None of the police who murdered a girl in her sleep will be charged with a crime

[Madner Kami]

The whole process of the warrant and procedure involved with it seems pretty shot.

I don't know the intricacies behind what caused the warrant, except for what was written about it publically. At first glance, the reasoning behind it is a bit shoddy though, which is that her criminal ex-BF used her adress, possibly without her knowledge or consent. If that is the case, then I see an intelligence-failure at work here.

Apparently the warrant was invalid and supposed to be a knock-knock instead of letting themselves in. The fact that it was 1 AM is kind of weird too.

This is the first time someone says that the warrant was invalid and demanded a knocking. Every other source I read so far was, that the warrent was legal and a no-knock warrant. That it's 1am is not wierd at all. If your perp is known to be armed or violent, then you best use an element of surprise, a situation where your target is likely not fully prepared or able to react "properly" (aka organize a defense; flee due to seeing the police lining up; conceal a weapon in clothing or call backup). It's very sound reasoning.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but surely the first thing they teach you when learning to shoot a firearm is to make sure that you have identified your target before you fire?

It's the US, you know the kind of place where they take their five year olds to a shooting range where they get to fire miniguns... That, plus the police's carte blanche, which's name I forgot and can't find right now. It's a society were "Shoot first! Ask questions later!" is the sensible approach...

[G-Man]

From what I understand, it was a no-knock warrant but they knocked anyway.

[G-Man]

Where would you say the extensive after-the-fact police cover up falls into this? Claiming their were no injuries, denying her medical attention, etc?

Please remember that, whenever you defend this, you are arguing for a world where the police can, legally, storm into your house in the middle of the night and kill you in your sleep.

I'd have to check into what exactly was done after the fact.

And I am not defending the raid. I am just saying that the problems with the raid were not necessarily the fault of the people on the ground conducting the raid. The situation that led to this may have been created entirely by others; did the people serving the warrant even make the decision as to when to serve the warrant?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but surely the first thing they teach you when learning to shoot a firearm is to make sure that you have identified your target before you fire?

It's the US, you know the kind of place where they take their five year olds to a shooting range where they get to fire miniguns... That, plus the police's carte blanche, which's name I forgot and can't find right now. It's a society were "Shoot first! Ask questions later!" is the sensible approach...

I feel like this sums a lot of stuff up. It's problematic, to say the absolute least. Like I was saying, the domain of property makes for rather volatile authoritarian conditions.

Mind you though that this is precisely a reason why 1 AM is a stupid idea. The government knows this and absolutely takes this kind of stuff into consideration with their public affairs.

Apparently the warrant was invalid and supposed to be a knock-knock instead of letting themselves in. The fact that it was 1 AM is kind of weird too.

This is the first time someone says that the warrant was invalid and demanded a knocking. Every other source I read so far was, that the warrent was legal and a no-knock warrant. That it's 1am is not wierd at all. If your perp is known to be armed or violent, then you best use an element of surprise, a situation where your target is likely not fully prepared or able to react "properly" (aka organize a defense; flee due to seeing the police lining up; conceal a weapon in clothing or call backup). It's very sound reasoning.

Sorry. There was a warrant that was changed from no-knock to knock-and-announce. All accounts seem to point to the police knocking, but the announcement part is in dispute.

[Draco Dracul]

https://www.aol.com/grand-jury-decision-breonna-taylor-183812872.html

This nation is much better at cracking down on people who protest the murder of a young woman in her sleep than it is on holding the people who murdered her to account in any way.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54273317

They were charged with wanton endangerment, which is an act that shows a reckless disregard for human life. This is different to manslaughter which is an act of killing someone without malice, and murder which is the act of killing someone with malice.

The reason for this decision is because they were aiming at the guy next to her WHO WAS FIRING AT THEM and missed. The way you and others like you keep on describing this incident is that the police entered her room and just executed her in her bed for no reason. This is nothing more than yet another tragic example of why your gun saturated country is a terrible idea.

Make me an argument as to why this was manslaughter or murder and also make me an argument what the police should have done differently when coming under fire. Because I am not seeing it.

Let's flip the script.

What was the man supposed to do when a bunch of armed strangers burst into his home without announcing themselves? What was he supposed to think? What was Breanna Taylor supposed to do to not end up dead?

How could the people who were just living in their home supposed to do so that they aren't gunned down in the course of their law-abiding lives? What would YOU do in their situation?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but surely the first thing they teach you when learning to shoot a firearm is to make sure that you have identified your target before you fire? If you are close enough to fire then you are close enough to see the police uniforms.

You know what I am reminded of here? Oscar Pistorius. He tried that defence too when he shot his wife through their own bathroom door.
''I thought that there was a burglar in my house. I was defending myself!!''
''Ah, so you didn't notice that your wife was no longer beside you in bed? And you didn't make any attempt at all to work out who was actually inside that bathroom before you fired?''
''Um...''
''You did it. Case closed.''

Kentucky is a castle doctrine state, they broke into his house without announcing themselves as cops, he was entirely within his rights to fire at them.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Please remember that, whenever you defend this, you are arguing for a world where the police can, legally, storm into your house in the middle of the night and kill you in your sleep.

The cause of death is the guy shooting at the police and the police retaliating in kind. I doubt anyone would've died if the guy hadn't held a gun in his hands.

No I think the cause of death is the police shooting a sleeping woman in the head.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

https://www.aol.com/grand-jury-decision-breonna-taylor-183812872.html

This nation is much better at cracking down on people who protest the murder of a young woman in her sleep than it is on holding the people who murdered her to account in any way.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54273317

They were charged with wanton endangerment, which is an act that shows a reckless disregard for human life. This is different to manslaughter which is an act of killing someone without malice, and murder which is the act of killing someone with malice.

The reason for this decision is because they were aiming at the guy next to her WHO WAS FIRING AT THEM and missed. The way you and others like you keep on describing this incident is that the police entered her room and just executed her in her bed for no reason. This is nothing more than yet another tragic example of why your gun saturated country is a terrible idea.

Make me an argument as to why this was manslaughter or murder and also make me an argument what the police should have done differently when coming under fire. Because I am not seeing it.

Let's flip the script.

What was the man supposed to do when a bunch of armed strangers burst into his home without announcing themselves? What was he supposed to think? What was Breanna Taylor supposed to do to not end up dead?

How could the people who were just living in their home supposed to do so that they aren't gunned down in the course of their law-abiding lives? What would YOU do in their situation?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but surely the first thing they teach you when learning to shoot a firearm is to make sure that you have identified your target before you fire? If you are close enough to fire then you are close enough to see the police uniforms.

You mean the police that didn't identify themselves as such? And the untrained civilian who shot somebody in a leg to deter them whereas the trained professionals that emptied their chambers a la Yosemite Sam?

What you are arguing is "police should be allowed to storm into my house in the middle of the night and kill me, and be legally defended for it."

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

We're not blaming police for being human. We're blaming them for acting like feral animals.

The advice for dealing with police is the same advice you'd get for dealing with a possibly-rabid racoon or a bear. Don't make any threatening moves, stay back, avoid startling them, etc.

The difference is that when a rabid dog bites somebody, it doesn't get put on administrative leave.

[Makeshift Python]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but surely the first thing they teach you when learning to shoot a firearm is to make sure that you have identified your target before you fire? If you are close enough to fire then you are close enough to see the police uniforms.

My understanding is that they were not wearing uniforms. They were plainclothes. If a bunch of strange men broke into your home armed with guns and you owned a gun, what would your response be?

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Make me an argument as to why this was manslaughter or murder and also make me an argument what the police should have done differently when coming under fire. Because I am not seeing it.

Okay, someone comes into your house and murders your girlfriend. They're not wearing uniforms, you're not guilty of a crime, you're not actually associated with the criminal, the reason they're coming isn't there [no drugs], and the criminal they're seeking evidence against is already in jail.

Are you supposed to take it?

If so, what kind of man are you?

Seconded.