Message from @ImNotGas
Discord ID: 787056553030582312
being told is not changing the warrant
I mean, if you want to get into that level of semantic argument.
im not the one being semantic lol
since you decided that my statement was wrong even though it wasnt
Yes, because they were told to knock. I didn't exactly say you were wrong, I was attempting to further clarify.
Because your statement left out context, hence why I followed it up. I didn't say your facts were wrong.
yes but your context was incorrect, or half correct, and then you said i was being semantic
when i was just providing context for your context
Not really?
the warrant being downgraded
That's a matter of perspective I suppose.
That is true.
we are talking about legal proceedings so semantics are important
😛
It was downgraded. If it weren't, they'd not have knocked and announced.
And they'd not have been ordered/told to knock and announce.
who did the ordering?
I'm guessing one of their superiors, as these things usually go.
only a judge would have the authority to change a warrant right?
but
i dont believe the warrant itself was changed
This is where we'll get into a semantics argument between literal and figurative.
well
lets stick with literal
We both know the judge didn't issue a change in the warrant.
ok
so the warrant wasnt changed, they were ordered to knock and announce
Which in my opinion is a downgraded warrant.
so we can pin the culpability for that on whoever did the ordering
Eh? I still think the culpability resides with whomever ordered the original warrant.
Unless we're trying to guess 'what would have been' if they were to execute it as a no-knock warrant.
i am not a fan of no knock warrants
Oh, I hate them.
They're anti-American.
but i would say in this case there would probably be less dead people
If executed as a no-knock?
yeah
of course if no warrant was issued there would be no dead people as well
You could certainly argue that, but I have a feeling he kept his gun close to him at all times.