Don't read to much into this. When we do that it gives them more power then what they actually have. This has been a common practice for years. Just because it made the news once doesn't mean it hasn't been done before.
Kinda like Flynn screwing around on his wife. Just because it made the news once doesn't mean he hasn't done it before.
This is really no different then these two scenarios:
Your walking down the street and you are stopped by someone who tries to rob you with a pencil. You take out your fire arm and shoot him. You are wrong. That is excessive force.
Your walking down the street and you are stopped by someone who tries to rob you with a fire arm and in fact fires the weapon in your direction. You draw your fire arm and shoot the person. You are justified and it is not excessive.
If the police in the situation announced in this thread enter the property without a warrant. It is more than likely because they believe someones life is in danger.
I want to be fair here. This forum is not for police bashing and "WE" unlike "Them" should not resort to such bashing. that is not what we are about. I want the police to know, that while I exercise my right to bear arms, I will be there should they ever need or ask for my assistance.
There will be times when one of us may be caught in a situation that is brought to the scrutiny of the public eye. We may have not done anything wrong even though the situation looks bad. We would want fair hearing and the facts brought to the table and an incident involving officers going into a home in an effort to legitimately save someones life, with or without a warrant should receive the same fair hearing and consideration.
If someone had broke into your home and was holding your family hostage and harming your loved ones, would you want the police to wait for a warrant before entering your property? Because that is the point of the article above.