I bet the most grieved person there though was the enforcer as he didn't get to smash a door down 
Clearly a well thought out, unbiased comment, based on full and comprehensive understanding of all details and facts relating to the situation...

Let's not forget, that magistrates granted a warrant, authorising the use of force to enter the property if needsbe, and thus making it lawful. And let's also not forget, that an enforcer was not actually used - simply taken along.
I'm sure the cops were all in posession of handcuffs, Batons, and CS Spray - but no mention of this in the article. They are just everyday tools, to be used in a lawful manner in cases where needed - and this also applies to the enforcer device.
One would only hope, that magistrates would make such a call, only if in posession of all the facts and with a genuine welfare concern.
I don't have an opinion on the situation. Why? Because I wasn't there when the facts were preseted to the magistrates, who subsequently considered it necessary to issue the warrant. I wasn't there when it happened. And I have no idea of any circumstances of events leading up to the issuing and the execution of the warrant.
Apologies if I sound a bit tongue in cheek. I agree the way it is portrayed by the news articles make it sound very OTT, but It just amazes me that people are prepared to jump on the "anti" bandwagon as soon as it starts rolling, without being in sure posession of all the facts....
