I'm all about supporting the boys in blue, and would defend one if I saw something going down.  But, I have to draw the line somewhere and there needs to be accountability, and a higher standard, and our second amendment rights are first and foremost to protect against government Tyranny.  The article is about a no-knock raid on the wrong house, no warrant, and the homeowner draws a gun to defend himself from what he reasonable be assumed a home invasion.  He gets shot, police are not held accountable.  Is this because the lawyer is arguing the wrong way in front of the supreme court?  I dont get it, but I do agree with the author.  The guys legal team argued that the 4th amendment was violated, why did they not argue the 2nd?  

Thoughts?  

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448142/angel-mendez-case-second-amendment-fourth-amendment-jurisprudence-flawed

Because it's a 4th Amendment issue and not a 2nd.

Officers ought to be up on charges.

His 2A rights were not violated.

I thought no nock raids were done with warrants...obviously someone didn't get the memo.  A no nock raid, without a warrant, on the wrong house is just asking for a civil suit, or violation of right to privacy suit.

Didn't read the article did ya?