Did you reply to the correct thread? Since your reply makes no sense when applied to my thread response.

The logic I put forth does not support giving the police more power. I simply state that having undercover officers has some good to it. Any power can be abused and thus needs checks and balances. If there was a better way then I would support it... And don't think I believe in the whole: if you don't do anything wrong then you have nothing to hide crap either. I believe in privacy of public citizens.

Name calling tells me your young and you will learn in time what it takes to keep a civilized world together.

So your saying that when police use undercover agents to bust kiddie porn rings, dangerous drug production labs, terrorist type groups and other similar things that are bad for society that you would rather they didn't bust them using a method that allows them to potentially find a larger number of members than those they would have caught by doing a single raid on a facility?

And to the point about police safety, I think anything that keeps anyone safe is a good thing. There is no need to point out there are more dangerous jobs. Its like saying that the taxi driver doesn't need a seat belt because the construction worker has a more dangerous job.