Hacker News Reader

Many nonviolent crimes are commonly associated with potential for violence. For example, selling meth is not a violent act, but betting that a meth dealer is a level-headed pacifist is not a very safe wager. (I am not really agreeing with the indiscriminate use of violence out there — just explaining the most logical rationale I've heard.)

They don't justify it. They just do it.

Raging hardon from all the adrenaline gushing in while storming the castle playing G.I. Joes with people lives - thats the justification.

You never know, he might grab a gun and start shooting if you give him a chance.

Not saying it's right, but I think that's the reasoning.

And that's why all police officers are already armed with pistols.

A no-knock warrant with holstered pistols would be entirely reasonable in a residential, non-violent crime conviction, don't you think? (Well, I would debate the no-knock part :)

> Does anyone know how they justify this type of violent entrance for a non-violent offender?

With the stick.