Oops… Oh, well, it could happen to the best of us. Right? Well, for anyone who carries firearms like myself the answer is, “no, no it can’t because I exercise some basic safety rules when handling a gun.” But, I digress… Detroit strikes again:
“The shooting happened at 12:40 a.m., when officers from the Special Response Team executed a no-knock search warrant on a duplex in the 4000 block of Lillibridge on the city’s east side. Police say an officer’s gun discharged when he had a confrontation with a 46-year-old woman, and a single bullet struck 7-year-old Aiyana Jones in the neck as she slept on a nearby couch.”
Surprise, surprise it was a no-knock warrent. I’ve become somewhat of a critic of the practice of raiding homes without knocking or announcing “law enforcement” because it can lead to misunderstandings, namely someone opening fire on what they believe are intruders. In this case, that wasn’t the problem. The problem was a police for so trigger happy that they either accidentally or intentionally opened fire and killed a 7 year old girl. According to Assistant Police Chief Godbee:
“Godbee stressed that information he released was preliminary, and that the police department planned to launch a full investigation. He also said police are not categorizing the shooting as accidental yet, ‘although we don’t believe the gun was discharged intentionally.'”
Which is interesting because if anyone else “accidentally” fired a gun that killed a child they would be charged with involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide. If they intentionally did so it would be murder. But, since these Detroit’s “finest” I find myself extremely skeptical that any of that will happen, I would be surprised if the officer involved here was even fired, which should go without saying.
Another issue raised by the case, was it really necessary (or smart) to throw a flashbang through the window to say, “hi?”
“As is common in these types of situations, the officers deployed a distractionary device commonly known as a flash bang,” he said in the statement. “The purpose of the device is to temporarily disorient occupants of the house to make it easier for officers to safely gain control of anyone inside and secure the premise.”
Had they given the occupants a chance to simply open the door, maybe this could have been avoided.
Bottom line: the police executed what appears to be a lawful search warrent. Inside, they encountered no armed resistance. Everything was fine up to that point. Unfortunately, one officer decided to play fast and loose with his weapon. I’ll withhold judgment until all the details come out.