Jump to content

Don't answer your door with a gun in your hand...


yyyz

Recommended Posts

11th Circuit Court has dealt a blow to the 2nd Amendment. Long short short... "Appeals Court Says Right To Bear Arms Isn't A Right If Cops Are Banging On Your Door In The Middle Of The Night"

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445909/andrew-scott-case-second-amendment-attacked-eleventh-circuit-appeals-court

 

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170318/09320836945/appeals-court-says-right-to-bear-arms-isnt-right-if-cops-are-banging-your-door-middle-night.shtml

 

Sorry if this has already been posted, but if it is, I didn't see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the heck? No similar court rulings? Wasn't there a cop who was shot and killed while climbing through the bedroom window of the wrong house in the middle of the night? It was ruled justified in that case and several others.

 

Oh well. Guess I won't be answering my door at all after dark now. I sure hope it isn't someone in need of help cuz it will suck to be them.

 

What's the saying jury by 12 vs carried by 6, screw that.

In the middle of the night, I'd grab the shotgun.

Unfortunately this guy got the short end of that stick and wound up with a bunch of new holes in his chest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a bit confusing because why would he open the door and why would he hold his gun while opening the door. I know, it's your property and you can do whatever but if he opened the door because the police said they were police and he still held his firearm at ready then it sure seems like two stupid decisions. Am I wrong here?

 

Now if we're talking about someone not announcing themselves as police or you taking all the necessary precautions to verify and explain what you'd be doing then we're just fine but that's a completely different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a bit confusing because why would he open the door and why would he hold his gun while opening the door. I know, it's your property and you can do whatever but if he opened the door because the police said they were police and he still held his firearm at ready then it sure seems like two stupid decisions. Am I wrong here?

 

Now if we're talking about someone not announcing themselves as police or you taking all the necessary precautions to verify and explain what you'd be doing then we're just fine but that's a completely different story.

They did not announce themselves as police at any point. The officer who shot him admitted that. He also admitted that the gun was pointed downward and that the victim was backing away after seeing a man crouching in the shadows. The officer justified it by saying he believed the victim was retreating to a defensice position in order to open fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a typical case of reaffirming police state powers really. The police said he pointed the gun in their face , his witnesses said he had the gun at his side. The reality is probably somewhere in between.

At this point I think we all should know that the cops show up ready to shoot and kill anyone with a weapon they see, regardless of the situation. They don't care if you're a law abiding citizen or not. Nor in that moment do they probably even know any of that information like in this case.

I don't see how this ruling changed anything other than just solidifying that the police can kill anyone they say is a threat with impunity. But did anyone actually think that wasn't already the law ? lol.

 

The moral of the story or the takeaway here is don't answer your door at night to stranger for any reason. Period.

And if you pull out a gun anywhere around the police for any reason you should reasonably expect to get shot dead. Maybe invest in a holster for answering the door at night if you're gonna do stupid stuff like that. Or better yet get a camera system and mount it outside so you can see whose at your door without physically having to open it. These days you can get them pretty cheaply.

For myself I'm gonna hang back with my AR checking my lanes of fire and waiting for the threat to walk into me. If indeed its a threat. If its the police and they are unannounced thats really gonna suck for all of us. But you stand a much better chance that way against any threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a bit confusing because why would he open the door and why would he hold his gun while opening the door. I know, it's your property and you can do whatever but if he opened the door because the police said they were police and he still held his firearm at ready then it sure seems like two stupid decisions. Am I wrong here?

 

Now if we're talking about someone not announcing themselves as police or you taking all the necessary precautions to verify and explain what you'd be doing then we're just fine but that's a completely different story.

Yeah I kinda agree with that. If you're scared enough of what might be at the door to have a gun in your hand why would you open it without confirming who it is ? You can't just shout through it ?

And if he did know it was the police before he opened he probably shouldn't have had a gun in his hand at all. Or at the very least holstered it into his pants Pancho Villa style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how this ruling changed anything other than just solidifying that the police can kill anyone they say is a threat with impunity. But did anyone actually think that wasn't already the law ? lol.

Exactly. We can all pretend that this is not the case but who are we kidding really. I wish this was different but being dead isn't very practical especially when you're settling you're settling who was right or wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if he did know it was the police before he opened he probably shouldn't have had a gun in his hand at all. Or at the very least holstered it into his pants Pancho Villa style.

 

? If I'm going to open the door late at night and I don't know who is out there I'm going to have a gun in my hand in case the person tries something such as attacking me or trying to get into my house.

 

Then again if someone is banging on my door late at night I'm not going to open the door, period. I don't care if they yell "Police!", anyone can yell that. I'm going to arm myself and take cover while my wife calls 911.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. My take away is, never answer the door and call 911. The problem remains, how can any group of judges not recognize that, irregardless of sketchy Intel, this cop's major failures in procedure is what caused this situation to to go sideways. It's like these judges totally disregarded how things got from point A to point B. The homeowner did nothing wrong. He died. There must by definition be fault somewhere, but they refuse to call it out. F'ing cowards.

 

I'm all for LEO support, and will bend over backwards for them. But, this is dead wrong. That cop should have absolutely identified himself. When that didn't happen, everything changed. From that point forward, the cop is in the wrong all the way.

 

Thank God, Scott wasn't a black guy, but where are all the protesters now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, ANYONE can bang on your door in the middle of the night yelling "POLICE".......... doesn't mean they ARE police.

 

Sounds like the court just gave an "in" to home invaders.

My thoughts exactly. There are cases galore of police impersonators. They can buy lights, uniforms, decals etc on the web and pull people over - its been done.

 

Even if they had announced that they were the police that isn't a free pass to violate someone's rights. As you said - it's a new method for home invaders to gain access. But the police simply need to claim that they feared for the life and the case is over. Few have been convicted or even punished because the legal system has forgotten that the police serve and protect the public. Period.

 

Until these no knock and unannounced raids are deemed illegal nothing will change. They justify them by saying it keeps the bad guys from running or destroying evidence. So what? The last time I checked, our justice system was designed to protect those who are accused and place the burden or proof squarely on the accusers.

 

It's better to let 10 guilty men go free than for one innocent man to spend a day in jail. I still believe that is the essence and cornerstone of our justice system.

 

But I don't blame the police as a whole. I blame the politicians and the courts that set the rules they must follow and the officers too cowardly to stand on the other side of the blue line and say "this is wrong".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if he did know it was the police before he opened he probably shouldn't have had a gun in his hand at all. Or at the very least holstered it into his pants Pancho Villa style.

 

? If I'm going to open the door late at night and I don't know who is out there I'm going to have a gun in my hand in case the person tries something such as attacking me or trying to get into my house.

 

Then again if someone is banging on my door late at night I'm not going to open the door, period. I don't care if they yell "Police!", anyone can yell that. I'm going to arm myself and take cover while my wife calls 911.

 

Well, ANYONE can bang on your door in the middle of the night yelling "POLICE".......... doesn't mean they ARE police.

 

Sounds like the court just gave an "in" to home invaders.

 

Ditto!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These judges are not pro-police, they are just pro government control over the lives of the subjects. Starting about 25 years ago, cases like this have almost always found the police blameless, regardless of the mistakes or incompetence of the police and the innocence of the home dweller. This is all part of a bigger picture of the loss of individual rights. Think of how many states it is lawful for the police to seize your car, or other property, and claim it was related to criminal activity. You might not be convicted of anything, or even charged, and the courts have upheld the seizure and sale of such property in state after state. My youngest son was arrested and they took the car he was driving, which belonged to me, and then claimed that I had told them that my son owned the car. Of course ownership was clear and easy to prove since I held title to the car. I had to retain a lawyer and go to court to get the car back. Between the "impoundment" fee, the recovery fee, and my lawyer's fee it cost me almost $3,000 and five months effort. The judge lambasted the village police and said that they had no right to seize the car in the first place (the charges against my son were totally dismissed) but would not order the village to pay restitution to me for my cost and inconvenience. This is happening more and more often throughout the country, with local police departments then selling the seized property and using it for their own purposes. We truly live in a police state, and President Trump not withstanding, I don't see this ending well for any of us. Police or not, anyone breaking down my front door will likely have to get by my Mossberg and Glock 17, and if it is the police and they shoot me dead, I will not have gone down without a fight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least it was a car with clear ownership and not cash. Some states use BS laws to steal people's cash claiming its drug money. The fight to get it back is so long and expensive that most give up. How dare free citizens carry cash eh?

 

Civil asset forfeiture is alive and well in Illinois. Ownership and criminal charges are irrelevant. They confiscate both cars, money and other property. $319 million worth in the last ten years:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-police-forfeiture-seizure-illinois-20161128-story.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You know that if a homeowner uses force against a LEO subsequent to an unlawful act, it's still a crime in Illinois. Shoot and kill a cop illegally entering your home in Illinois, better hire an excellent criminal defense attorney because you'll be facing murder charges. This kind of crap is what prompted Indiana to change its law to immunize homeowners from criminal prosecution when a LEO illegally enters a dwelling. Man in Indiana shoved a cop who was trying to unlawfully enter his home, ended up being convicted of a felony and sent to prison simply for exercising his rights that would have been "lawful" had it been anyone other than a sworn LEO. They should not, cannot, carve out exceptions to the Constitution that benefit law enforcement and give them a blank check to do whatever they please without the subject being permitted to resist the unlawful act. Lay down, take it, hash it out later. That's all fine and dandy unless they decide to use lethal force, like what happened in a case involving a Cleveland PD officer who shot an unarmed man in the back when the cop knew the subject was not armed. Left him paralyzed from the waist down, CA6 affirmed the denial of QI so that cop is fooked beyond anything he can possibly understand. The cost of caring for a paraplegic is immense and Cleveland, the officer himself, will bear that burden if it costs him his home, car, other liquid assets. Be very, very careful.

 

Another case, Adams v. Custer, (PBSO Deputy, PBSO has a big problem with its Deputies shooting first and then lying about it later) is being tried again after a mistrial (11 wanted to find in favor of Custer's victim, 1 juror borked the whole thing). Read about that case. He was denied QI because of all of the holes in his story and complete BS narrative of events not matching with the physical evidence ie "I shot him while standing next to the vehicle, I don't know why all of the blood was behind his truck. I don't know what happened to my department issue phone. I don't know why shell casings weren't where I said I discharged my weapon. I don't know what I meant by my 'evil plan' when I texted someone and then my Department 'lost' my phone that had evidence on it. I'm a victim here. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...