> It seems like a lot of people were fine with posting the addresses of Supreme Court members.
Even if you think that kind of protest is a step too far (I do), you surely agree that there's a fundamental difference between peaceful protest at the home of a public figure (which is quite clearly what happened) and the practice of SWATing, which even in its least dangerous form is a perjurious accusation of a serious crime.
>Everybody has a right to feel safe in their own home.
Bit of a devil's advocate here: I think private ordinary citizens should have this right. I think a lot of public figures have forgotten they're meant to be servants, not rulers. And I don't mean the supreme court, but congress and the senate. They fought and machinated and put great effort into attaining that position of power which they can abdicate at will any time they don't like the downsides. The fact that they don't says quite a lot. When you've built up all sorts of protective layers and alliances to protect yourself from any real accountability, it's invariably to the detriment of the people at large.
The People's History of the United States by Zinn is full of incidents of the people taking up arms en masse and getting what I would call justice for the little guy. Things like that are denigrated in the harshest possible terms and slandered and libelled with religious fervor these days. But I've read about Ruby Ridge, and Waco. The government was clearly the bad guy in those cases. But where was the accountability? One of the perpetrators at Waco was nearly nominated the head of the ATF instead of facing life in prison for killing children.
Even if you think that kind of protest is a step too far (I do), you surely agree that there's a fundamental difference between peaceful protest at the home of a public figure (which is quite clearly what happened) and the practice of SWATing, which even in its least dangerous form is a perjurious accusation of a serious crime.