Michael Ramirez for September 27, 2020

B.S.

You misspelled: “Executing a no-knock warrant where it is disputed whether the officers properly identified themselves.” It’s OK. It’s been a rough 2020.

You’re asleep, in the middle of the night, there is a knock on the door…it’s someone claiming to be the police. Do you answer? Did you even have a chance to wake up and gather your wits? Doesn’t matter as they have already burst in…is it the cops or a home invasion?

This cartoon is a total mischaracterization of what happened. All the officers should have been charged with wanton endangerment since Kentucky law clearly states that police cannot fire unless they have a clear target. Shooting through a door does not provide a clear target. And only one of 12 witnesses finally said that he heard the police announce themselves, after being interrogated several times. And he does not speak English. The other 11 said there was no police announcement.

Sr Ramirez continues to lie and distort. How touching.

The police, of course, insist they identified themselves while numerous witnesses say they didn’t. Taylor and boyfriend are wakened from a sound sleep in the early a.m. by persons unknown breaking down her apartment door and he fires in what he considers self-defense. I don’t keep a gun in the house but I imagine one who does wouldn’t hesitate to use it under those circumstances.

Her boyfriend was calling 911 because he didn’t know they were police. He was using the right to defend your home from invaders. Police had a warrant for a man who was already in custody. Do we not have a right to be safe in our own homes?

So, Señor Ramirez, if it had been your familia, would justicia have been served?

A legal warrant would have correctly identified where the person they were looking for lived. The manslaughter charges should be against the idiots who prepared the warrant and the idiot judge who signed the warrant.

The cops had a no knock warrant that was changed to knock and announce. They returned fire as they should have. A tragedy, nothing more.

Don’t let facts get in the way of a cartoon Michael. I guess research is not one of your strong points.

They did not identify themselves. 11 people have testified to that.

I wouldn’t let no one break into the house, I would shoot them.

He shouldn’t have shot at the people breaking into the house.

Say the right wingers.

“Hi! I’m Michael Ramirez and I like to vomit up nonsense on a daily basis! Facts don’t mean a thing to me!”

#FDM (Facts Don’t Matter)

All burglars need to take note of this to get the advantage.. Crash the door… call yourself police and the occupants will stand down.

Here is what I find curious about the right’s portrayal of BLM. They never show a Black person being righteously angry about the treatment of Blacks by the police. It’s always some White guy. It makes me wonder what the message is.

What they say: everybody should be allowed to defend themselves with guns when somebody kicks in your door in the middle of the night.

What they mean: unless you are a minority.

Michael, the police were serving a no knock warrant. In addition, there are more ways to defend yourself then unloading everything you’ve got blindly.No one thinks that cops shouldn’t be able to shot back at someone who knows that they are shooting at cops.

Just like your brain.

People wear headphones, have different degrees of deafness, have fears of people impersonating police (or incompetently prepared warrants) and police may not announce themselves as loudly as they think while wearing “battle gear” (or lie retroactively). So, no chance of righteous indignation for being shot in your sleep?

Let’s see …No knock raids generally start by police using a battering ram to knock down the door while nearly simultaneously yelling “Police!”. Home invasions generally start by criminals knocking down the door while yelling whatever the invaders wish to yell. So, if home invaders choose to yell “Police!” are they legally protected from being shot in self defense by the occupant? How is the occupant supposed to know whether it is the police or not? If the occupant uses a rapid firing military style weapon to shoot through the door and wipe out a group of invaders he will receive praise from many, including politicians. If those invaders are police he will be vilified by the same people and prosecuted by the state. What a great legal system.

Assumes facts not in evidence. The warrant contained no particularized information as to why Taylor herself was dangerous or presented such a threat. And that, according to the Supreme Court, is not sufficient to grant a no-knock warrant.

@ rmfrye ( above ) — If Ramirez based his cartoons on facts, he might be reduced to being a service worker in an Adelson casino.

TROLLS by the dozen and not a brain cell among them. Where does The Repulsican Crime Cult find them? Busboys at Mar-a-Lago?

If you want to show you are for Biden/Harris, just put an American flag out.

It really IS that simple. They DID knock. More like pounded on the door. They DID announce.

And Walker DID open fire.

And lest we forget, the warrant was absolutely valid. Based on solid evidence that Taylor was involved in drug trafficking. She allowed Glover to use her car, her phone, her address and held cash for him. Please read ALL of the article below. If you still think the warrant was a mistake or ill advised you have a serious lack of knowledge about due process.

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/breonna-taylor/2020/08/25/report-details-why-louisville-police-decided-to-forcibly-search-breonna-taylor-home/5593502002/

Taylor herself created the circumstances that led to her death. It should not have happened. It is a tragedy that it did happen. But she CHOSE to not only associate with Glover but to assist him in his drug dealing enterprise.

Quit confusing people with the facts!

What they mean to people who no link to reality.

Shooting an innocent bystander is NOT self-defense.

And only one alleged witness, who has changed his story at least once, said they heard the cops identify themselves. All others say they didn’t.

And the subject of the warrant was in custody for an hour before the cops busted into Breonna’s apartment.

And Kenneth Walker fired ONE shot to protect himself and Breonna from armed intruders, while the cops responded with 32 shots.

Trump hasn’t paid any federal taxes for ten years.

It was a no-knock warrant.

The cops themselves, were probably pretty close to doing the things they needed to do to stay on the side of “legal” and even “within the rules”. The system  within which the cops were operating, however, is basically wrong/bad. The guy on the right may or may not be the guy on … or “in” the right. But of course you cannot expect nuance from Ramirez (or, usually, any political cartoon). PS: Imagine for a moment that you’re living in a neighborhood where gangs have been known to break and enter… and that you or your bedmate have recently broken off a relationship with such a gang. Are you feeling paranoid yet? You should be. NOW imagine that someone yells something and breaks down the door. You take ONE (justified?) shot at the intruders, and they return fire with 32 shots, not all directed at or near you. IS it against the law to defend your home against a poorly defined threat?

Again, Michael Ramirez can’t understand what the United States Constitution says or what it means. It clearly says and means that no person can be deprived of “life, liberty or property” without “due process of law.” Fifth Amendment.

The Fifth describes due process as indictment, trial, conviction (or acquittal) and finally punishment (or freedom, if equated). It applies to state governments or any of their agents, such as police, just as it applies to the national government.

There is no evidence from police or witnesses that Breonna Taylor was afforded her constitutional right of due process before she was deprived of her life. And there is no evidence she waived that right, as could be the case when a gunman engages police in a shootout.

If we had a legitimate national administration, its Justice Department might bring charges of violation of constitutional rights under the 1964 civil rights law. But nothing will be done by the present administration to protect anyone’s rights.

So where are the police body cams? Should clear it right up.

Waiting.

Of course they’re being shot at! Just because the police said that they identified themselves, doesn’t mean that Breonna Taylor or her boyfriend heard it (they were asleep at the time). If the police broke into somebody’s house, they will get shot at if the resident has a gun, as with anyone else. Add to that the fact that the police killed Breonna Taylor, but missed the boyfriend. It seem to me that shooting was not beneficial or effective.

Oh, and also, they let her die on the floor while they busied themselves with arresting her boyfriend. “Protect and Serve”, indeed. Trying to find a person who had already been apprehended. There was no good reason for the police to even be there.

Trevor Noah said it better than me though.

It’s clear that the majority of the posters have not taken the time to educate themselves about this. I watched the press conference with the Kentucky States Attorney and Michael has all the facts correct in this comic. Here’s my suggestion – when police try and question you or place you under arrest, don’t resist. The majority of these events begin with resisting arrest. Secondly, as stated, the police had a warrant. Her ex boyfriend was dealing drugs, and she said, while in jail (and recorded on the jail phone) that she was holding money for him. Please use facts, noe emotion when discussing these stories.

. . . and they argue that racism is not institutional

Don’t like Ramirez, don’t read it! Go to the NYTimes or Atlantic or any other of the Leftist hit pieces for THEIR “political” cartoons.

Shooting an unarmed black kid in the back is NOT how you arrest anyone…

The identification part is backed-up by one other person, while other residents say there was no identification. Should have worn their body cameras, but then the evidence would have been damning.

So, there is body cam video. It needs to be released. It should confirm if the announced themselves before knocking down the door.

Too bad you don’t recognize facts you don’t agree with. Try checking those facts out or prove them wrong instead of criticizing out of pure ideological blindness!

This didn’t age well…

Justice may not be perfect but it was served properly in this case. The outcome is not what was intended but it was not the actions of the police that caused that tragic end.