> there's basically 1 of 2 scenarios: What utter bullshit. Here are just a few more: 3. You're a presumed "bad" person, but a no-knock raid is completely unw

> there's basically 1 of 2 scenarios: What utter bullshit. Here are just a few more: 3. You're a presumed "bad" person, but a no-knock raid is completely unwarranted. They shoot your fleeing dog in the back. 4. There has been a clerical error, and you were mistaken for a presumed "bad" person, but a no-knock raid was completely unwarranted in the case they anticipated anyway. They shoot your fleeing dog in the back. You are being willfully ignorant if you think these scenarios don't play out, and if you think the cops never deserve blame. I linked you to one such scenario. Click the link and read. > " The other dog was shot twice, including once in the back of the leg which bolsters Calvo's argument that the dog was fleeing and that the force used was "unbelievably excessive".[13] This version of events was also confirmed by the later testimony of a law enforcement officer present at the raid.[21]" > "In depositions, law enforcement personnel admitted that at least one of the dogs was running away when shot.[26]"