CO: Police blow up innocent man’s home to capture shop lifting suspect

[anygunanywhere]

Tyranny. Pure and simple.

[DynamicDan]

Serious Swat team overreach.

[Liberty]

It seems these days things have devolved into them against us. Hard to tell who is more of a threat to us as average citizens. We live in scary times.

[Excaliber]

It wouldn't surprise me if the cost of overtime and the need for relief of initially assigned officers were factors in the decision to initiate a full on assault.

[Texas_Blaze]

Who’s gonna pay?

1. Individually involved officers? That’s not acceptable. Require each officer to carry a form of duty insurance, like doctors malpractice? Except officers don’t earn $$$$.
2. Police department? Well actually that’s you & me via the taxes. From police dept budgets? Now we are hampering our own public safety.
3. Homeowners insurance?

Consider it a form of vandalism and file your claim. Getting your deductible covered is no small matter with the cost of homes nowadays.

[JustSomeOldGuy]

The kid was released or just walked out early on, so they knew nobody but the perp was in the house. They could have either waited him out, or used existing tech to determine which room he was in and guided a team in to enter (and possibly destroy) ONLY that room.

On another note; he's a shoplifter and he's driving a Lexus!?

[flechero]

Who’s gonna pay?

1. Individually involved officers? That’s not acceptable. Require each officer to carry a form of duty insurance, like doctors malpractice? Except officers don’t earn $$$$.
2. Police department? Well actually that’s you & me via the taxes. From police dept budgets? Now we are hampering our own public safety.
3. Homeowners insurance?

Consider it a form of vandalism and file your claim. Getting your deductible covered is no small matter with the cost of homes nowadays.

Why is it OK for a Dr to pay for malpractice to cover mistakes and accidents but no on else? I suspect it's because you aren't Dr.. My friend is a surgeon and his malpractice premiums are higher than double my mortgage. That's half the reason medical costs are so high. As a real estate professional, I have to carry E&O and liability insurance. Heck, even plumbers and electricians carry liability and other insurances... why should a police department or officer be exempt? I actually think the dept should carry it, not the officers and think the hospital system should provide MP for the Doctors.

Taxes? Sure, but that's spread across everyone. There are many things we pay taxes for that most people don't use- the individual burden on something like this is pennies per person. If all departments or officer's carried insurance like this the cost would be pretty low... As it is, anyone unfortunate enough to be in this position can be wiped out.

Vandalism? OK, but when the criminal is caught, he can be held responsible for the damages.

A homeowners ins claim normally means a big rate hike. Certainly more than a potential tax burden on insuring the police. And the rate, unlike the deductible goes on forever.

Asking victims of intentional property destruction or loss to shoulder that burden for the city or state isn't fair- the criminal they catch in the process is a burden on society, not just that home owner.

just my $0.02 worth

[K.Mooneyham]

Who’s gonna pay?

1. Individually involved officers? That’s not acceptable. Require each officer to carry a form of duty insurance, like doctors malpractice? Except officers don’t earn $$$$.
2. Police department? Well actually that’s you & me via the taxes. From police dept budgets? Now we are hampering our own public safety.
3. Homeowners insurance?

Consider it a form of vandalism and file your claim. Getting your deductible covered is no small matter with the cost of homes nowadays.

Yes, the police department/town should pay. And that means the taxpayers. And then they get angry about their money being wasted, go to the polls, and boot out the politicians who set up the system which led to that massive overuse of force. That's how it SHOULD work, in a society where the citizenry has a say about how things are operated. OR, do we just suck it up, doff our caps to our "betters", and say that whatever the elites dish out, well that's just how it is? I don't think the Founding Fathers would like that very much.

[strogg]

Who’s gonna pay?

1. Individually involved officers? That’s not acceptable. Require each officer to carry a form of duty insurance, like doctors malpractice? Except officers don’t earn $$$$.
2. Police department? Well actually that’s you & me via the taxes. From police dept budgets? Now we are hampering our own public safety.
3. Homeowners insurance?

Consider it a form of vandalism and file your claim. Getting your deductible covered is no small matter with the cost of homes nowadays.

Yes, the police department/town should pay. And that means the taxpayers. And then they get angry about their money being wasted, go to the polls, and boot out the politicians who set up the system which led to that massive overuse of force. That's how it SHOULD work, in a society where the citizenry has a say about how things are operated. OR, do we just suck it up, doff our caps to our "betters", and say that whatever the elites dish out, well that's just how it is? I don't think the Founding Fathers would like that very much.

Agreed. To add to it, the people who did the damage are the ones who pay. No, not the perp. Not the insurance company. Not the homeowner. They're not the ones blowing holes in walls and turning the residence into a recreation of Baghdad. The police did it. Plain and simple. Their choice. Their actions. Their responsibility. They could have very well not done it at all and faced different repercussions. But they went the nuclear route instead and should pay dearly.

[03Lightningrocks]

The police in this instance are 100% in the wrong. The force used was beyond excessive. They absolutely should have to pay. If this was not malpractice of a police department, I don't know what is.