Police screw up, shoot unarmed WHITE kid this time

[Esquire]

Depends on the situation. If they had a no-knock warrant (or whatever the technical term is, it varies from place to place), they wouldn't have been required to identify themselves as police officers. Usually, though, you'd be right. Without a warrant, it is illegal for police to enter a house in an official capacity except with permission from the owner or in a few special cases - hot pursuit, probable cause, an in-progress emergency, that sort of thing.

[Ralin]

Huh. I didn't know there were federal restrictions now.

You know, you're right. There are none. I could have sworn there were...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrow ... _ownership

Guess it's only some states that require licensing.

Yeah, I remember reading a Cracked article (reliable source, I know) mentioning that there was no law against having one in Arizona. Also apparently it's unconstitutional to ban the user of tracer bullets during dry seasons.

But I've never heard of someone committing a crime with a flamethrower, so I guess the system works?

[Zaune]

That's because flamethrowers aren't all they're cracked up to be; their range isn't very long, they draw enemy fire like Justin Beiber draws verbal abuse and you have to strap a pressurised tank full of flammable chemicals to your body in order to use them.

[Tribble]

That's why they are no longer used as a weapon of war. And because the deaths they inflict were deemed to be too horrible. Media and all that.

But I'm surprised not even one criminal has thought of using one. As a terror/ambush tactic against civilians and other criminals you'd think it'd work, especially if they are indoors. If everyone in the room is set on fire, I would imagine it would be difficult for them to focus on drawing their firearms and aiming accurately enough to hit you.

[Simon_Jester]

Tribble, they're huge and conspicuous, completely impossible to conceal. By the time you've "set the room on fire" they've already shot you, or more likely just ran out of the room because seriously flamethrower guy.

How often do you really think that a typical criminal needs to ambush a room full of people? That's never normally part of their M.O. Where's the money in that?

[Zaune]

Further to which, I can't imagine having whatever the hell those things are fueled by (diesel? Thickened gasoline?) soaking into your clothes from a bullet hole some cop made in the tank is any more fun if you're a would-be terrorist or spree killer. And authentic military ones are rare and expensive and DIY ones wouldn't be very easy to make. If you have a truly uncontrollable urge to burn horribly someone to death then you're better off with the good old-fashioned Molotov Cocktail.

[Tribble]

They worked quite effectively in WW2 clearing out bunkers filled with soldiers. The flames can round corners, and they can also deprive the area of oxygen. I agree that the opportunities where their use would be warranted would be very limited, I'm just surprised it hasn't been attempted even once by a civilian. I mean, everybody knows what a flamethrower is, and they're not even illegal to own. You'd think that at least one person would have tried it by now.

Hmmm, throwing one Molotov Cocktail isn't a guarantee you'd get your target, you'd have to use several at once, just to be safe. Are there any Molotov Cocktail launchers?

EDIT: Nvm, that would be far too slow and inefficient compared to simply throwing them as quickly and accurately as possible,

[Korgeta]

Why buy a flamethrower when you can simply create an improvised one ie: Lighter and aerosol, or even customizing a hand held cutting torch. Of course improvised weapons are dangerous but their generally easy to assemble, harder to detect which is what you want if you are intending to cause terror or what.

As for the case, I agree with earlier suggestions that their isn't enough details to give a clearer picture, the officer may have been on the edge, the victim may have tried to scare the officer by claiming he had a gun just prior to the door opening. I sometimes wonder if the second amendment has fuelled paranoia in American society over time instead of intending to reassure them (if that was the intention).

[Lord Revan]

They worked quite effectively in WW2 clearing out bunkers filled with soldiers. The flames can round corners, and they can also deprive the area of oxygen. I agree that the opportunities where their use would be warranted would be very limited, I'm just surprised it hasn't been attempted even once by a civilian. I mean, everybody knows what a flamethrower is, and they're not even illegal to own. You'd think that at least one person would have tried it by now.

well the thing is flamethrowers are very fuel hungry, heavy, very situational and very, very likely to bite you in the ass at urban environments (since unlike in PC games they will light anything flammable including wallpapers, wooden structure elements and anything made of cloth), not mention they're more then likely to get unwanted attention from the authorities even if they're technically not illegal.

TL:DR flamethrowers just aren't worth the cost for most criminals or terrorists.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

Further to which, I can't imagine having whatever the hell those things are fueled by (diesel? Thickened gasoline?) soaking into your clothes from a bullet hole some cop made in the tank is any more fun if you're a would-be terrorist or spree killer. And authentic military ones are rare and expensive and DIY ones wouldn't be very easy to make. If you have a truly uncontrollable urge to burn horribly someone to death then you're better off with the good old-fashioned Molotov Cocktail.

The ones you can buy nowadays count as farm equipment, and are fueled with propane.

[spaceviking]

I am not sure if you would call them civilians... but, some people have tried it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_ ... checkpoint

[RogueIce]

I don't get the not responding to the "who is it?" if that's what happened.

This makes me wonder as well. If it was a no-knock warrant I could see it, but I literally can't think of any reason police would actually knock and then not announce "Police Department!" or something similarly identifying in a loud, clear voice. I suppose if Kamikaze Sith wanders by he can weigh in on this, but I don't see why they would keep silent after knocking and even when somebody asks who is it and they don't respond, as the article says.

[Thunderfire]

A WW2 veteran used an improvised flamethrower against school children in cologne germany. Here is the wikipedia article about the incident.

[NecronLord]

I am not sure if you would call them civilians... but, some people have tried it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_ ... checkpoint

Certainly not. They might be civilians by law, but by that standard the Viet Cong were civilians. Certainly they considered themselves an army, issued ranks, were led by an 'Army Council' and 'General Headquarters' it's not at all relevant to discussion of regular criminal activity.

[Lolpah]

Protesting south Korean veterans also used a flamethrower a few years back:

So yeah, flamethrowers have been used, even if infrequently.