In a previous post, I discussed how the metaphorical “War on Drugs” has become deadly literal. I then discussed the case of Derek Copp, who was shot by police during a raid of his home when he moved his hand to shield his eyes from their flashlights. Derek’s case is hardly isolated. Any time armed people break into someone’s home unannounced, the chances of a casualty go up.

There are casualties on both sides. In the case of Kathryn Johnston, the mortality was the ninety-year-old homeowner, who probably thought she was being robbed when she fired at the people who were breaking in her metro-Atlanta door late at night. In the case of Ryan Frederick, the mortality was a police officer, and Ryan was convicted of manslaughter (although I’m not sure why shooting at someone who is breaking in your door in the middle of the night should be a crime).

Police argue that no-knock raids are necessary to prevent suspects from destroying evidence when they realize the cops are at the door, but I wonder whether other techniques could accomplish the same goals while reducing the likelihood of casualties. I read about a case (sorry, extensive googling failed to find the link) in which police knew that kids were in the home and so opted to make a traffic stop and arrest the suspect on the side of the road, in order to spare the kids the risk of an armed raid. The mom didn’t realize that the traffic stop was anything but routine until it was too late.

After reading about that case, I started to wonder why no-knock raids were the norm, when more subtle and creative techniques could be just as effective and safer for everyone involved. One obvious answer is that the police are operating with a fundamentally military mindset, and so they choose to confront the “enemy” with overwhelming force. Is this answer too simple? Is there more to the situation? Let me know in the comments.