User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 12:22:29 AM EDT
[#1]
To all the looney-tunes who can't wait to shoot a cop serving a warrant or whatever, why are all of you so studiously ignoring the one and only true and correct answer to this question? It was natez's post. Go back and read it. Better yet, here it is again:
There is no right, implied, constructive, common law or otherwise to use force to prevent a police officer from serving a warrant. The 4th Amendment to the US Constitution enumerates a right to be free from unreasonable searches. It also provides for the issuance of search warrants. If the police come to your house to serve a search warrant, and some kinds of arrest warrants, they have a duty and an authority to enter the residence to conduct their searches and arrests. The occupants have no legal standing to resist the lawful execution of a search warrant, and the officers have the authority to forcibly enter. In some circumstances, almost always when specifically authorized by the judge issuing the warrant, officers may break and enter into a residence without first anoouncing their intentions. There is no legal right to resist. This is all very clearly established in case law. He hit the nail squarely on the head. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 2:39:51 AM EDT
[#2]
Thanks, Dave_G
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 4:29:13 AM EDT
[#3]
I will second Natez's truth.
Also, to keep on the subject of this thread I will respond as a 17 year veteran LEO, held every rank from Patrolman to Chief. An LEO acting within the scope of his official duties is presumed to be acting lawfully when serving court process including writs and warrants, or when conducting a warrantless search or arrest based on probable cause or an investigation based on reasonable suspicion. All of these actions are in fact reviewed by the court for their validity ( if you think the courts give LEOs a free pass on this stuff you don't get to court much). If you got a beef take it up with the judge. Simply put, most people are not qualified to determine if they think their rights were violated, because they don't know in modern legal terms where their rights begin and end. They simply know what they believe based on their specific point of view. That is why the court reviews pretty much all police actions that result in arrest or seizure of property. There is no right to resist the police in the performance of their official duties unless you are prepared to declare a state of war between you and the government. In that case you will still be taken into custody and probably jailed, or put into an assylum. Do cops make mistakes and hit the wrong house, Yep, but rarely. It is uncommon enough to be national news. The following lawsuit, usually done on contingency is usually worth about $500k-$1m to the victim of the mistake. Simply put, if I believe I am performing my lawful duties, and someone opens fire on me. I will return fire in kind and with all necessary tools at my disposal. I will summon that help necessary to end the threat to my life. We will not just go away because someone thinks they want to resist lawful process. As to those who bring up Ruby ridge or Waco, we could just as easily say these tragic events could have been avoided had the primary actors, IE, Weaver or the Dividians, come out peacefully when the cops showed up. Fact is that they would not have been harmed and had their day in court. The fact is that we live in a republic. That means democraticly elected representative government. There are checks and balances built in to the system. The legislature writes the laws, the Judiciary interprets the laws and determines constitutionality, and the Executive branch enforces the laws. Thats the way it is. If you don't like the law, vote for representatives that will change it in your direction, but you have no right at all to open fire on people who are acting within the scope of their official duties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 7:37:12 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: ...., some of you bastards are a bit twitchy on the trigger. I always thought that me pulling a weapon and killing somebody was if I felt I had no other option. In all the scenarios described, you HAVE other options. This is the response I find myself agreeing with after reading through this thread a couple of times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 7:50:55 AM EDT
[#5]
You don't bust a cap in every cop who pulls you over for speeding. That is ridiculous. But in your home, it is different. I don't know why an LEO would be trying to kill you in your own house but in many situations you either don't know it's an LEO or don't have time (most likely scenario) to decide.
However, it is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 8:49:49 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:Another scenario: if he bolts out the door, I won't shoot him. I [b]WILL[/b], however, catch him. But, if he starts to jump my shit, and the situation escalates to where I am under physical threat from him, I would indeed pull the trigger on him. Yes, over a loaf of bread. Which was your question, and my ultimate answer. You just changed the situation from one of defending your property to defending your life. We can all agree (except maybe the Amish and other pacifists) that this is moral, and thus doesn't address what The_Macallan was discussing. It still comes down to a person's life being more important and valuable than property. Also, not all rights are equal. The right to life is paramount because [b]without the right to life, the other rights are meaningless.[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 10:51:19 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Perhaps now you can see why I answered the way I did, and, if not agree with, at least understand my reasoning. But don't just assume that I'd blow his head off as he snuck out the door while I hand another customer's change back at the register, as if there was nothing peculiar about it. the_reject The problem is that I can only judge your intentions and "ethos" by the information you give me. You did not say that you would kill the individual after passing through a reasonable escalation of force, only pulling the trigger in the gravest extreme that you felt your life was threatened. You said you would kill a homeless man over a loaf of bread. It was a very simple and direct statement. When called out, you defended that simple and direct statement, and only when put to it by multiple people who felt your response was cracked, have you changed the statement to lookat reasonable escalation. "What we have here is a failure to communicate." The problem is that these failures get noted by people who are hostile to gun ownership. They are noted and used against us to demonstrate that gun owners are a bunch of ignorant savages just acheing for an opportunity to kill someone. We all know this isn't true, but when we make statements such as those made by Reject in the thread above, we hand them evidence to the contrary. It has long been said that the battle for continued firearms rights in the US is one of public relations. Whoever can convince the most voters of their position will ultimately win. Public relations isn't a matter of right and wrong, legalities or constitutionality. It is a matter of image. How your cause is perceived counts for everything, because the voters of this country could eliminate the second amendment from the Constitution if they felt it was the right thing to do, and right or wrong, once that is done, it is done. It's not so much jack booted thugs we need to be concerned about as the spin doctors who work to affect and alter public opinion. They can do over a few generations what no number of jack booted thugs could manage. The ATF is a distraction. Loud and noisy to be certain, but the main enemy is operating in our schools and on our TV screens. The folks who shape public opinion are well on thier way to beating us in the court of public opinion while we are off beating our chests over the BATF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 11:11:30 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: The problem is that I can only judge your intentions and "ethos" by the information you give me. You did not say that you would kill the individual after passing through a reasonable escalation of force, only pulling the trigger in the gravest extreme that you felt your life was threatened. You said you would kill a homeless man over a loaf of bread. It was a very simple and direct statement. Well, it was a very simple and direct question. Would I kill a starving bum over a loaf of bread that he/she/it attempted to steal from my store? Well, bypassing all escalations, the simple and direct answer to your simple and direct question is, "Yes". When called out, you defended that simple and direct statement, and only when put to it by multiple people who felt your response was cracked, have you changed the statement to lookat reasonable escalation. "What we have here is a failure to communicate." Well, in this day and age, it's not exactly good to be known as "that psychopath with a gun". [:D] And while I normally beat down my paranoia with a huge stick on a normal basis, simple logic dictates that not just board members that are reading these posts, if you catch my general drift. The last thing I need is that rap on the door at 3am... ...and though I snipped the rest of your post, I whole-heartedly agree that the fight over the 2nd Amendment is one fought mostly with public perception and opinion. the_reject |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 11:21:56 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: You just changed the situation from one of defending your property to defending your life. We can all agree (except maybe the Amish and other pacifists) that this is moral, and thus doesn't address what The_Macallan was discussing. No, I expanded the situation that [b]icemanat95[/b] posted. While not directly addressing [b]The_Macallan's[/b] post, it was a tangent off of the original idea. Keep up. It still comes down to a person's life being more important and valuable than property. Well, if the bum threatened me, I personally would not be all that concerned with the fact that my shotgun took out a french bagette AND a bum who was threatening my life. But that's a matter of perspective. Before any threats are made, my perspective is that my bread is more important to me than a bum who will starve if he doesn't steal what is mine. Also, not all rights are equal. The right to life is paramount because [b]without the right to life, the other rights are meaningless.[/b] I disagree. Take away any right, and the rest are meaningless. What good is my right to own property, to work my ass off and have a comfortable life at home, only to have some jerkoff steal it because I can't defend it? Conversely, what good is my right to defend my property if I am not allowed to have any? Take away any right at all, and my right to liberty is shot to hell. I could go on, but I think you'll get the point - all rights are indeed equal. the_reject |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 3:00:11 PM EDT
[#10]
You know I am really tired of these self obsessed cop haters who probably live such a pathetic life that they feel the need to lash out at the police for their own shortcomings.
I've been an LEO for 13 years now and am a staunch supporter of our constitution and especially the Bill of Rights but I'm really tired of seeing these Internet tough guys vowing to pull out a gun and shoot a LEO for a perceived violation of their rights or whatever seems to bother them. Speaking to those big mouths , what makes you think you will succeed in a physical confrontation or shootout with a LEO ? How many fights have you been in in the last 10 years ? Have you ever had to fight for your life ? Have you ever had deadly weapons attempted or actually used against you ? Every LEO out there probably has some or all of these experiences under their belt. One more thing dont make the mistake that cops cant shoot , because plinking at cans with the boys aint gonna make it . Sorry to those others who are reasonable and open minded , I unfortunetly am tired of the cop bashing especially when some are so cavalier about wanting to kill cops , my former partner was killed in the line of duty 4 years ago this January and it kinda hit home . |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 4:10:07 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: You know I am really tired of these self obsessed cop haters who probably live such a pathetic life that they feel the need to lash out at the police for their own shortcomings. I've been an LEO for 13 years now and am a staunch supporter of our constitution and especially the Bill of Rights but I'm really tired of seeing these Internet tough guys vowing to pull out a gun and shoot a LEO for a perceived violation of their rights or whatever seems to bother them. Speaking to those big mouths , what makes you think you will succeed in a physical confrontation or shootout with a LEO ? How many fights have you been in in the last 10 years ? Have you ever had to fight for your life ? Have you ever had deadly weapons attempted or actually used against you ? Every LEO out there probably has some or all of these experiences under their belt. One more thing dont make the mistake that cops cant shoot , because plinking at cans with the boys aint gonna make it . Sorry to those others who are reasonable and open minded , I unfortunetly am tired of the cop bashing especially when some are so cavalier about wanting to kill cops , my former partner was killed in the line of duty 4 years ago this January and it kinda hit home . Amen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 4:32:38 PM EDT
[#12]
As for the cops, remember that in the decleration of independence, the FF said that they were prepared to use violence only because all other means of protecting their rights had been exausted. In this country, we do have a court system that is quite capable of punishing police officers who violate people's rights. Only when there is no hope for a peaceful solution through the courts would violence against a LEO to protect your rights be justified.
As for the homeless bum, assuming he was in my house, as I do not own a bread store, the situation would most likely go as follows: When you come downstairs or around the corner or whatever and witness a stranger in your home, I would probably point my gun at him and ask him to leave. At this point, shooting would only be justified if he advanced towards me, as advancing on a man with a gun can only be seen as a threat. Stealing alone does not generally justify deadly force, but threatening your life in order to steal something does. Of course, there are exceptions, like stealing someone's guns could be seen as an intent to use them against you or someone else, which would justify deadly force. The PR of this is important. The anti-gunners are trying to convince everyone that all gunowners are homicidal maniacs who would kill over a loaf of bread or a parking spot. It does not help our cause to have gun owners confirm that view. Remember to say that deadly force is only justified if the offender escalates the conflict to the point that you believe your life or someone else's life is in danger. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 5:59:38 PM EDT
[#13]
Mace, A question for you, are the courts a peacful option as you suggest if the cost is to high to pursue it? Or if no lawyer will take the case because he needs to count on favors from the cops in his other cases? And if you think the above cases are not true, they are from personal experiance.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2002 10:50:26 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: I've been an LEO for 13 years now and am a staunch supporter of our constitution and especially the Bill of Rights but I'm really tired of seeing these Internet tough guys vowing to pull out a gun and shoot a LEO for a perceived violation of their rights or whatever seems to bother them. Police officers have no right to violate citizens' constitutional rights. If they're at my door to illegally confiscate my guns and they break down my door, I for one will shoot to kill. Taking away my means to effectively protect myself is putting me in danger. If the LEO is just and fair he will know whether or not an order is legal or not and whether or not to follow it. There's NO justification for allowing that to happen in any scenario. Violations via tickets from traffic stops are nowhere near that level of escalation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2002 1:05:18 AM EDT
[#15]
First of all this is one of the ten commandments to people with or with out badges. By the very statement of gods law ,all lives have worth your's and mine. To kill another whom is trying to take your life is not murder,just self defense
Whoso shedeth mans blood,by man shall his blood be shed,for in the image of God made he man. (Genesis 9). This means that if some mentality demoralized person is attempting to take a LEO'S life that he is guaranteed by god to protect it by any means neccesary. For God so breathed the life of man into all men,so that they could be as one, as brothers. There is a thin (membrane thin) threshold of window of time you might say that an act of true self preservation turns into murder. Its up to every person who wishes to own that weapon ,to know these small (atom like)times when such force would be necessary to make the killing of another human justifiable to God ,and the courts. Study the laws in your state,and owning nuclear weapons is much like owning a gun. When you are hungry the whole world is hungry,and when you are sad the whole world is sad. When you shoot(nuke)this person his whole world past,present,and future are over! And yes MAC I feel nobody has the right to trade life for property,cash,slander, the only exception I would have would be when the Waring fractions came to my door to take my weapons, and send me to the death camps(I would as soon die at the door and take some with me). Bob [8D] [50] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2002 2:54:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Some of you guys need to get away from your pc's and get a breath of fresh air! Your tin foil hats are screwed on a little to tight.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
