Originally Posted by Razorsharp
Right, and your knee jerked and changed my contention from "extremely rare" to "rare", and a pissing contest ensued.
I still contend that "extremely rare" is a disengenuous assesment. It's almost dismissive of the actual instances.
Fine, we can go with "extremely rare" if you want. That should be easier for you to defend. At what frequency point do occurrences cross out of "extremely rare"?
"Extremely rare" is neither disingenuous or dismissive when you admit that even one event is too many, which I did.
Have you ever talked face to face with someone in law enforcement, in a position of responsibility and authority in the warrant service process, and asked why mistakes happen and what is being done to prevent mistakes?