Responding to a Hacker News discussion about the article based in information from the article seems quite reasonable. Perhaps it does not deserve phrases like "saying stupid, reckless things". Could you step back for a moment and consider how YOU want others to perceive YOUR postings? I, for one, am a big fan of civil discourse on HN.
Given this is in the context of people loudly condemning a poster here for actually being concerned about other human beings' well-being, I think your claimed concern about "civility" in this one instance is dubious at best.
If someone prefers people making stupid and reckless arguments to other people civilly pointing out that those arguments are stupid and reckless, I'm not concerned about their perception of me.
In that case, the commenter who started this whole discussion of whether or not the researchers' behavior was in the wrong should've also educated him/herself before making phone calls to law enforcement agencies based on the claims of a WiReD article.
Or is basing one's statements on the subject matter alone only valid when you happen to agree with it?
Perhaps you should educate yourself before saying stupid, reckless things. The claims of the article are no defense.