Police SWAT team home over stolen credit card, tear down security cameras.

Hmmm.

SWAT teaming a home over a stolen credit card... Slow crime day?

Guess the peace officers need to do something in order to justify their existence. Imagine if the word got out that there are way too many cops and not nearly enough crime.

What a shock, they didnt find what they were looking for but charged the victims with some other stuff. Can you say Police State Industrial Complex?

But wait, theres more.

Once the peace officers realized that they were being recorded, they disabled the cameras...

Why bother putting the cameras out of commission if you weren't planning on doing anything that could not be filmed? That act ALONE, makes them look terribly guilty of something. They didn't find anything in the home that the warrant was issued for, so naturally they had to look for something else... can't go home empty handed after all.

I also wonder about why it took SO MANY armed cops (looking ready like SWAT) over a stolen credit card/merchandise??? You would have thought they were going into some kind of hostage situation by the looks of it.

I hope they do get into trouble for the camera issue if nothing else. If they were doing their jobs, they should not have cared about being filmed and in this day/age, I am sure at least one or two of those officers had cameras running on their person at the time. The only difference being, is that they couldn't control who saw it after the fact.

Nothing short of corruption. I've been reading up on corruption in different US states. I find many of it is due to big profits. Not that corruption of this manner didn't exist before but it seems to be growing at an exponential rate. Economy is shambles, money losses? Go lock up, fine and confiscate from people. Slow day? Make up a raid, make some big cash. Is this a norm over the board now? Cameras on every officer? It shouldn't have to be like that in the first place.

reply to post by dreamingawake


It shouldn't be that way, that's for sure. The irony of it is that they are constantly telling us that "If we don't have anything to hide, then we shouldn't mind being spied on/watched/filmed/listened to" etc. But when it comes down to it, they seem to have something against it themselves.

It's messed up on so many levels.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


In regards to the camera it could be safe to assume that they were disabled for the officers protection.. i know the first thing i'd do if i was entering a property with CCTV would be to disable any cameras i saw fit to avoid giving away my position - there's no way of telling where the video feed runs to.

There were 6 other suspects linked to the stolen card, some known to own guns and oftenly get high on methamphetamine, which is quite an unpredictable drug where the safety of the public is concerned - maybe an organised, co-ordinated SWAT raid wasn't so bad at all.

As for them going straight in there and knocking the door down - you know how much the media like to portray things in certain light (especially a source like RussiaToday who aren;t so favourable of the West), in the full CCTV feed knocks were given and ignored, followed by commotion in the house. Now if i was raiding a property where the suspects are potentially armed and watching my every move i'm going to start sweating and getting nervous the longer i have to wait for that front door to open.

No way am i pro-militarization of the police forces over in the states, but i see little wrong doing here? Heck at least they didn't shoot the dog.

(This is my first post by the way! I'll make an introductory thread as soon as i can!)

reply to post by Merces


I can concede the point about their safety concerning the cameras and the people being able to watch them using those cameras. It is a good point. On the other side of that.... had they been left running, there would be no need for an investigation. We would have been able to see exactly what happened, how it happened, and when it happened. It would have taken just a few seconds to figure out who was telling tall tales. It would have also aided the officers if they had been shot at, injured, etc. The footage would have shown who did what.

I guess this falls into "No matter how flat you make a pancake, it still has two sides" category.

BTW - Welcome to ATS.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


"Okay guys! if you see CCTV cameras pointing right at us when we surround the entrance points to the house, leave them running! Who knows, if one of us get shot then we have a definite conviction! Awesome! So whose volunteering to be shot at first?" - does that not sound like a bit too much of a gamble?

All i'm saying is these guys have to operate tactically - it would be naive to assume all SWAT officers are around to impede on your constitutional rights and what not.. i'm sure the vast majority of them are out there to protect US citizens - cutting the video feed sounds like standard textbook stuff, they're entitled to ensure their own safety too.

Whilst excessive police force is something we all really have to address and make examples of, i just don't think this house in Des Moines makes the cut - time & debate could be better spent on more profound stories of corruption that really make people start to question.

Thank you for the welcome it's nice to meet you and i look forward to hearing your views in other topics!

Policeman
CCTV cameras?!?!?!

HOW DARE YOU SPY ON US, that's for us to use on you not the other way around.

Laughable. As for the no-knock for a stolen item search? What the hell man? The use of no-knock is getting more and more on crimes of less and less severity, soon you can expect a no-knock raid for littering recorded on cameras earlier that day.

My personal opinion is more and more that regular police should not be allowed to carry firearms.

Beyond that, for every maybe 5 or 6 different police precincts, jurisdictions, or whatever they're called, all depending area of coverage and distribution of dangerous and violent crime, there could then be an extra super special unit of police that DO carry firearms that are called in as backup assistance, and only backup, where they only move in when the regular police without firearms can't manage a situation.

Above that, then there could be an even more super special SWAT type unit that's backup for the backup, but, never breaching, never first response, and only deployed when even the backup can't manage a situation.

Eh.

It's fun to think about, but, won't happen.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


A super special team that are allowed to carry guns? ...you mean like a SWAT team right? & say they get called in as 'back-up', then it sounds like a situation which requires firepower (just like the stolen credit card had guns and drugs tied to it), and then if we really needed to we could call in a super special SWAT team, a team so special they aren't allowed to breach, just stand and wait for the regular officers to exhaust all their possible options and assess that they can't handle a situation.

There are too many gun bearing american citizens to have unarmed police officers.

I think the bottom line is if you were one of those SWAT officers, you would definitely be in favour of the CCTV being cut so you could secure the house without the inhabitants knowing your movements. This is standard RT propaganda against the West, 'A Des Moines Family' - the two suspects are merely partners, i wouldn't call them a family, however that sounds more horrifying on the news now doesn't it - as you immediately jump to the conclusion children are involved, but oh there weren't.

Theft is theft at the end of the day, why are we trying to justify this meth-head thief's human rights by discussing what is deemed as 'excessive' use of force :/

reply to post by gladtobehere


The only way to stop this would be for all LEO to wear a camera or google glass any time they engage with the public. An arrest can only be made if the whole incident was recorded and available to the courts. If all officers were to wear a cam then it would be very suspicious should footage not be available. This would mean that LEO would have to behave in a way that is expected of a public servant and might remind them that they serve the public.

reply to post by flammadraco


A perfect inexpensive solution!

Merces
There were 6 other suspects linked to the stolen card, some known to own guns and oftenly get high on methamphetamine, which is quite an unpredictable drug where the safety of the public is concerned - maybe an organised, co-ordinated SWAT raid wasn't so bad at all.

....

No way am i pro-militarization of the police forces over in the states, but i see little wrong doing here? Heck at least they didn't shoot the dog.

Your background police PR story may be true .... but it's just as likely that it's fabricated.

One of the police's favorite games appears to be the amazing false police report or media report. Generally speaking, they seem to take great pride in twisting the events to something that suits their claims. Until, and unless, we have tamperproof personal cameras on each policeman, I take everything they as highly-likely misrepresentations. I don't give reports in the media by "police spokesmen" even that level of credibility.

SWAT raids for anything but hostage situations are bogus and are a real threat to public safety. We are simply dealing with highly questionable (low caliber) police management and even lower caliber of policemen.

juspassinthru

SWAT raids for anything but hostage situations are bogus and are a real threat to public safety. We are simply dealing with highly questionable (low caliber) police management and even lower caliber of policemen.

I hope i've managed to quote you correctly there, it's my first time in doing so. I highly agree with your statement, i seem to have forgotten american regular officers are already armed to the teeth, it's quite different here in the UK. You're right to be concerned about the safety of the public and get me thinking about the safety of the public too (star for that) as these raids do seem increasingly common.

Perhaps this is just the further conditioning of American citizens towards having this type of militarisation on the streets. I do feel like cases where innocent families are in fact involved should be more heavily debated and questioned though - i've little regard for people that sit around stealing credit cards and taking meth.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

I also wonder about why it took SO MANY armed cops (looking ready like SWAT) over a stolen credit card/merchandise??? You would have thought they were going into some kind of hostage situation by the looks of it.

The answer unfortunately is simple & self-evident: Because this is the new norm.

Get used to it. It's only going to get worse unless & until enough good people stand up and say "Enough!".

I'd put the chances of that happening at less than 10%.

You can now see something similar in almost every decent size city across the USA. Even run of the mill traffic stops today seem to require multiple officers in full-out assault gear. And yet, most people still say nothing.

Until the law enforcement thugs come for them...and of course at that point, it's too late...

reply to post by gladtobehere


Thats why you use Hidden cameras alongside the deterrent of visible cameras.


Surprised they didn't kill the sweet fluffy dog.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Holy crap they didnt shoot the dog this time. Im amazed it almost appears that the cops are capable of learning.....

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


Come on that would require the sons of whores to be honest and intending to do the right thing.

I have 2 camera systems for my business and one out in the open system is watched by a much better hidden system. even my DVR's are watched by hidden cameras

reply to post by gladtobehere


The video states that the "Department" has opened an investigation into the raid...

My question is why has the family not filed charges against the officers and the department itself? Make life as difficult as possible for those children in uniform who think they can make the rules.