I think there are probably a few details left ou.
Isn’t the purpose of owning a firearm: To give a citizen the means to resist.
A warrant is only valid if there is compelling evidence that the person in question has actually committed a crime, not a fishing expedition to gather evidence that they have committed a crime.
The use of these no-knock warrants is to terrorize the rest of us.
Is there a law against owning rifles in Texas now? If so, I didn’t realize, I thought Texas would be last to take up ANY type of weapon ban laws.
Is the guy a felon? Is being a felon justification for no knock warrant? What if someone called the cops and said this guy is a felon, and he has a rifle?
Yes—a few details were left out—like—where did this happen? TX is a pretty big state——also, what was their “legal” reason for taking the rifle? Does the guy have a record? Has he been deemed a danger to himself or others?
If they had probable cause to believe a crime was being committed by keeping the rifle, technically a warrant could be issued, but it is only one more symptom of the flouting of the 2nd Amendment. Per the 2nd Amendment, any weapon which can be used for defense (keeping security) ought to be able to be fielded by any person or people who are competent and capable. The “well regulated” part of that amendment doesn’t mean riddled with restrictions, it means in modern language “well drilled.”
Per the 2nd Amendment, any weapon which can be used for defense (keeping security) ought to be able to be fielded by any person or people who are competent and capable. [Well... and of course not proven to be a criminal]
Here is the petition filed with the court giving the basis of the filing:
From the following website who is participating in the filing:
Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed a petition for appeal with the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in the case of Quinn v. State of Texas, which involves
a Texas resident, John Quinn, whose home was stormed by a SWAT team that failed to knock
and announce its entry in keeping with police protocol for non-violent situations.
Although the SWAT team had been granted a search warrant on the basis of leads provided by
informants that Quinn’s son may have been involved in drug activity, the warrant did not
authorize police to enter the residence without knocking and announcing their entry.
Nevertheless, based solely on the suspicion that there were firearms in the Quinn
household, the SWAT team forcibly broke into Quinn’s home after he had gone to bed
and proceeded to carry out a search of the premises. The raid resulted in police
finding less than one gram of cocaine, which Quinn was charged with possessing.
Lower courts rejected Quinn’s objection to the “no-knock” entry on the grounds 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.
Although established Fourth Amendment jurisprudence dictates that police officers
entering a dwelling must knock on the door and announce their identity and purpose
before attempting a forcible entry, police may disregard the knock and announce
rule under circumstances presenting a threat of physical violence or a danger that
evidence will be destroyed. In their petition to the Court of Criminal Appeals, Rutherford
Institute attorneys argue that in the absence of any evidence of actual danger
to police, the legal possession of a firearm, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is
not sufficient to justify allowing police to override the Fourth Amendment’s
protection against unannounced “no-knock” home invasions when executing warrants.
Affiliate attorney James A. Pikl of Scheef & Stone, LLP, in Frisco, Texas, is assisting
the Institute in defending the rights of Quinn.
From the article, the warrant was issued based upon informant info about the son’s drug activity. So the issue is really that the suspicion of an AK-47 in the home should or should not be sufficient grounds for a “no-knock” flavor to the warrant.
There are a few details beyond the excerpt, yes.