Your rhetorical questions are nonsensical, you continually ignore the questions posed to you, and I think we know why. You might sit on here and say one thing in an attempt to save face, but we both know that you don't want the police announcing their presence to an armed terrorist who will set off a nuclear device in a home. Let's go back to your man on the street. If you surveyed the average man on the street (which coincidentally is NOT the standard that the Courts use for a reasonable person, but I digress) and posed to them the "terrorist-armed-with-a-nuclear-device scenario", you'd be hard pressed to find one that believed the police had to knock and announce first. You know it, and I know, that's why you are trying to throw out red herrings now.
Look, it's this simple, a warrant gives the person holding it the right to break and enter into a home, if after announcing their presence, they are refused entry. Further, the no-knock warrants while generally unreasonable, are permitted in very limited circumstances. Finally, your whole contention regarding Plummer, John Bad Elk, and the State of New Mexico law is flatly without merit.
You are free to do as you like, and ultimately you will have to make your own decisions, just be aware that what you read on the internet, and what notions might flow through your head, are not representative of the actual state of the law, and any decisions that you thus make should keep this fact in mind.
Have the last word. Godspeed.