I realise that flying drones over restricted airspaces is not allowed. At the same time it doesn't feel like this kind of treatment was justified. Wouldn't three or four police officers (and no riot gear) be enough?
It seems very excessive from the outside, because we have full knowledge of the situation at the outcome. When you go into these situations, you're essentially blind, so you're exposing yourself to the entire risk profile.
I mean, don't get me wrong I think going after a news site is bull shit and I think we should all rally around this guy, but it was not these officers' decision to arrest them and I don't think it was excessive, it was safe (for everyone).
In other countries we wouldn't hear anything about excessive force (because the jaw of the one being arrested would have been broken).
Anyways, to get back on topic: having an old woman stand in front of her house in underwear while the neighbors watch is completely unnecessary but totally unsurprising. Moves like this contribute to the ongoing breakdown in policing legitimacy, and we shouldn't settle for a world where we have to choose the least bad unaccountable organized gang.
Just to put a finer point on it: this kind of humiliation would never happen during a home invasion, and for most people the humiliation is a larger harm than losing some computer equipment.
https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/1012350_10...
I like how you imply this would be disqualifying, only to follow it up with "i haven't".
If you amputate the wrong leg, I don't need to be a doctor to tell you "that's not great".
Literally every type of crime involves arrest. It's that some crimes are custodial arrests and others are not. You can be arrested and in custody for going 26mph over the speed limit. That's a pretty low bar.
Yes, I know people in law enforcement and the military as well. Many of them disagree with the types of actions you see in these high profile raids.
Let's not forget that some of the very agents involved in things like Ruby Ridge and the Branch Davidians have shown harsh criticism of how inappropriately the leadership handled the strategy for those.
Also, would anyone risk not cooperating? Wouldn’t that in itself be a more serious offense?
Nah, doesn't convince me. They can perfectly stalk the house for a few days and even listen to conversations, and have a realistic assessment of risk.
It's simply a display of violence to intimidate everyone into not using drones and not trying to find anything about these areas.
In fact, it's simply a display of violence, as many other law enforcement people use, when it is not needed.
Most civilized places the only thing coming through his door would've been a letter informing him about his upcoming appointment at a local police station.
Between Snowden, Assange, Manning and this guy the US government message is very clear: "Don't stir my shit or you're gonna be sorry for the rest of your life"