> You asserted that crimes where the police might need to barge in without knocking in order to prevent destruction of evidence are most likely nonviolent crimes. In fact, that kind of situation is almost exclusively drug crime, and the drug world is a violent place.

> As I said, the fact that no-knock SWAT teams are sent in indiscriminately is bad, but it doesn't mean that crimes where evidence can be flushed down the toilet are "a non-violent crime, probably."

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.h...

Alcohol is more dangerous than all drug related crimes combined to LEO. Not just raids. anything.

Please provide statistical evidence that a drug arrest is more violent/dangerous than other arrests. Please also provide evidence that a large percentage of these arrest involve violent offenders.

And nothing you've said precludes what I said should happen [ search the premise when its unoccupied ].

It has been about a day without a response so I'm assuming you lack such sources/evidence to support your claim.

You are demanding data to support the idea that drug rings are associated with violence. That demand does not suggest to me that this will lead to a productive conversation regardless of how I answer. So if you want to believe that associates of Mexican drug lords are all hippie antiwar activists, I guess I am not going to be the one to disabuse you of that notion.

Actually, I'm demanding data that drug arrests are more dangerous than other arrests. Or really any data supporting your position in general.

I'm not sure how that wasn't clear when I explicitly stated it.

Instead of doing this, you continue to make up ridiculous misrepresentations of what I've said.