What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
New Food Sprinkle Convinces the Brain to Stop Over-Eating view!
howlifeworks.com - How sophisticated scents are helping people control their appetite and lose weight
327 Comments
- devindotcom, on 10/12/2007, -23/+150Yeah... laugh real hard at an old lady's violent death. And then throw out an idiotic statement like "cops suck" at the end! What a winner!
- bitt3n, on 10/12/2007, -12/+76the bullets don't hurt less on account of being fired by a 92 year old broad
- HardSide, on 10/12/2007, -17/+82She shot...they shot...there is no 2 ways about this. They were protecting each other. Age doesn't matter here.
If a 10 year old has an uzi and shoots up a school, cops arent to shoot back? Give me a break.
While we on the subject, nowhere in the article or in the niece interview does she say her grandma was innocent. - ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -50/+110"My aunt was in good health. I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down," Dozier said. "There was no reason they had to go in there and shoot her down like a dog."
Typical and predictable.
Low class people always defend the violent, uncalled-for actions of their loved ones after the law takes them out.
"Your aunt shot at cops, and they shot back"
"But she was in good health! Oh, it's so sad and unfair!"
Sound familiar, sungam? - chatwithaninja, on 10/12/2007, -8/+65According to a relative (I live in ATL, and heard this on the radio on my drive in today), her house had been broken into at least twice by criminals posing as undercover police, so even if they announced that they were police, I doubt she was listening to that. The only thing she registered was a gun pointed at her. That same relative was claiming that she was the one who got the gun for her to protect her (relative) with for this very reason.
Yeah, some research beforehand would have been appropriate. I dunno, maybe watching her house for a day to see that an elderly lady living there??
Sheesh. The war on drugs has got to stop. Its already over, the government lost. Now its time to treat the casualties. - ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -20/+64"So, ayeroxor, you are in favor of the shooting of old aged pensioners?"
If they shoot at cops, yes.
"You don't think that the cops could have subdued a *92 year-old woman* without gunning her down?"
I don't want cops to literally dodge bullets just try and take out violent people like little lambs.
"You don't support people's right to own firearms & protect themselves from home invasion?"
I sure do.
"How was this old lady to know who was kicking her door down?"
Even if it WAS a home invasion, you RAISE the risk of dying by shooting first. Check the statistics.
Anything else? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -17/+59Yeah... that's pretty funny... she tagged each one of them (and I bet they took a good long pause trying to figure out "what the hell?" before gunning her down)... too bad she wasn't a better shot.
...but here's the thing: this stinks to high heaven; here's why:
> had a legal warrant and "knocked and announced" before they forced open the door
1 - every last one of us knows that "knock and announce" means "knock with the door breacher" and "announce your presence with a flash-bang". Perhaps it need to be "knock, announce and identify yourself to the upstanding citizen that you're prepared to shoot" (and give the citizen time to verify your credentials). Innocent until proven guilty pretty much ends when the warrant is served.
> Kathryn Johnson, was the only person home at the time, and had lived there for about 17 years.
2 - cops need to be less tactical and more strategic. Perhaps if someone had done their intelligence homework and looked at the power/phone/water/gas/cable/etc. bills they'd see *WHO* they were about to take into custody. Seems to me that they just don't know what the fsck is going on and prepare for the worse (and guess what... they get the worse outcome... surprise). You know, those warrants for paper searches aren't as sexy as the "real thing", but maybe there'd be three cops without bullets in them and one grandma who's still alive if they'd taken the time to do their homework.
> Neighbors and relatives said it must have been a case of mistaken identity.
3 - well, you know what they say... hindsight is 20/20. Good thing they had the "right" address. This is what happens when good people live in bad neighborhoods, etc. etc, cliches ad infiniutum.
> I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down
Don't discount the possibility that they may have been fed incorrect information (never actually trust anonymous/CI intelligence sources... always verify, cross check and do your due diligence). Obviously they weren't going off any type of reasonable intelligence. So, gun nuts beware, if I want you out of my neighborhood, all I have to do is dime you out for some heinous crime from the anonymous comfort of a payphone and a pseudonym. - bonked, on 10/12/2007, -9/+48@CrackedTech
Yeah, we've all seen the lovely knock and announce a million times on Cops/Worlds Most Exploited Cop Videos/Podunk SWAT/etc.
It works something like this, they line up quietly outside the door, one guy stands to the side of the door and about the time the battering ram is halfway on the downswing they knock once on the door and say "Police Department - Search Warrant" about half of a second before the door comes off the hinges.
The war on drugs makes everyone unsafe - and does nothing to stop/control the flood of drugs, and if legalization was looked at I, for one, would bet that we would stop hearing stories like this.
http://www.leap.cc - CrackedTech, on 10/12/2007, -8/+47@warty
The article say they knocked and announced that they had a warrant before kicking the door in. If she manage to shoot three officers before they could shoot then she was probably already waiting for them. Doesn't sound to me like someone who was surprised and just started firing randomly. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+49Doesn't matter how old she is. You shoot at a cop and you will be summarily executed, anyone knows that.
- superbonbon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+35all good points. Another is that they were plain clothes officers so she may have doubted them when they stated they were police, if she heard them at all.
And then when a group of men in street clothes (no uniforms or id visible) force down your door and enter, I think most people would panic. - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+34The kind who's had people break into her house twice already by people who claimed to be undercover police.
If the police are not prepared to prove who they are, then they should expect to get shot at when breaking into random people's houses. - donatj, on 10/12/2007, -9/+38The cops weren't dressed as cops. I've had attempted break ins at my house, anyone can claim to be the cops. This is entirely the polices fault.
- staticneuron, on 10/12/2007, -8/+35The lady did nothing wrong. The cops have the wrong house. Is it really that insane to not believe some 3 plain clothes (most likely) younger gentlemen, are not the cops who they claim to be? From her point of view, it makes alot of sense. It sucks for the cops, who were only doing thier job, but this is not something you can blame the old lady on.
"Low class people always defend the violent, uncalled-for actions of their loved ones after the law takes them out.
"Your aunt shot at cops, and they shot back"
"But she was in good health! Oh, it's so sad and unfair!"
stereotyping gets easier every day doesn't it? How is that working for you? - izzie2, on 10/12/2007, -15/+38Just an observation here but it did say they were "plian clothes" officers.
Ok so a grandmother has a gun and thinks some thugs in regular clothes is trying to rob her.Plus they found no drugs.
Open and shut if you asked me.
Maybe next time they will bring a black and white with them.
I heard this one tape of a guy(recorded by his g-f) who got totally rail-roaded into signing a release form allowing them to search and by rail-roaded I mean they beat the ***** out of him.It was Tennessee I believe.
Either way the police dropped the ball on this one. - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -14/+36LogicBomB
What I hate the worst is when the police ARE the criminals! - ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28Do you need Dr. Phil? Got some issues you need to work out?
- superbonbon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21maybe one that lives alone in a not so safe neighborhood? Some sources say family members purchased the gun and trained her on how to use it because of two prior break-ins/forced entries by thugs claiming to be police.
- ryno35, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25- VolatileWhimsy
I agree it's not the invading officers fault although I'm sure if there weren't drugs in there it was some police officers fault.
Anyway the real blame lies with the criminal justice system and ridiculous prohibition laws. - Couchy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+31>What kind of 92 year old woman has a gun ready when the police enter?
An AMERICAN 92 year old woman! YEEEEEHAW!!!!!!!!!! - PsypherX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23@Nougat:
Given the fact that they "knocked and announced" (the quotation marks giving rise to suspicion and likely wordplay), and the officers were not in uniform, I'd say she was more than justified in shooting at them. Not to mention, she probably didn't have the greatest of hearing, and was more than likely already off to get her weapon when she either saw men approaching her home, or after they banged on the door.
She's old, she lived in a bad neighborhood, and she had a gun to protect herself. When three ***** you don't know start banging on your door in the middle of the night, you reach for your ***** gun.
That being said, I can more than appreciate the officer's response. If anything though, I hope this woman's family sues the ever-loving piss out of the Atlanta police department. Like an above commenter stated, a simple (SIMPLE!) checking of facts could have avoided this entirely too ***** up situation. - diggduggjoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20This is the exact reason no-knock warrants are bad. This knock and announce crap (kicking down a door while saying you are the police) is just plain wrong. In a bad neighborhood, having someone kick in your door and assuming they are cops will get you an early grave. You get one anyway when they ARE cops.
They could have knocked on her door during the day, in uniform, with warrant in hand and she would have let them to discover that they got "BS intel" from a gang banger trying to get a better plea deal. This is why I have problems with cops, some of them use force because they are incapable of using their brains or their hearts.
The drug war makes everyone unsafe. It takes our liberty and crushes it. It makes the police, many who are smart and compassionate, look evil. We should stop the war on drugs, now! - xenuxenuts, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19American cities new motto: Now safer than Baghdad!
- oneofmanysteves, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20"Just another scumbag shooting at police"
Did you even bother to read the ***** article? I did, I guess I must have missed the part where is describes all 92 years of her life to deduct she was a scumbag. Did it ever occur to you she was 92 years old? First off, the article does not mention if she had any medical disorders like, OH, I don't know, dementia or poor hearing for example. However, I really think what was going through her mind at the time was, there are a bunch of men trying to get into my house, I am innocent and I have no other means to protect myself. Why the hell should she have believed it was the cops, chances are she was scared to death it was robbers, murderers etc. She may have lived in a bad neighborhood as well. Judging from the nieces willingness to keep her safe with the mercury lights, obtaining a gun for a 92 year old and a house alarm might suggest the neighborhood is bad. Anyone can go up to someone’s house and claim they are the cops to try and gain access, because it has been done before. Did she jump to conclusions to quickly, maybe? Was she wrong for shooting at the cops, yes. Was it justified for what she did, (i.e. feeling the need to protect herself because she didn't believe it was the police), none of us where there so it is hard to tell. So before you go off and judge this woman, maybe you need to stop and think what may have been going through her mind at the time. - author20, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Current Standards (lack thereof) Permit the following senarios:
1. Cops kick in wrong door with no announcement -- kill all citizens inside -- who legally try to defend themselves.
2. Cops in unmarked car can pull you over -- even though you can't tell if they are phoney cops (who are raping citizens every week now). They can search your car without any cause or evidence. With or without your permission.
3. Cops can demand that you to open your door even with no uniforms -- if you refuse, they can burst in and kill you -- even if there is NO gun! This has happened many times.
4. Cops can place a phoney crime call to 911, and burst in with no search warrant; and even if the courts find out that the call was phoney -- they are compelled to allow things that are found as evidence. This was the US Supreme Court.
5. Cops can listen to conversations in your home with special equipment, steal your business secrets; nobody will ever know because there is virtually no oversight or checks on police surveilence. They can tap your phone and nobody will know. Taps that are not removed can be used on the next unwitting citizen. As long as the wires are there -- you are vulnerable to violation and compromise.
The right of privacy and the right against unreasonable search and seizure and very closely tied together. Both are needed or neither have the strength to protect.
We must increase citizen rights --
1. From cities who want to mow down your house and build a strip mall
2. From cops who want to kill everybody before the occupants have a change to flush the "joint" or other evidence down the toilet.
3. From state and federal courts who are not honoring the US Constitution and who do not care about either cops or citizens.
Do you think US Citizens are going to continue to tolerate executions by cops? That LAPD cop who was punching the man in the face was trying to drive his nose into his brain. The commissioner approved it. They are both killers. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Lives that would never have been endangered if not for their own careless actions.
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Actually, this article is wrong. I watched the press release about an hour ago given by the police spokesman. Several points:
1) The cops never announced themselves by name. In fact, Joe Cobb started stuttering when he started to say they announced themselves and then went back and just said they knocked on the door after saying they approached the building and were shot at. He added that they don't technically have to announce themselves by name, which is interesting.
2) The woman's niece said she was innocent and that she had nothing to do with drugs. I watched the actual video.
3) I never knew about them being plainclothes. If this is true then the picture is very different.
Namely, it was nighttime, they knocked, they weren't dressed as cops, they were armed, they kicked the door down, she freaked out and shot them.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/22/woman.shot.ap/index.html
Here's a video of it, but it doesn't show the police officer talking to reporters.
Here's the most interesting part of the CNN article. It tells two different stories:
1) From Assistant Chief Alan Dreher: The officers had a legal warrant, "knocked and announced" before they forced open the door and were justified in shooting once fired upon, he said.
2) As the plainclothes Atlanta police officers approached the house about 7 p.m., a woman inside started shooting, striking each of them, said Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman.
So the Assistant Chief says they kicked the door down and then were shot at. The spokesman says they were shot at as they walked up and then fired back but also that they knocked in a separate statement.
Yes. Messed up. - LogicBomB, on 10/12/2007, -12/+27After so many articles there seem to be 2 main types of idiots:
1. Those who hate police and want to see them dead
2. Those who cate criminals and want to see them dead
Personally, I don't want to live in a world without police. I also don't want to live in a world where people are shot down on the spot either. Going to one extreme to the other never solves anything. - glock22ownr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Really messed up story! Hard to say who was in the right... she did manage to shoot all 3 of them at least one time... so they were defending themselves, but were they justified in kicking the door down and entering the house like that?
- Weasel_DB, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15First they came for the Drug Dealers
But I did nothing because I was not a Drug Dealer
Then they came for the Smokers
But I did nothing because I was not a Smoker
Then they came for the Beer Drinkers
But I did nothing because I was not a Beer Drinker
.....When they finally come for you, there will be nobody left to say anything. And if they speak out to defend your rights, their comments will be buried.
These are the new Brown Shirts. This is the new era of Prohibition. - firstdueco41, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18@drpepper
Feel free to run over a homeless person on the way home to make yourself feel better... - luservegas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Yeah, if you're getting shot, you get to shoot back. So when that guy breaks into my house and I shoot at him, he's got a legal right to shoot back? I'm sorry, but that's one of the stupidest things that I have ever heard. It's the age old question of which came first, the chicken or the egg... Except the way that you're describing it makes no sense.
I seem to remember something in the Constitution about unreasonable search and seizure... and something else about the right to bear arms. If she was part of the Escobar cartel and a notorious drug dealer, I guess all of this is a moot point. That doesn't really appear to be the case. If the cops had found anything there, that would have been the first thing in the article. As it stands, it looks like they didn't find anything other than a citizen defending her property. I bet the judge that signed that search warrant is going to have to answer to someone. - 02evad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14"How slow were these guys to get hit by a 92 year old..."
I am not sure if you know this or not bullets come out of guns really really fast. - author20, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Same thing happend in the 90s, a woman who was very old was shot dead by cops in Tyler Texas.
Also, there have been many, many shootings of people in bed by bounty hunters who can break into your Texas house and shoot you dead. And do no jail time. The guy who did this recently was not a bounty hunter so he did get prosecuted.
But the real killers are the US Supreme Court, who recently said that cops don't even have to announce. So, here is the state of the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure:
1. Cops who announce with an explosive device can then burst in and kill people who are disoriented, possibly hit with pieces of the devices. Why? Because they moved or tried to run away from people who were invading their home.
2. Cops who want to violate your house and search it can place a phoney call to child protective services or some other agency. Next thing you know, you are dead.
3. Cops who do not announce are in danger of citizens protecting their home with very powerful weapons that could take out an entire police force; including but not limited to boobie-traps, fire arms, and even other things that I won't mention. The point is -- with the Supreme Court ruling that warrants don't need to be presented to announced, they elevate the status of the search warrant for drugs more important than the value of life. This is 100% contrary to the US Constitution's goal. Just like stopping the counting and appointing the occupant to the white house instead of counting votes.
We don't have a U.S. Supreme Court. Each member who voted for the non-announcement invasion of the home is a traitor to the spirit and the letter of the highest law in the land.
We also don't have a congress. The jerks that won against the corrupt Republicans are every bit as corrupt. Only their corruption is that of individuals who want to force homosexuality, abortions and open borders on U.S. Citizens. Why? Because they are bought and paid for.
We need to bring back democracy, and both Republicans and Democrats need to stop and figure out if we can even co-exist. I know I don't want to live in a country with no 4th Amendment protection, and that I won't co-exist with Republican citizens who want to take away our Constitution. They are a facist division of the Republican party and they are ultimately to blame for the deaths of innocent citizens by eroding the 4th Amendment.
Attacking cops means nothing. They do what they are told. They don't think. They don't know the U.S. Constitution and they don't care about it. They only want to get their pay check. Local governments pay wrongfull death settlements over and over -- with no changes in policies that put cops and citizens in danger.
Here's an idea -- restrict non-announce searches to situations where life is in immediate danger. Stop bursting in on citizens without presenting search warrants. If a search warrant can't be examined -- it is worthless. Cops search without warrants all the time.
And finally -- our Congress must tell citizens what they are to do right now -- at a time when phoney cops are knocking at doors to invade tens of thousands of homes. They rape, rob and murder citizens who let them in, motiviating more citizens to get even more powerful fire arms; capable of doing far more damage to cops than the 92 year old woman did to the Atlanta cops. Neither our congress, wh or the supreme stooges have explained how American citizens are to honor a knock at the door when there are millions of illegal immigrants threatening to take our nation house-by-house, job-by-job, city-by-city. In my city, Hispanic and Asian gangs perpetrate home invasion robberies and murders all the time.
When you stomp on the 4th Amendment, you stomp on America. It is time for America to purge both houses of Congress, the WH (yes -- again) and stomp on the officials who appoint traitors in the U.S. Supreme Court. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14You are innocent when you are only defending yourself from as far as you can tell, unprovoked aggression.
- HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Even if they're disguised to NOT look like police?
I'm sorry, if their intent is to not look like police, you can't hold the victim who defended herself against them responsible for knowing what they really are. - Karyyk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13The thing I don't get is why in the hell they were in plain clothes when serving a warrant. You hear about people impersonating officers and breaking into homes that way all the time, preying on the elderly in particular. Seems like a dumb thing to do. If three armed men broke into your home, what would you do?
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I dugg you up on but, DUDE!!!!
If you lived alone in that sort of Atlanta neighborhood at 92 years old my guess is that you would have a ready and highly accessible fire arm handy as well. I know I would for sure. - Amnesia10, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15They turn up in plainclothes and kick the door in! Mmmm smart she probably thought they they were robbers and may have been hard of hearing so would not have heard the standard police warnings. They obviously did not check the records to see that the house was occupied by a old woman, or that she had a firearm.
The fact that she shot three of them shows that they were either sloppy or she was a Chuck Norris fan. I do hope that they sue the police for millions. I do hope that they fire the officer who told them that was the correct address. - finalblue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I wonder what would happen if the feds legalized certain narcotics. Let's say for a second that you can all of a sudden obtain cocaine and marijuana at your local CVS or Duane Reade or whatever. Think it would put a few druglords out of business? Would events like this occur still?
- fjc8, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15***** the police, ***** the DEA, and ***** the drug war.
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I am not for sure which part of this story strikes me as more odd. The fact that a three police officers in a botched narcotics bust shot and killed a 92 year old lady, in what is described as obvious self-defense. Or, that a 92 year old lady was able get off enough good shots to place three individual hits on three separate and highly trained narcotics officers of the Atlanta PD.
My condolences to the family but my gawd the lady was 92, she must have been a dead-eye shot in her early years. - HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I might have done the same thing the old lady did. In fact I know I would. A bunch of regular looking guys claiming to be police usually aren't, and I have two women in my house to protect.
It's better than dying of cancer though. - yensed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Doesn't everyone know not to piss off old lady's in Atlanta?
- HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Wrong. I'm very much pro-law enforcement, but that doesn't blind me to the fact that they were trying to NOT LOOK LIKE COPS. They were NOT in uniform.
That means that this tragedy is their fault. They caused the confusion that made this old lady believe she had to defend herself. Didn't you read the article? - TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12How about busting in to the right house. This old lady wasn't dealing drugs. She defended herself against a stupid cops mistake and died because of it. Which pretty much makes you look like a stupid cop from KY.
- jonesin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12This drug war has to stop, it's completely out of control.
- bonked, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12peeweegear - there are world's of difference between legality and morality.
#2 - most of us feel the knock,announce,kick door in within 3 seconds of each other is illegal and there are cases pending in courts about that.
#3. She defended her home and self against non-uniform wearing police that busted in her door - it was much a mistake on her part as that of the cops for picking the wrong door. If they weren't cops it wouldn't have been a crime. - plnegative1, on 10/12/2007, -13/+23""Your aunt shot at cops, and they shot back"
"But she was in good health! Oh, it's so sad and unfair!"
Sound familiar, sungam?"
THEY WERE IN HER HOUSE. It wasn't like she was the one acting aggressively the officers were. I thought the "drug war" was supposed to protect us. Hmm... guess not. - OdinsFury, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Would you let 3 guys in your house dressed in plain clothing who claimed to be the police into your house? I'm sorry to say for all the defenders of the actions of the police, but the fault does indeed lie with the police in this situation. They killed what was likely an innocent woman, and no amount of reasoning can change that fact.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 327 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is