AM64
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Messages
- 28,555
- Likes
- 42,352
I think that's his point. If someone busts your front door down I'm thinking it's kill or be killed. What possible crime could local police be investigating that they need a "no knock" warrant and apparently they didn't have one. Now if they didn't allow someone to answer the door and then broke the door down the cops are screwed.
What gives anyone including cops the right to break into someone's house? If it's not war - martial law, then the castle doctrine should apply - period. If it's a siege type situation and someone sticks a gun out the window and starts firing, perhaps sets fire to their unit in an apartment complex, or threatens/executes someone they have taken hostage; then all bets are off - until then it's civil enforcement. Even at that point there's often collateral damage, so why accept the risk of harming an innocent to sate testosterone lust.
Somehow I don't get the reluctance to stop a riot attendant with looting and burning by a crowd while allowing cops to break into a home to apprehend one person suspected of criminal action. It smacks of trespass and intemperate use of force in the lesser case and impotence in the one with far more serous consequences - like a bully choosing his moment.