.

That distinction is irrelevant and quite frankly a red herring to my point. My point is that within ANY group of people, regardless of how you want to group them, is going to be some bad apples. Your concept of "no choice afforded" applies to the good cops who have no choice in the matter of OTHER cops behaving badly any more than one black person has any choice in another black person behaving badly. You have chosen time and again to insult ALL police officers based on the actions of a few. That, by definition, is bigotry (see the phrase "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group").

[bmw]

Punctuation is important.

Only when you want to nit pick. I'm trying to understand where you are coming from, and you're trying to batter me into agreeing with you. I'm very concerned about the state of violence in America, and if you want police to be respected and trusted, you have to address matters like this. I can't brush them off because they are over reported. Crimes committed by undocumented aliens are also way over reported, but that doesn't mean we don't have a problem that has to be addressed.

you also suggest that just being a good guy with a gun is not enough. Should training be required before you qualify to own one?

"Required"? No. I believe such a requirement would violate the 2nd Amendment. You have the right to "Keep and bear arms." That means that mere possession is a right, as is bearing your arm. Nowhere are either of those rights contingent on training. This would be akin to asking me if I believe sensitivity training should be required before I can exercise my First Amendment right to free speech.

But exercising your First Amendment rights don't kill people.

Is there any common ground / common sense discussion about guns in America with you and those who hold similar opinions. Here's my take - yes, the Second Amendment protects your right to "bear arms" - any chance of discussion what that meant in 1776? The Constitution also said that a black person were 3/5 of a person... after some serious incidents we changed that. I'm sure there were a lot of people who were just as diehard as you about their rights to "own someone else". Why does every discussion about guns end with "Second Amendment"?

I believe that one of the biggest dividers in this country today is the inability to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I'm willing to hear what you have to say and consider the fact that I'm not 100% right. I'm a firm believer in the "third solution" - your side, my side, and a "third side" that helps us solve the problem and can be considered a win win. Are you willing to meet there?

If you're looking for a simple answer, there isn't one. I don't believe that it is the guns that are the problem. No amount of government legislation can fix culture rot. Man, as a species, inherently has bad apples. Always has, always will. And it seems that as culture gets more complex with modern times, these bad apples come out of the woodwork.

[paul8539]

All the police have to do is claim 'necessary force'. That is it. You are not allowed to argue.