Posted on 01/02/2014 9:57:38 AM PST by jmaroneps37
Texas courts have ruled that because legally owned firearms represent “a threat of physical violence” to police, officers may ignore the 4th Amendment rights of Texas residents by treating ALL legally issued warrants as “No Knock” warrants, even if the issuing judge has made it clear that officers “…must knock on the door and announce their identity and purpose before attempting a forcible entry.”
In August of 2006, police in Collin County, Texas obtained a warrant to search the home of John Quinn based on information that Quinn’s son might be keeping a controlled substance on the premises. Although the warrant “…did not authorize police to enter the residence without knocking and announcing their entry,” the County SWAT Team broke through Quinn’s door unannounced, “…based solely on the suspicion that there were firearms in the Quinn household.”
Not aware of who had broken into his home, the suddenly awakened Quinn was shot by officers as he grabbed a nearby gun for the purpose of defending his life, family and property. All firearms in the home were legally owned by Quinn. Police discovered less than 1 gm of cocaine on the premises.
When Quinn took the Collin County SWAT Team to court for ignoring the terms of the search warrant by turning it into a “No Knock” warrant, the court ruled that “…because police had information that guns were present at the residence, they were justified in making a forced and unannounced invasion into Quinn’s home.”
In short, a judge decided John Quinn represented a criminal danger based upon the legal exercise of his 2nd amendment rights.
The Rutherford Institute has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the Quinn case, writing to the Court that: “…in the absence of any evidence of actual danger to police,...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
I wouldn’t count on that. You have to remember that most of these police departments exclude candidates who have an IQ above a certain level, so don’t count on thugs who get hired to smash in doors at 4:00am to be bright enough to handle that math.
Is he wrong here?
We also have excellent gun ownership and carry protections.
Are you SURE about that?
y’aaaaaalll got a problem with that?
> Are you SURE about that?
Yes.
I think the law was passed after a man was killed in front of his wife in children in Nashua during a no-knock raid. He was in bed and reached for his eyeglasses to see what was going on, and the police said they thought he was going for a weapon.
Loved it!!
> We also have excellent gun ownership and carry protections.
Yes, but we have a communist with a moslem surname in the governor’s office, and another communist with a moslem surname as a senator.
That’s VERY interesting...thanks!
I would wait for another source before I got all upset.
True enough. But our governor (Hassan) is highly constrained because in NH, the governor has little direct power and all five members of her executive council are Republicans.
As for our senior Senator (Shaheen), she's going to face a tough challenge, probably from Scott Brown. Big caveat to that, though: if he wants to get elected he's going to have to abandon the pro-gun control stance that served him well in Massachusetts but won't work here.
I read a pretty good article that gave some pretty damning evidence against Romney and the homosexual marriage issue (specifically concerning the judges he appointed).
> As for our senior Senator (Shaheen), she’s going to face a
> tough challenge, probably from Scott Brown.
Scott Brown is a big-government socialist.
The only difference between him and Shaheen is the party they puport to belong to.
> if he wants to get elected he’s going to have to abandon
> the pro-gun control stance that served him well in
> Massachusetts but won’t work here.
I submit that even the communist Shaheen is better on gun policy than Brown.
He shoulda stayed in Massachusetts.
I won’t vote for him.
I’ll write-in somebody.
Start at the bottom.
Control of your sheriff’s deputies and/or municipal police starts by electing a right thinking sheriff, county commissioners, mayor, city council members and DA’s (if elected). Most judges are elected. Pay attention to the local power structure. Stop electing lawyers as judges (not a requirement in many jurisdictions, hell, it’s not even a requirement for the USSC).
Work your way up the government ladder. Most states have a ballot initiative process. Use it.
Take control of the bottom and the elite at the top will get their come to Jesus moment when they suddenly realize that it’s not only a new game, it’s a whole new game board with different pieces.
These people http://www.massresistance.org/ have all the dirt on Romney.
I couldn’t bring myself to vote for him.
let me get this straight.
If you register your guns, then you are surrendering your 4th amendment rights.
Police can and do gun down anybody they choose for any or no reason. Many headlines over the past few years show that to be the case. It is a policeman's right, when he is in uniform and sometimes when out of uniform, now to kill anyone he wants to kill. The only restraint is that he must say to the first reporter or other officer on the scene,"I felt threatened." That statement absolves him of any guilt.
LOL... Some of us are better armed than others. And we’re not alone. You might end up dead, I might end up dead. We’re all going to die at some point. I ask this... do cops really want to die at the doorstep of someone who has committed no crime but to exercise their Fundamental Civil Right to RKBA?
I’ll happily give my life to protect my family. Who’s willing to die trying to harm my family? Is it worth it to you? It’s very much worth me dying to protect my wife and child. It’s also very much worth me destroying any immediate threat to my family in such a way to ensure that threat is gone for good.
Do I want to get into a fight. Nope. Will I if I am pushed? Better believe it. If someone feels they have the right to violate my Rights, they better not say a word when I violate theirs.
>>let me get this straight.
If you register your guns, then you are surrendering your 4th amendment rights.<<
That’s my take on it too.
I don’t want there to be a misunderstanding about my post - it wasn’t intended to tell anyone that they shouldn’t defend their home from an invasion,
it was to put, in stark terms, what anyone in support of ANY “no knock raid” is advocating -
the killing of innocent homeowners by agents of the State.
There is no way around that truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.