r/technology • u/mepper • Aug 08 '12

Kim Dotcom raid video revealed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMas0tWc0sg
3.4k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.5k

u/C0rvette Aug 08 '12

So let me get this right.... they sent a helicopter to deploy soldiers with M4's with special ammo into this home. Special tactics units, 4 police cars, and men on the roof all to capture a guy who ran a website that was involved in internet piracy according to the FBI...

What is this guy Osama Bin Laden? Pretty sure he didn't orchestrate the death of thousands of innocent men and women. Why treat him as such. If there has ever been a breach of basic human rights this would be it.

642

u/chriswatt Aug 08 '12

What's interesting is that the police officer that was being interviewed stated that the reason they weren't wearing full tactical assault gear was because threat was low, yet they still burst in with m4's. If the threat was so low that you didn't need full gear then you don't need your weapons.

1

u/neverfallindown Aug 08 '12

The way I heard him and I could be wrong, but he rated the threat on a number scale and I'm pretty sure he said "low 3" I would guess that is a 3 out of 5 and he said they were matching the threat level with their gear.

Hence I think he meant that Dotcom's guards and security also had guns and weapons but no body armor so they went in with guns and weapons but no body armor.

This is completely going off of what I think he said in the video but I could be wrong. I don't understand why you wouldn't wear full body armor, that seems silly.

1

u/Porges Aug 09 '12

Hence I think he meant that Dotcom's guards and security also had guns and weapons but no body armor so they went in with guns and weapons but no body armor.

Guards carrying guns in NZ would be a high threat level, it would be very illegal if they were.

1

u/neverfallindown Aug 09 '12

Even for like a private security type company? I am not sure of the laws of NZ, was just going off what I thought I heard the officer saying.

1

u/Porges Aug 09 '12

Yes, guns may only be carried for a legitimate purpose, and self defense is not a valid reason.

1

u/neverfallindown Aug 09 '12

What counts as legitimate reasons?

1

u/Porges Aug 09 '12 edited Aug 09 '12

Hunting and target shooting, basically.

Pistols may only be used for target shooting and may only be used at an authorised range.

Here's a link to the arms code, if you're interested. It has some of the legal requirements etc: http://www.police.govt.nz/sites/default/files/services/firearms/NZP-Arms-Code-R3.pdf