[harpseal]

Despite what you say murder is a criminal charge that must be proven in a court of law. Clearly Wolk will never be in such a court to answer that charge. While my usuual stand is that most police officers are granted a certain benefit of the doubt in most circumstances there have been many cases where officers have shown themselves unworthy of theat benefit. I cite cases of corrupt officers , mistakes on the address of the warrant and officers serving warrants knowing that those warrants were inherently defective.

Had this entry to Mr. Wolk's home taken place during the daytime with an attempt at negotiation conducted before the fact I would be much more disposed to look favorably on the officer's behaviour. As it is his decision to serve this arrest warrant at 10:00PM is egregious and unreasonable. The fact that he was willing to resort to dynamic entry for a housing court order is even more outragous. Your attempt to dismiss me as a libertarian as though that meant the arguments I was advancing are also irrelevant.

[r9etb]

Your attempt to dismiss me as a libertarian as though that meant the arguments I was advancing are also irrelevant.

I was not dismissing you as a libertarian. Rather, I was dismissing the extreme libertarian aspects of your argument, which admit to absolutely no possibility of a legitimate government role in matters of private property.

The basic facts remain:

Whether or not you agree with the law in question, the law exists. Members of a civil society cannot pick and choose which laws they will or will not obey.

The officer was serving a legal warrant to arrest Mr. Wolk for his flouting both the law and the courts.

Mr. Wolk killed him in the course of resisting arrest.