That's some fine police work Lou

http://www.13wmaz.com/story/news/local/dublin/2014/12/10/david-hooks-shot-twice-in-back/20213383/

There are many stories like this every year, why are cops allowed to do this with impunity?

from another source:

The facts submitted to Deputy Magistrate Snell to convince her that probable cause existed to issue the warrant consisted of the statement by Rodney Garrett a confessed burglar, thief, and a meth addict who was under the influence at the time of his arrest that the approximately 20 grams of methamphetamine, a digital scale, and 2 firearms found on him at the time of arrest had been stolen by him out of another vehicle at the Hooks home.

Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but:

In September, authorities say Hooks responded to the search by getting a weapon before he was shot. But according to the return search warrant, the shotgun Hooks had in his hands had no ammunition.
I interpret this as meaning that they got a search warrant and entered the home. He grabs a shot gun. Now, ammunition or not, I’d bet money that if you point a shotgun at a bunch of armed cops you are going to get shot. More than once.

http://www.13wmaz.com/story/news/local/dublin/2014/12/10/david-hooks-shot-twice-in-back/20213383/

FIFY
.

Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but:

In September, authorities say Hooks responded to the search by getting a weapon before he was shot. But according to the return search warrant, the shotgun Hooks had in his hands had no ammunition.
I interpret this as meaning that they got a search warrant and entered the home. He grabs a shot gun. Now, ammunition or not, I’d bet money that if you point a shotgun at a bunch of armed cops you are going to get shot. More than once.

Why were the cops given a no-knock warrant based on information from a meth addict burglar who said, when caught with meth and drug paraphernalia, that the stole it from Hook’s house? Seriously?

17 shots fired, four of which hit Hooks, and two of those were fired when he was face down on the floor.

So the police storm the house of an innocent man based on the say so of a criminal drug addict and kill the homeowner and nobody has a problem with this?

Simply put, this is the state murdering one of its citizens and it’s not an isolated case.

So the police storm the house of an innocent man based on the say so of a criminal drug addict and kill the homeowner and nobody has a problem with this?

Have you not heard, there’s a war on drugs and in all wars there are civilian casualties.

I don’t get the whole “Knock your door down with guns drawn” etc etc. I don’t care who you are if someone comes blasting into your house you’re going to do what you can to protect yourself, drug dealer or not. We’ve basically trained our police to act the same way is if they are in a war, becuase we have in fact elevated “The war on drugs” to a level of war.

I would bet dollars to donuts that the percentage of suspected drug dealers that would just start blazing away at a cop at a door is FAR less then the percentage that would do so if someone came busting in unannounced. The whole point of such excercise is to create a situation where the police have the advantage of surprise in the conflict rather then allowing the criminal to do so. That being said I’d like to see the numbers where police where shot at without the element of surprise.

~Matt