Yes, I read and understand the English language well. Mind you, it is much easier for me to read and understand something that has been articulated well.
You obviously feel that I misinterpreted something about your post. To me it seemed that you were blaming the cops for getting killed and you minimized the responsibility of the accused killer.
What part of your post did I misunderstand?
The entire post, unfortunately.
It was not the fault of the cops that died. It was, in part, the fault of the policy of undercover sting operations. These good men were put in an unnecessary and dangerous situation by the top brass. They were just doing thier jobs, of course. The murderers are at fault for killing them.
The reason this situation existed at all is a result of dangerous and unnecessary policy i.e. undercover sting operations. Law enforcement should enforce the law and not break the law. Creating crime to prevent crime results in an increase in crime, LEO's walking a dangerous tightrope, violence and death to many of the officers ordered into these situations and a continual degredation of Liberty.
In short it's cheating and in all situations when you cheat you eventually lose. The bigger the stakes the bigger the loss. In this case the stakes were very high and these unfortunate men had to pay that price. I detest it, and I wish these good cops were still alive to protect and serve.
I hope this was more clear for you and a better articulation. In my censored post I was using generalities aimed at the entire nationwide practice using the obvious failure of stings in this particular tragedy as a springboard into a more general discussion of the failures of undercover stings as a form of law enforcement.