It should be extraordinarily hard to get a no-knock warrant. They should have to prove an extreme threat of violence or that evidence will be destroyed. Our legal system is a farce, one step removed from Soviet Russia.
The only time a no knock warrant is justified is when you wouldn't need a warrant in the first place. Don't need a warrant to intervene in a hostage situation or a suspected bomb.
Perhaps you should need a warrant for a suspected bomb, so as to justify the suspicions to someone. Otherwise, anyone could make up a bomb suspicion as an excuse.
It should be extraordinarily hard to get a no-knock warrant. They should have to prove an extreme threat of violence or that evidence will be destroyed. Our legal system is a farce, one step removed from Soviet Russia.
I'll go one further. They shouldn't exist. There's not really a justification for it anyway, even if explosives are suspected on site.
The only time a no knock warrant is justified is when you wouldn't need a warrant in the first place. Don't need a warrant to intervene in a hostage situation or a suspected bomb.
Perhaps you should need a warrant for a suspected bomb, so as to justify the suspicions to someone. Otherwise, anyone could make up a bomb suspicion as an excuse.
Yeah you don't need a warrant to inspect a bomb at a mall.