zlacker

Well I don't know who's going to be at the grocery store, so I better strap on my grenades. You can't be too careful.

>>jeffbe+(OP)
This is legitimately the argument I hear from my friends who are fans of open carry. Now, it's with AR's and AK's, instead of grenades, but that exact line is what they use. I find the fear simply fascinating and confusing.

>>jeffbe+(OP)
Grocery stores are public places, homes are not. Homes can be located in gang territory. Police ambushes do happen. I'm not saying they get it right 100% of the time, but serving warrants and bike patrol have way different risks.

It's also entirely possible the warrant was unjustifiably a high risk warrant. In that case, SWAT could serve the warrant, and you get this situation. But that's not SWAT's fault.

>>vsaret+Q3
> But that's not SWAT's fault.

Obviously it's no one's fault. We should just accept things the way they are and change nothing.

>>vsaret+Q3
This is the exact mindset that created the police state: There might be gang members, so rolling up in an armored vehicle makes sense.

>>vsaret+Q3
That would be (partially) SWAT's fault. I don't expect police officers (SWAT or not) to be automatons who blindly follow orders. They need to stand behind their actions. They shouldn't serve a warrant like that unless they believe it to be a high-risk situation.

>>Alexan+6d
>Obviously it's no one's fault. We should just accept things the way they are and change nothing.

I'm not saying that, you'd want to find out why the warrant was high risk or deserved a SWAT response. Someone made that call, and it may not have been SWAT themselves. And you should take actions to ensure it doesn't happen again and hold them accountable. If you find abuse of power, you need to get rid of that person.

The key theme here is that you usually don't get all of the details about why things happened. Sometimes it's honest mistakes. Sometimes it's abuse of power. Sometimes there's miscommunication.