If the police have a search warrant, know I have weapons in the house (which I do), and have some reason to expect a violent response to their entry. But comparing entry into a home for theft, is often a whole different thing then entering a home looking for drugs. Where drugs are involved the likelyhood of armed resistance is significantly higher. Again, if the police had credible information that they might encounter armed suspects that would likely resist with gun fire....the tactics they used are totally proper.
It sounds like they used a no knock entry....which to me implies they were expecting armed resistance along with a strong concern about evidence being destroyed.
Just because a raid doesn't turn up everything you are looking for doesn't mean the raid was carried out improperly. There are many factors that are outside of the control of the police that can have an impact on the success of such a raid, not the least of which is someone tipping off the bad guys so they have time to get rid of evidece, so they can claim they were poor victims of an overy aggressive police force.
To condem the police, as many of you seem do be doing, without knowing more about the subject, is just wrong.
You can say this to justify any action. "prepared for firearms" In Texas? go figure. Moderate risk? Is there ever a low risk? probably not. This is legalese to cover their actions. I fully appreciate the dangerous nature of police work. However I'm afraid that after prolonged exposure to the worst elements of society, some forget that most of us aren't violent criminals. Now if they thought they were busting a major drug dealing operation, that might justify the fear of an armed response. But some guy with a bong watching NASCAR doesnt justify the force in my opinion.
i'm curious how you come to the conclusion that a person who is a drug user (a non-violent misdemeanor offense) is more likely to present armed resistance than a burglar (felony offender).
And why is that, do you think?
BTW, it's "likelihood".
What more is there to know? If there had been sufficient quantities of drugs found to charge someone with distribution offenses, don't you think the police would have released that information? The truth is there is nothing more to know. A home was invaded by police, a dog was shot and killed, several thousands of dollars of property damage occurred, peoples' lives were put in danger (LEO's and citizens) and miniscule amounts of pot were found. If one supports the WOD, then this is just collateral damage. If one doesn't support the WOD, then this is evidence of legalized tyranny.
The reason behind these types of raids is that politicians and LE officials have decided that securing the evidence (drugs) is more important than the lives of the inhabitants of the home and the lives of the officers instructed to carry out these legalized home invasions. Ain't social engineering grand?