5 ms·
I don't see how this would bypass the need for a warrant. It'd allow for picking the lock rather than breaking it when you _do_ have a warrant (and whoever has
by phantom784 8mo ago
I don't see how this would bypass the need for a warrant. It'd allow for picking the lock rather than breaking it when you _do_ have a warrant (and whoever has the key isn't available or isn't cooperating).
- dec0dedab0de 8mo agoI have seen cops use lockpicking guns while serving warrants. I would much rather them do that then break the door down. Hopefully projects like this can make this better. Even though it’s cool enough on its own to exist just because Even if the person is stone guilty I don’t think the police should be willy nilly destroying property in the process of serving a warrant. I know much of the focus is rightly on increasing accountability for the damage done to humans, but I always cringe at the thought of how much damage they can cause while performing a search. Imagine if your kid, or roommate had a warrant and they came in, smashed all your drywall and left you with the bill.
- dylan604 8mo ago> I would much rather them do that then break the door down The fact that law enforcement isn't responsible for damages during a search is problematic. When it's done somewhere when they've screwed up the address is even worse. "oops, sorry" should not be enough.
- dec0dedab0de 8mo agoEspecially with body cameras becoming ubiquitous, it should be easy enough to distinguish between necessary and excessive damage.
- ImPostingOnHN 8mo agoAnd once the distinction is made?
- dec0dedab0de 8mo agopay people who are victims of excessive damage, and punish the people responsible.
- ImPostingOnHN 8mo agoAh, that leaves us where we are now: able to recognize excessive force and excessive damage, but lacking the ability to punish the people responsible, who also decide not to pay victims anything.
- chuckadams 8mo ago> The fact that law enforcement isn't responsible ... is problematic FTFY