The warrant was for the suspect owning firearms despite being a felon and restricted from owning them. They killed the first person who shot at them and then had a standoff with another person who shot at them from inside the house.
And yet I have tried MANY times to get police to do something with all the evidence I have given them of someone I know who openly plays with guns in public that they’re not allowed to have as a felon (who has also since harassed me many times), and they simply don’t care about either of those things happening.
Is there another office with jurisdiction, like a Sheriff’s office?
Or a parole officer.
nope
WSOC-TV said their helicopter captured an armored vehicle driving through yards and knocking over recycling bins before officers removed a person with blood on their shirt who was then loaded into an ambulance.
After the home was cleared, the helicopter pilot said he couldn’t show the front lawn of the home because the scene was too disturbing.
Several armored vehicles were on nearby lawns and driveways of the older suburban neighborhood of a tree-lined street with brick homes. A shattered window, blinds torn, was in a street and a entire doorway was leaning against of one of the vehicles.
Many roads in the area including Interstate 77 were closed so ambulances could get to hospitals faster. TV footage showed ambulances speeding to hospitals with several vehicles with sirens on both in front and behind them.
Plus three dead cops.
There was really no other time and place they could have served this person a warrant?
It seemed to be at their home which seems like the typical place to serve a warrant. The police probably could have used the road to drive their armor vehicles on and not peoples’ yards though.
I don’t know that ‘typical place’ is the way to do it when it was clearly someone dangerous enough for them to send in armored vehicles. At least wait until they get out of a residential area? Just put a tail on them.
Ah yes, the places without people that people often go to. If they were already this dangerous the situation would have simply been worse by putting them in non-residential areas where other innocent people could have been caught in the crossfire.
In my city, we made national news because the cops served a warrant on a guy while he was driving. Next to a park. Which he proceeded to run through and grabbed several hostages and then killed them. The best area, and worst, is their home. They could be armed and ready to fight like this, but it’s better than facing off with them in shopping areas, businesses, parking lots with others, or anywhere else.
The better question is why is someone who continues to be so dangerous for society that we need a response like this allowed to both be out freely, and have access to firearms.
Maybe there wasn’t a better place to serve the warrant on him than a residential neighborhood tightly packed enough for five people to be injured in the crossfire, but I find that hard to believe.
You’re commenting on something with literally zero information. The most we know right now is that the guy the warrant was initially for was shot right out front in the very beginning in an exchange right at the go. Someone was inside the house, heard it, and opened fire on the cops/Marshals. Look at the helicopter views of the house. It’s pretty open. That’s the problem, there was no cover, they had an additional suspect open fire on their position. That’s all we know. You’re speculating something while being 100% ignorant.
Asking that warrants be served “not somewhere residential” (meaning at the suspects home) however is also incredibly stupid. Cops take risks. They know the job, and sometimes shit goes bad, but maybe shopping centers are better for serving warrants in?
There are places in this world other than residential neighborhoods and shopping centers.
And you’re speculating as much as I am since you are insisting the warrant couldn’t have been served elsewhere.
Do criminals go to completely empty fields often? Do they find themselves in areas with no other people around? The one area where innocent people are likely to not be around between… say 8am-3pm M-F is? A residential area. Look at heat maps of suburban cities and how they basically completely lose population during the day. The one major business park I live by causes the city of 100k to nearly double in population during those working hours.
I’m not saying that each situation couldn’t call for something more tactical regarding apprehension, but considering the hour and day served it at least wasn’t during a time when people were likely to be around. There really aren’t a lot of areas in a major metro like Charlotte where you could safely serve a warrant without innocent people being around.
You’re literally arguing over cops being shot. They did their job. It sucks they died, and I hope their families get support and help, but had this been innocent people this would have been a massive fuck up.
I knew there’d be some awful takes in here, and boy are you delivering.
Oh. My take was that they sent in armored vehicles after shooting started.
There was a 3 hour stand off so it is likely they requested armored assistance as things developed.
Based on the description in the article, it sounds like it was used to extract someone to an ambulance, not in assaulting the house.
Hm. Maybe? One of us is right, but I have no idea which of us.
It’s probably not the one suggesting the police waited until the wanted criminal was in a quiet spot with nobody around.
The “typical place” is usually wherever they find the person, especially if they’re holed up at home.
People hiding from the cops don’t tend to get out much.
Three people dead, and you’re worrying about someone’s yard being a mess?
Besides, they probably wanted to get access to the side of the property.
No. I’m worried that yards often have people in them.
If they’re still out in their yard after all the gunfire, that’s kinda on them.
Removed by mod
Gross.
Well, the liberal freedom of the 2nd amendment has some costs.
Dead cops. Dead children.
All to ensure America’s right to kill is protected.
Conservatives say this is what the 2nd amendment is for. Obviously they’re lying about wanting this, but this is what they say.
It’s quite disturbing how many violent people are on this platform. I know damn well what all these removed comments said.
Y’all need help.
I see one removed for saying dead cops are a good thing, one still up saying ACAB, and one removed for saying the suspect will be put on administrative leave. Looks like there is another that was removed but they responded to something else so I can’t see it.
Heh, gottem. ACAB.
Removed by mod
No person dead is GOOD. Dead police just get replaced with more police. Fixing the system is the solution… and I understand how that sounds impossible
No person dead is GOOD.
I mean… there are definitely a good handful of people who’s final theft of our oxygen will mark the world becoming a slightly better place.
The absence of evil is good. When people use their life to be evil, their death is good.
I’d personally draw that line well before the entire career field of law enforcement, but to each their own I guess.
Well, true, but specific people. Not whole groups. Thats genocide.
I meeaaaaaaaan… billionaires tho.
They aren’t “people” so kill away.
Removed by mod
By laughing at them when they die actually doing their job or by putting your money where your mouth is, poseur?
Removed by mod
