Your writing is terrible. You frequently misuse words and misplace punctuation. It’s as if you think a thesaurus can cover up the fact that you are an idiot. I take comfort in seeing that most of the intelligent comments in response to yours are well-written. For your sake, I hope that “edit device” becomes available soon, lest your obviously weak grasp on grammar, syntax and vocabulary weaken your future arguments.

Where’s the amdt for “street drugs” like there was for alcohol? If it’s such a wonderful cause then the amdt would pass in a heartbeat.

If the drug dealer in question never dealt drugs or if his wife cared more about her kids health and safety than the Benjamins, she’d not be in the predicament she was in either. In a world where drugs are illegal and those laws are enforced, anyone breaking them risks this outcome for themselves, their family members, and any law enforcement on the other side. You can’t just put all the blame on the laws and their enforcers.

Finally, google “felony stop officer shot” or “officer shot traffic stop” or “suspect shot arrested parking lot” and notice how many hundreds of thousands of stories come up. It’s not like this fanciful alternative of is a real one, and this sets aside the risk to convictions and evidence if it were honestly pursued.

-You have zero hard statistical evidence on the overall (mal) performance of SWAT teams in arrest mode;

-you don’t have the balls to admit that the wife’s gun (ownership), which your libertarian view nested, was ultimately used to kill the FBI agent.

And for the record, I do support DC/Heller. How ya’ like them apples.

But I’m not such a frickin’ ideologue that I would try to dodge the elephant in the living room.

If you want to try and make a (now clearly specious) case against SWAT teams and riot gear, and for dope legalization, you’d have more credibility if you’d readily address the DC/Heller consequences in this immediate matter.

Instead, we get the my-conservative-penis-is-more-conservative-than-yours polemic.

Yawn.

By avoiding or subtly deflecting the topic (and now-obvious downside) of the right to own guns, you make that downside and the weakness of your case all the more conspicuous, along with your anti-government, knee-jerk fundamentalism.

Would it be so much to ask that law enforcement make a documented showing that a particular individual is dangerous before sending in the SWAT team?

That, in essence, is what libertarians are asking for.

And resh, check out Radley Balko’s work for Cato on the subject. This is literally all there is because police departments don’t keep records on these sorts of things.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476

http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

Because no real conservative or libertarian has any problem with people having a gun for self-defense if they are not serving time in prison or demonstrably insane.

But nary a peep about the very thing that killed the agent-relaxed gun rights qua the DC Heller ruling that you libertarians thump your chest over.

Heller was irrelevant here. No one should be disarmed until they are arrested, prosecuted and convicted of a crime.

You got some splain’n to do, Lucy.

As do you, since you act like gun control would have played a key part in preventing this, a very liberal position. After your holier than thou claptrap above about living next to the ghetto, I wouldn’t be surprised.

Perhaps the most fundamental disagreement that we have here is that I don’t believe in saving people from themselves. Such is condescending, not kind.