LEO breaks into your Home w/o warrant - Now you can shoot them! - Page 9

LEO breaks into your Home w/o warrant - Now you can shoot them!

This is a discussion on LEO breaks into your Home w/o warrant - Now you can shoot them! within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by mcp1810 To put it in perspective in 1780 the population of the United States was 2.78 million. Adjusted for population,(scale) that would ...

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 141
Like Tree151Likes

Thread: LEO breaks into your Home w/o warrant - Now you can shoot them!

  1. #121
    Senior Member Array Chevy-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    To put it in perspective in 1780 the population of the United States was 2.78 million. Adjusted for population,(scale) that would be a total of about two warrants per day being served in all of the thirteen states. Do you really think the founding fathers would have objected to that?


    LOLOLOL, is 70,000 to 80,000 raids per year NOT an incredible number to you? How many annual raids would you consider "incredible"? Just curious.

    -
    mcgyver210 likes this.
    'Be careful, even in small matters' - Miyamoto Musashi


  2. #122
    Distinguished Member Array DontTreadOnI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by paaiyan View Post
    You don't get it. The numbers aren't important. The principle is.
    Hammer meet nail head. That's exactly it.
    mcgyver210 and Crowman like this.
    If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

  3. #123
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Chevy-SS View Post
    LOLOLOL, is 70,000 to 80,000 raids per year NOT an incredible number to you? How many annual raids would you consider "incredible"? Just curious.

    -
    I'll have to think about that. So you never answered my question. Do you think the founding fathers would have thought two search warrants like this per day in their entire country would have been excessive?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  4. #124
    P95
    P95 is offline
    Ex Member Array P95's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    304
    It's about time..

  5. #125
    Distinguished Member Array DontTreadOnI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    I'll have to think about that. So you never answered my question. Do you think the founding fathers would have thought two search warrants like this per day in their entire country would have been excessive?
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

    Tell me, how much leniency do you attribute to the phrase "shall not be infringed", and I will also answer your question.
    mcgyver210 and ccw9mm like this.
    If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

  6. #126
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    In my opinion both sides of this issue have legitimate concerns. It is more than likely true that if your home is invaded by armed individuals you will be harmed and possibly killed. If the invaders you presume to be bad guys are LEO's the chance of your being harmed are even greater if you resist.

    That fact should not deter a person from resisting if they are doing nothing wrong and truly believe that it is some street gang or other criminals. But please lets not add insult to injury by prosecuting a person, who while doing nothing illegal that would cause the Government to invade, attempts to defend themselves.

    Michael

  7. #127
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,104
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnI View Post
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."
    And the rest of that is.....
    and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    We are talking about officers in good faith executing properly issued warrants but making a mistake and hitting the wrong location. So like it or not this is not a 4A issue. It is a question of either someone reading something incorrectly or writing something incorrectly, unless you believe that officers are intentionally going to the wrong houses.
    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

    Tell me, how much leniency do you attribute to the phrase "shall not be infringed", and I will also answer your question.
    Well let's see......
    My oldest son will turn eighteen in a couple of months. Last week a doctor examined him for the courts. He is writing the letter to recommend the judge grant full guardianship (in all aspects) to me and my wife. I wont go into great detail but he suffered severe brain damage in the first forty eight hours of his life. His vocabulary is about three words. He can walk on level surfaces without assistance, and can eat finger foods but it still working on using a spoon or drinking out of a regular cup. Fortunately for us he is perpetually happy. Other than needing assistance in every manner of day to day life he is actually easier to deal with than a "typical" kid.

    So, what firearm do you think he should use when he exercises his second amendment right in public? Maybe something full auto with a 200 round Beta mag?

    Do I think his RKBA should be infringed? HELL YES I DO! Allowing him access to weapons would put his life, and those of everyone around him in jeopardy. Do I think the rights of convicted violent felons should be infringed? Yes I do. Do I think the rights of people who are habitual users of psychoactive chemicals should be infringed? Yes I do.

    If we believe wikipedia and CATO there have been forty "bystanders" (wiki's word) killed in this kind of incident since the "mid 1980's". The CATO map has filters that don't work but the oldest year they have is 1986. So that is just over 1.53 people killed in this kind of incident per year, out of a population of over three hundred million.
    Is that enough to say that officers should have to give people time to destroy evidence, grab a few extra magazines and put their armor on before the officers can open the door? I don't think so.
    Yes it sucks that people are getting killed in incidents like this but like I said before life isn't fair.
    tacman605 likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  8. #128
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    We are talking about officers in good faith executing properly issued warrants but making a mistake and hitting the wrong location. So like it or not this is not a 4A issue. It is a question of either someone reading something incorrectly or writing something incorrectly, unless you believe that officers are intentionally going to the wrong houses.
    Citizens should not have to give up their right to self-defense because of an error they had nothing to do with.

    Michael
    mcgyver210 likes this.

  9. #129
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    I'll have to think about that. So you never answered my question. Do you think the founding fathers would have thought two search warrants like this per day in their entire country would have been excessive?
    To answer your question, no. However, search warrants are not the issue at hand no knock warrants are.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  10. #130
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,104
    Who says anyone is giving up that right? Actions have consequences. Our world.and the people that populate it are not perfect. When we buy or guns and ammo we are assuming some risk. When we decide we are going to carry weapons we assume risk. If we decide to employ deadly force against someone we assume risk. If we are right we win. If we are wrong we are dead.

    This is serious business. Every time I load a weapon it is with the understanding that if I discharge that weapon it could result in me on a gurney in Huntsville with a needle in my arm. And I accept that.
    tacman605 and W9HDG like this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  11. #131
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    search warrants are not the issue at hand no knock warrants are.

    Wow well I guess I don't need to say then a No Knock warrant is a legal search warrant then.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  12. #132
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    MCP outstanding post.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  13. #133
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,011
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    We are talking about officers in good faith executing properly issued warrants but making a mistake and hitting the wrong location. So like it or not this is not a 4A issue. It is a question of either someone reading something incorrectly or writing something incorrectly, unless you believe that officers are intentionally going to the wrong houses.
    Let's go with your line of logic here for a minute and assume that all officer's motives are pure as the driven snow. This is still a 4A issue, front and center. Your protestations to the contrary don't change that fact one iota. For NKR warrants to actually meet the Constitutional definitions, they would have to say that "we are looking for 'so and so' and 'such and such' and, oh, BTW, if anything moves we reserve the right to blow it away."

    In addition to a 4A issue, this is a life, liberty and pursuit of happiness issue. If the law-abiding HO actually lives through defending his castle from invading cops, he has probably killed or severly hurt more than one. More frequently, he will die in the process. In either case, his life as he knew it is over, he will not have liberty and he will have lost his happiness forever. All because the 4A does not mean anything to our government.


    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    Yes it sucks that people are getting killed in incidents like this but like I said before life isn't fair.
    Correct, but you seem to like it best when the cards are stacked in the government's favor. If the governed get the impression that you are indicative of how the government thinks as a whole, and they are getting there, slowly but surely, but getting there, you should expect to see the consent of the governed revoked. I pray that we do not get to that point, but we do appear to be headed there. I hope we can reform the government at the polls, I really do, we shall see.
    mcgyver210 likes this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  14. #134
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,011
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    search warrants are not the issue at hand no knock warrants are.

    Wow well I guess I don't need to say then a No Knock warrant is a legal search warrant then.
    Legal - yes. Constitutional, not so much. Regardless of what 9 black robed government-employed lawyers say (and they, beinig 1/3 of the government have a vested interest in the growth of the government and its power), NKRs do not meet Constitutional muster.

    BTW, you would have made a great soldier in King George's army. You seem to think just like they did.

    In the United States of America, the government is not the sovereign, the people are.
    DontTreadOnI and mcgyver210 like this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  15. #135
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    Ks you really need to research a little more on search warrants and the process to obtain them.

    For NKR warrants to actually meet the Constitutional definitions, they would have to say that "we are looking for 'so and so' and 'such and such'


    Well no clue, that is correct it is called an affidavit, it is required on every search warrant regardless of type in the US, so since they are done on every single warrant in the United States then all the said warrants meet the requirments set forth in the constitution. There is not some "search warrants are us" shop in the back of Best Buy where LE can go to buy a search warrant.
    They have to go before a judge, present the affidavit and be sworn to it. Then and only then will the warrant be issued if the judge finds probable cause for the warrant. The officer can request all he wants for a no knock but if it does not meet the criteria it is not given.

    That criteria includes very specific things that LE is searching for it simply does not say "We want to search Bill's house" specific items or materials are listed. Should they find evidence of another crime they would stop and obtain a separate warrant for that item. If I am searching for drugs and decide to run th SN on the TV and it is stolen it does me no good that is evidence obtained from "The fruit of the poisonous tree" and is inadmissilbe in court. There is not even a crime scene exception to the constitution, meaning at the scene of a murder you better get a search warrant to gather evidence or you may find yourself losing your case when it goes to court.


    if anything moves we reserve the right to blow it away."


    Please show me in text or by case law that this is anything more than your ramblings.

    There are only three ways LE can enter your home. In active pursuit, he is chasing you and you run into your house he can follow you. Emergency circumstance, he answers a call to your house and sees someone stabbing you he can enter, he sees you laying on the floor bleeding he can enter or finally with a warrant issued by a judge anything else is unlawful.

    Well not sure about being a good soldier in the King's army, as I type this I am sitting here with my counterpart, a former British Armed Police Officer with more than 25 years service in England and Northern Ireland. I let him read some of the replies and he has informed me that I am much to weak and liberal to have been a good soldier in the King's army or to be a Police Officer in the UK.
    Whether you like the system or not we are luckier than other countries. In England for example if I am stopped and arrested for a "Serious arrestable offense" such as selling drugs, the officer then contacts a ranking police inspector who agrees, signs off and he can then search my car, house or anything else without a warrant or a judge involved at all. This includes the residence where I am simply staying at, doesn't even have to be mine and if they find evidence of another crime they simply arrest me on that charge and continue on.
    Then when I say "Simon is selling drugs to and is my supplier" they can now go arrest him for "Suspicion of selling drugs" and continue to search all he owns without a warrant at all and the process will continue until someone gets tired of searching. The entry into the home can be by whatever means needed to complete the search.

    Just for the hell of it I asked him if they were given a lot of false information that led to bad arrests and his reply was no, the system worked quite well. The officer makes an arrest, an Inspector signs off, the seach is done, evidence is found and they go to jail, "Quite simple really" in his heavy British accent.

    Whether you like the Supreme Court or not the issue of warrants has been through several Presidential administrations of both parties, several supreme court justices, and have passed the test of time and the courts, they are still there. There is nothing unconstitutional or illegal about them. Is the system perfect? Nope. But it is all we have to work with and there will always be someone who will try to work the system or the worst of all abuse it for their own gain.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

can you shoot a cop on your property

,
if a person breaks into your house how far in do they have to be before you can kill them
,

no knock warrant wrong house

,
powered by article dashboard brain injury support groups in wisconsin
,
powered by article dashboard cal grant application
,
powered by article dashboard how to buy a home and walk away from your home
,
powered by article dashboard michigan car accident
,
powered by article dashboard nevada museum of art
,
powered by article dashboard right to bear arms (1791)
,
powered by article dashboard speeches and statements
,
powered by article dashboard tn funeral home
,
the leo stack at your door
Click on a term to search for related topics.