Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

Now Playing at Reason.tv: Mississippi Drug War Blues—The Case of Cory Maye

Reason Staff | 5.8.2008 7:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Visit this story.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Sit On It

Reason Staff
PolicyNanny StateWar on DrugsCultureCivil LibertiesRacismReason.tvDrew CareyPrisonsDrug PolicyDrugs
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (22)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. CSI   17 years ago

    I'm sure its excellent, but I don't think I could stand watching that video at the moment. As I noted in the thread about Tracy Ingle, it now seems to be the de facto position of police across America that if you become aware of someone trying to break into your home, you are to automatically assume they are police and immediately become completely passive and submissive. Why don't they make this their official policy? Perhaps they're afraid that this would make it a little too obvious that many police regard the constitution and bill of rights with complete contempt.

  2. UCrawford   17 years ago

    Great piece, Radley. Very well done. The telephone call made by the racist CI was particularly shocking.

    BTW, it appears to have knocked all of your other May posts off your site

  3. Radley Balko   17 years ago

    Thanks, but my role in the video was mostly advisory. Paul Feine and Roger Richards deserve the credit. I think they did a tremendous job.

  4. jmr   17 years ago

    I'm amazed that despite Radley's excellent journalism (or maybe because of it, if my theories about antilibertarian media bias are correct, as it seems!) the political left doesn't latch on to this case.

    What is it about "Mumia" that they love so much, anyway?? It can't be the gun, they hate those, so it must be some deep, intellectual reason -- like the fact that "Mumia" changed his name to something politically-correct & revolutionary-sounding. Perhaps Mr. Maye should consider changing his name in order to get "mainstream" attention?
    JMR

  5. Rhywun   17 years ago

    you are to automatically assume they are police

    And why not. It probably is, anyway.

    What is it about "Mumia" that they love so much, anyway??

    He's one of their own? Mr. Maye is just some guy, just living a boring life. Where's the interest in that.

  6. Joseph   17 years ago

    Why are you defending this guy? He killed a cop, is that supposed to not incur a penalty. I feel bad for him because it was perhaps an accident, but this has to be a strict liability issue. Didn't they identify themselves? Even if he suspected that they were not cops, why didn't he call the police instead of shooting?

  7. Brandon   17 years ago

    Joseph, are you kidding me?

    Cops take about 5-15 minutes to arrive on a scene.

    If they weren't cops, he could have been murdered before then.

    If you break and enter into someone's house-whether you're a cop, a criminal, or a girl scout-you run the risk of getting shotted dead.

  8. Andrew   17 years ago

    Joseph -- Why couldn't he have called the cops? Because if they weren't cops, he likely would've been dead before someone on the other end of the phone could answer.

    The "self-defense" defense to murder is based on whether the defendant, subjectively, had a REASONABLE BELIEF that he was in immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury. When someone's bashing down your back door in the middle of the night, that's gonna give you a pretty reasonable belief in that respect.

    As for identifying themselves as cops, the cops say they did, Maye says they didn't, but I don't think it matters either way. Just read a case the other day out of Brooklyn where they arrested a gang who had been breaking into the homes and cars of drug dealers by identifying themselves as police.

  9. Joseph   17 years ago

    Joseph -- Why couldn't he have called the cops? Because if they weren't cops, he likely would've been dead before someone on the other end of the phone could answer.

    Well that is the liberal response.

    The "self-defense" defense to murder is based on whether the defendant, subjectively, had a REASONABLE BELIEF that he was in immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury.

    What if their cops?

  10. Joseph   17 years ago

    If you break and enter into someone's house-whether you're a cop, a criminal, or a girl scout-you run the risk of getting shotted dead.

    You'd better be sure they aren't cops.

  11. Mike Laursen   17 years ago

    It's great that Drew Carey lends his name with these reason videos. All of the videos so far have been about relatively light-weight subjects where most people are likely to agree, but this time he's really sticking his neck out.

  12. Andrew   17 years ago

    @Joseph:

    Well that is the liberal response.

    Well isn't that a nice non-sequitur. I'm not a liberal. Nor am I a conservative. You, however, are a troll. But I'm going to continue responding cuz I'm bored.

    What if their cops?

    I'll ignore the grammatical error there.

    It doesn't matter if they're cops. The self-defense law doesn't have an "unless they're cops" exception. It's a reasonable belief that your life is in danger. If you KNOW they're cops, that's one thing. But Mr. Maye didn't know they were cops.

  13. JW   17 years ago

    Why are you defending this guy?

    You must be new here. Feel free to use this new tool called a search engine to educate yourself before asking so many ignorant questions/statements.

  14. J sub D   17 years ago

    Didn't they identify themselves? Even if he suspected that they were not cops, why didn't he call the police instead of shooting?

    Errr, even if it were criminals, calling 9-1-1 might not have helped.

  15. Nick M.   17 years ago

    Joseph | May 8, 2008, 11:13am | #

    Joseph -- Why couldn't he have called the cops? Because if they weren't cops, he likely would've been dead before someone on the other end of the phone could answer.

    Well that is the liberal response.

    Now that's just funny. It's typically the gun-hating liberals who espouse the idea that it is better to call the police than engage in self defense.

    And, as J sub D pointed out, there is absolutely no guarantee that the cops will even show up.

  16. TallDave   17 years ago

    Very good work Radley. This case is such a horribly perfect example of what a mess the WOD has become.

    You break down a guy's door, he's going to defend his home. What's the confusion here? Is that connection really so hard to make?

    In the old days, you didn't break down a guy's door unless he was already so dangerous it was more risky NOT to break down the door.

    We repealed Prohibition for a reason. Having "morality police" doesn't work any better now than it did then, or any better here than in Saudi Arabia or under the Taliban.

  17. ghezbora   17 years ago

    Why does it matter if the police identified themselves? Either way, what Cory did was reasonable. Any idiot can yell "police." There is no way for police to authenticate their identity in a dynamic entry situation, it's simply impossible. The decision to shoot or not shoot takes place before any opportunity to confirm their identity. Ergo, it is reasonable to shoot at armed intruders, even the ones that yell "police."

  18. JW   17 years ago

    Holy shit J sub, that's horrible.

    Stop competing with Radley to depress me.

  19. R C Dean   17 years ago

    Ergo, it is reasonable to shoot at armed intruders, even the ones that yell "police."

    There's no way to confirm that their cops unless they present their credentials in a civilized fashion.

  20. Paul   17 years ago

    Please, everyone, Joseph is a troll.

  21. Windypundit   17 years ago

    "There is no way for police to authenticate their identity in a dynamic entry situation, it's simply impossible."

    Yeah, that's really starting to piss me off. Cops in these botched raids always say they identified themselves as cops.

    Bullshit. To identify themselves as cops, they'd have to show a badge and police ID.

    They didn't identify themselves as cops, they just claimed to be cops, which is something anyone can do.

  22. the innominate one   17 years ago

    Joseph:

    the castle doctrine. very conservative and traditional.

    now, fuck off and die.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Are the News Media in Their Onion Era?

Joe Lancaster | From the June 2025 issue

Alton Brown on Cultural Appropriation, Ozempic, and the USDA

Nick Gillespie | From the June 2025 issue

James Comey's Deleted '86 47' Instagram Post Is Obviously Protected by the First Amendment

Billy Binion | 5.16.2025 4:48 PM

New Montana Law Blocks the State From Buying Private Data To Skirt the Fourth Amendment

Joe Lancaster | 5.16.2025 4:05 PM

Trump's Tariffs Are Sapping Small Business Optimism

Autumn Billings | 5.16.2025 12:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!