Police Better Off Accidentally Shooting Black People Than Family Dogs

Police Better Off Accidentally Shooting Black People Than Family Dogs:

You'll get in less trouble if you accidently shoot the one on the right.

I’m about to tell you a story. If the story included Chicago PD shooting an innocent black man who posed no threat to them, the story would end in an acquittal, vindication for the officers, and an outraged black community starting a charity fund for his widow.

But this story involves CPD shoot an innocent black Labrador Retriever. A family pet who posed no real threat to the officers. As such, the police have been punished and roundly excoriated, and a federal jury awarded the family a huge sum for damages.

Which is fine. I mean, I agree with the jury’s decision. I just don’t like living in a world where shooting my dog is a bigger liability risk for a police officer than shooting me….

The Chicago Tribune has the story (gavel bang: Huffington Post):

Teenage brothers Thomas and Darren Russell were in their second-floor apartment in the 9200 block of South Justine Street in February 2009 when officers announced they had a warrant to search both units of the two-flat. Thomas Russell, then 18, opened the door and found officers with their guns drawn, according to the lawsuit. Russell said that he put his hands in the air and asked permission to lock up his 9-year-old black Labrador, Lady, before they entered.

Police refused the request and came into the house, the lawsuit said. When Lady came loping around the corner with her tail wagging, Officer Richard Antonsen shot the dog, according to the suit, which alleged excessive force, false arrest and illegal seizure for taking the dog’s life.

A jury awarded the family $333,000 for their loss.

How does this play out if instead the story is: “When LeBrandon, a 5’10” dark-skinned black man wearing a wife-beater, came loping around the corner running his mouth, Officer I Am The Law put him down with two shots to the chest.”

Because the police say the same thing about innocent black people they shoot as they did in this case about the black lab:

Jennifer Hoyle, a spokeswoman for the city’s Law Department, said: “The officers involved in this case were executing a valid search warrant when this incident occurred and were simply protecting themselves. We are extremely disappointed and reviewing all of our options. In particular, we think the damages awarded to the plaintiffs were excessive.”

The difference is that nobody believes that the police need to respond with deadly force to protect themselves from random dogs, but lots of people think the police need to respond with deadly force to protect themselves from random unarmed black men. It’s BS.

But it is what it is. Do not mess with dogs. Our society loves dogs. Keep your guns pointed in the direction of less sympathetic targets.

Family gets $333,000 for 2009 raid in which cops killed dog [Chicago Tribune]
Police Kill Chicago Man’s Dog During Raid, Jury Awards Family $330,000 [Huffington Post]

Search Warrants For Future Criminal Activity

Yes, you understood that correctly. Cops can get a warrant to search, for example, your home for criminal activity that hasn't yet occurred. This insidious device is known as an "anticipatory search warrant."
Begin with the foundation: The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures," and provides that "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause." This language is clear.
An anticipatory search warrant is a warrant based on a showing of probable cause that particular evidence of a crime will exist at a specific location in the future. In U.S. v. Grubbs, decided in March 2006, defines an anticipatory search warrant “a warrant based upon an affidavit showing probable cause that at some future time, but not presently, certain evidence of crime will be located at a specific place.” The Supreme Court had no problem with using anticipatory search warrants.
With a typical search warrant, officers requesting the search must establish probable cause that what they want to look for is presently in the place they want to look for it. If the government wants to get into your house, it needs to show probable cause the drugs are in the house. It doesn't have to be certain the drugs are there, but it must at least make a showing that they reasonably believe the illegal substance is there. In contrast, an anticipatory warrant doesn’t claim the evidence is in a particular place at the time the warrant is requested. Instead, that kind of a warrant anticipates a certain event will occur and if that event happens, then there is going to be probable cause.
Using U.S. v. Grubbs as an example, Mr. Grubbs ordered a child pornographic video tape from an internet site. Unfortunately for Mr. Grubbs, the site was being operated by the U.S. Postal Service. Agents intended to deliver the tape Mr. Grubbs ordered, but that delivery had not yet been made. The agents wanted to search Grubbs’ house after delivery of the tape to prove that he was in possession of it. The government wanted to get the warrant before the delivery so once the delivery was made, the agents could immediately conduct a search for the tape inside the house. In that affidavit they told the magistrate what they knew and they requested to execute a warrant to search for the tape if a triggering event occurred. The exact language that was in the warrant: “Execution of this search warrant will not occur unless and until the parcel has been received by a person and has been physically taken into the residence. At that time, and not before, this search warrant will be executed.” Delivery of the parcel and acceptance of the parcel was the triggering event. If the triggering event doesn’t occur,the warrant can’t be executed.
What's to stop the government from fabricating an event, placing any person in possession of an illegal item or substance, then executing upon a warrant for the mere purpose of getting into your house?

Sealing An Arrest Record

There are many reasons you would want to expunge your arrest record. Expungements are available ONLY to those people who have not been convicted of the charged crime. If you have been convicted, you cannot seal your record. Most people want to seal their record because the arrest, or arrests, are getting in the way of a good job. Some are embarrassed about an arrest that can be easily found on the internet. Others simply want to get rid of a charge that never should have happened in the first place.
Expunging an arrest record begins when you make your first appearance in court for the charge. You cannot plead guilty or you will not be eligible for an expungement. If you plead no contest, or nolo contendre, you will not be eligible.
Two special circumstances exist with misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence and with marijuana possession. Even though you may ultimately have the charges dismissed, most courts require you to plead guilty or no contest. This makes you ineligible for an expungement.

Restoration of Firearms Rights

Upon conviction of a felony, any felony, violent felony or not, you no longer have the right to possess a gun. You may be arrested if you attempt to purchase a gun after you have been convicted of a felony. If you are found in possession of a gun, you face an additional felony charge. This prohibition applies not only to guns, but to ammunition for any firearm.
This rule applies to any person who was adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile 14 years of age or older at the time of the offense of murder in violation of § 18.2-31 or 18.2-32, kidnapping in violation of § 18.2-47, robbery by the threat or presentation of firearms in violation of § 18.2-58, or rape in violation of § 18.2-61.
Any person under the age of 29, who was adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile 14 years of age or older, of a felony other than those specific felonies mentioned above, cannot possess or transport any firearm or ammunition for a firearm.
Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
Repeat offenders will face a harsher sentence with a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment.

Exceptions to this rule include possession of a firearm, ammunition for a firearm, explosive material or other weapon while carrying out his duties as a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or of the National Guard of Virginia or of any other state, any law-enforcement officer in the performance of his duties (a convicted felon as a law enforcement officer?), or any person who has been pardoned or whose political disabilities have been removed pursuant to Article V, Section 12 of the Constitution of Virginia provided the Governor, in the document granting the pardon or removing the person's political disabilities, may expressly place conditions upon the reinstatement of the person's right to ship, transport, possess or receive firearms.

How do you get your right to possess, transport or carry a firearm back? A petition filed in the circuit court of the jurisdiction in which you reside. Before you petition the court of an order allowing possession of a gun, you must first have your civil rights restored by the Governor.

Information to have your civil rights restored can be found at the site maintained by the Secretary of the Commonwealth. http://www.commonwealth.virginia.gov/JudicialSystem/Clemency/restoration.cfm