Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "Shock: Texas Jury Sides with Marijuana Grower Who Killed SWAT Officer" video.

  1. Why? Because it's easier to track your gun if it's legal gun. Also they weren't there to capture him. They were there to get evidence of him growing/dealing drugs. You just don't go and ask them to come out and surrender when they can flush all the drugs from the toilet and then cops would have no case against them in court. Try at least using your brain bit before calling someone idiot. Irony is too great in here. Edit: Personally If I would be criminal I would just laugh, destroy evidences and come out and surrender. Then get free the moment police sees that there are no evidences any more at the house. You might be stupid enough to just come out and leave evidences there for them to pick them up.
    1
  2. ***** Being known drug dealer isn't enough evidence to be judged as guilty by jury. You need hard evidence. Aka stuff which most likely is in his own house. And only way you can access to those stuff is by getting to his house. Now how you're suppose to get the evidence if you kindly knock the door and wait outside until criminal has already destroyed the evidence which could condem into ass rape in jail. Informant isn't enough to convict someone. If that would be true then I could call police and be informat who claims that you sell drugs and you would be in jail no matter did you have them or not.
    1
  3. Hezekiah Ramirez It's not me using the word, it's your friend who is trying to make case that just being "known drug dealer" is enough evidence to be thrown in to jail. The left wing friend of yours using it here. I'm just saying that just being "known drug dealer" isn't enough for conviction but it's enough for raid to see is it true or not.
    1
  4. ***** They said he had legal gun, not stolen. Also you can use chemical tables to destroy those plants heck or just burn them. They sure can smell some of it but if they can't get a hold of it they really have no evidence. You guys are basically saying. Police should let criminals go away. Because your magical thinking that criminals have to surrender when police says so doesn't really work in real life. Also it was clear that he was prepared for a stand off since he shot a police in the first place. Either way cops have higher chance to die or losing the evidence and subject.
    1
  5. ***** Your point of article is irrelevant since I were talking about legal arm. Which he did infact have. Having a stolen weapon makes this action from SWAT even more approtive because he might also be weapon dealer. Or weapon used to commit murders since harder to track. "Chemical tables(?) burning leaves ash which can be analysed. " What is there to analysed? Really you do know what ash is? How do you come to conclusion that ash is indeed from pot instead of something else? The tech you see in movies doesn't exists in real life. "All I said was, bursting unannounced through the door of a known armed man, who may be paranoid about being robbed, was NOT the way to bring about a safe arrest." If he is ready to kill a robbed what makes you think he isn't ready to kill a police which would make him to be in prison for multiple years? Also how do you even mix someone with SWAT gear to a normal robber? That is just nonsensical, especially since they are trained to tell person to surrender and get down to the floor instead of shooting them on sight. Robber would've shot him on the spot. "The police put themselves at risk and one died for 5 pounds of grass, and a man got away with murder just because the police wanted to be macho men, like on TV," So you're having idea that SWAT does this just for fun? First of all SWAT is group of police which is suppose to take care of potentially dangerous criminals, not normal police officers. Send normal police officer there and he would've died with much higher chance. Question here isn't did he get out of murder or not, but is it fair that police do it like this. In any other case that guy would've gotten away with that little amount of grass if he just did wash it away. So you're not really giving any solutions. You're basically saying, they give small time criminal enough time to get rid of evidence since according to you it wasn't much he had.  You're not giving any tips how to caught a criminal like that in any better means with more efficiency.
    1
  6. Should it really be violent military route? Yes, many drug dealers are also part of a gangs and if you don't do it in this way you easily get every officer slaughtered and gang get's away. Also police usually yells when they are in that everyone get down etc. Not to mention people who take drugs are highly unpredictable and usually stronger if on drugs due them not able to feel pain in normal way. You guys really aren't offering real option for this. It's either get every law officer killed and criminals get away or law officers are allowed to be bit more rough. The reason why we can't have nice things is because criminals and assholes exists. Sure in perfect world where there would be no violent criminals in the first place, police might knock the door and come in for a tea.
    1