- Quickdraw McLaw
- 18 Comments
- 78 Views
- Sigal Chattah is representing a group of conservative activists suing over the closure of the legislative session to lobbyists. [TNI; RJ]
- Tony Hsieh’s family, represented by Dara Goldsmith, will sell nearly 100 downtown properties. [RJ]
- Nevadans age 65 and older are eligible for the vaccine next week. [RJ]
- The Nevada Legislature is considering whether to restrict no-knock warrants. [Nevada Current]
- Governor Sisolak announced the state is permitting high school sports to resume, but will CCSD join in the fun? [News3LV]
- North Las Vegas Justice Court will resume criminal hearings March 1. [NVbar]
- Should public defenders be tweeting? [Vice]
Does anyone have any recommendations for local Cantonese and Mandarin translators who work in the field (not document translation) here in Las Vegas? Also, what kind of prices should I expect?
Sending someone your way. I'll have her give your office a call and ask for you, personally. Know her personally but I have not worked with her extensively so I don't know what fee structure she has
No Knock Warrants
Yes, let's restrict no knocks. It will give the poor under privileged and uneducated criminals time to get their guns ready and flush their drugs.
More PC crap.
Damn straight.
Yeah, we don’t want to let anyone get away with any kind of drug crime by flushing them down the toilet. We balance this with giving certain elected officials and their friends every opportunity to commit crimes and obstruct justice without punishment. Seems fair, no?
11:58, you may be conflating two different things.
If something is bad or problematic it is not rendered okay because some people are getting away with far worse behavior, but behavior of an entirely different variety.
If you were saying that the average person gets screwed on drug offenses while elitist, sheltered politicians are not accountable for their illegal drug use, that might be a fair complaint as you would be complaining about the same behavior in both groups of people–illicit drug usage.
But to suggest the average person should not be accountable for drug violations because there are politicians who get away with rampant, generic corruption, the two matters and not connected.
But, yes, we do have misplaced priorities, and yes, many public officials are not held accountable for corruption.
But that is not really the best argument as to why we should be less strict about drug possession for individual usage. But, yes, we should in fact be far less stringent about it, in general.
10:54 and 10:56. I hear what you're saying and don't disagree but it's not an either/or issue. There are shades of gray.
Yes, knocking and providing notice does greatly increase the possibility of evidence disposal and, even more importantly, the suspects being able to arm themselves and fire on police.
However, in many cases where people would have actually complied and opened the door to the police if there was knock and announce, they instead get quite startled and terrified with their door being kicked in or whatever, and they fire at the invading entity.
Afterwards, when interviewed by the police they tend to report that they thought the invaders were rival gang members, or other criminals who they may have burned in a drug transaction or whatever.
Now, I understand that we need not attach much credibility to what people accused of serious crimes represent as being true, but it's clear there are problems with either approach(to knock or not to knock).
So, there's certainly problems either way. But, on balance, I vote for no requirement of knock and announce(providing we are dealing with potentially dangerous felony situations).
The following excerpt from the article regarding the bill should not be controversial or objectionable to anyone:
"The bill would prohibit no-knock warrants for misdemeanors, property crimes or simple drug possession.
Law enforcement seeking to secure a no-knock warrant for other situations would have to show a risk to public safety, explain why knocking and announcing isn’t an option, and certify a no-knock warrant is the last and only resort.
Officers carrying out no-knock warrants would also have to certify they were properly trained to exercise such a raid."
I don't favor a ban on no-knock warrants, and that is not what this bill proposes to do. Their use should be restricted to situations where there is evidence it is truly necessary.
So they create new boilerplate for the warrant request relying on "training and experience" to justify a no-knock in pretty much every instance.
This is not law enforcement's first rodeo.
You liberals are overthinking this. A no knock should not be and is not a routine warrant. It is not simply about drug crimes. They are/should be served only after careful verification of the suspect or convicted felon's whereabouts.
Sloppy verifications are not supported by anyone. Police are not the villains.
They were in Breanna Taylor's case
Breanna Taylor and her cop-shooting boyfriend were the bad guys in that case. They announced themselves and her dirtbag boyfriend opened fire, severely injuring and almost killing a cop. They returned fire, and she died. No pity for her. None. I pay taxes to keep her kind off the streets.
2:29 what exactly do you mean by "her kind"? She had no criminal record, so it really seems like there's only one other thing you could be talking about. I hope you work through those issues someday.
2:29 was okay until the last two sentences. Then it all went to shit.
2:29 you are racist garbage.
11:06 PM sounds like a little too much tipple. Easy on the juice, SJW warrior.
The term "warrior" is built into the "SJW" acronym. And calling someone an SJW is not the read you think it is, boomer.
2:29 has ED