Knock knock. "This is the police. May we search your home?"

[Scoop 0]

WOOP WOOP DATS THE SOUND OF DA POLICE!

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

HOWEVER I am strongly opposed to even suggesting voluntary searches of houses.

I'm glad you ended your post on that note, Scoop, because the rest of your post scares the shit out of me.

PS so does your new avatar.

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't see what the problem is... They only want to get rid of illegal firearms so whats the problem?

They're police - they'll confiscate any firearm they find, illegal or not. "We're just going to take this back to the office and check it against our stolen gun list." And then you'll go through hell trying to get them to give you back your legal firearms.

Not being funny but if your firearm is on a licence (I don't know if it is in your state) then how difficult is it to prove that you legaly own it?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Scoop 0]

Funny thing is, they mocked us for trying to get illegal firearms off the streets but they are allowed to do voluntary searches over there to do exactly the same

ITS NOT THE GUNS!!! ITS THE PEOPLE!!!

At least thats what I heard.

I wish our country was as free as yours. Seems we all have our pros & cons huh

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

"Sir! Sir! We saw an armed thief run into your backyard and disappear! Can we search your house and yard for him?"

Hot pursuit is an exception. Courts have found this to be reasonable. I think there was a case of a guy weighing and packaging cocaine for sale in his home when a perp who was running from police busted down his door and ran through, followed cosely by the cops. Both were apprehended.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Are there any actual cases of dogs being used to initiate a warrantless search?

About 3 months ago, a couple of friends were at a park. Hanging out, talking.

A foot patrol officer approached them and asked them if they were smoking pot/drinking beer/or something.
(knowing them, probably so)

They said no, he asked to search the car, they said no.
He said if they did not consent, he would call for a dog.

He called for the dog. It sat down next to the door and scratched it. Using that as a premise, the car was searched.

Nothing was found. The car was left with 2 paint scratches. Since they occurred during the execution of the search, there is nothing legally actionable.

The cops told them to hang out somewhere else than the public park.

Bottom line - there is right, there is wrong, there is legal.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Nothing was found. The car was left with 2 paint scratches. Since they occurred during the execution of the search, there is nothing legally actionable.

To be anal about it, there really is, but with the damages being about 20 bucks, WTF...

[Hayfield 0]

What would JOSE PADILLA say about this?

"Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!"
-Crusty Old Pete

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Not being funny but if your firearm is on a licence (I don't know if it is in your state) then how difficult is it to prove that you legaly own it?

Most states don't register firearms. So you would have to have a purchase receipt in your possession. And that can be problematic. For example, I've got an 1865 Spencer that has been passed down to me through the family generations. There is no purchase receipt for that rifle, and it's worth about $2,500. If the police asked me to prove it was mine, I couldn't. The same can be true of many firearms because of the way they are acquired, from trades with friends, or whatever, that don't generate paperwork.

I had a handgun confiscated once, wrongfully. I got it back two months later after a LOT of hassle, and had to make a 20 hour round-trip drive to retrieve it from the police. They didn't return my ammo that was in the magazine. I asked where it was, and they said they had sent it to the state lab which shot the ammo for ballistic analysis against unsolved crimes. So some incompetent lab technician could have fingered me as a murderer. I sold that gun as soon as I got back home, so that it would no longer be traceable to me, if those Barney Fife's ever decide to try and hang some crime on me in the future.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

"Sir! Sir! We saw an armed thief run into your backyard and disappear! Can we search your house and yard for him?"

Hot pursuit is an exception. Courts have found this to be reasonable. I think there was a case of a guy weighing and packaging cocaine for sale in his home when a perp who was running from police busted down his door and ran through, followed cosely by the cops. Both were apprehended.

And what was the outcome of that case? Did the cops bust down the door in pursuit?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Not being funny but if your firearm is on a licence (I don't know if it is in your state) then how difficult is it to prove that you legaly own it?

Most states don't register firearms. So you would have to have a purchase receipt in your possession. And that can be problematic. For example, I've got an 1865 Spencer that has been passed down to me through the family generations. There is no purchase receipt for that rifle, and it's worth about $2,500. If the police asked me to prove it was mine, I couldn't. The same can be true of many firearms because of the way they are acquired, from trades with friends, or whatever, that don't generate paperwork.

I had a handgun confiscated once, wrongfully. I got it back two months later after a LOT of hassle, and had to make a 20 hour round-trip drive to retrieve it from the police. They didn't return my ammo that was in the magazine. I asked where it was, and they said they had sent it to the state lab which shot the ammo for ballistic analysis against unsolved crimes. So some incompetent lab technician could have fingered me as a murderer. I sold that gun as soon as I got back home, so that it would no longer be traceable to me, if those Barney Fife's ever decide to try and hang some crime on me in the future.

John. In my opinion your name was already tagged to the ballastics tests. So selling doesn't do any good for past crimes if any.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Yes! I would tell them NO! If, they want to search my vehicle or home, they'd better have a warrant.
I would be well within my rights.

so you voted "Yes" in the poll? They can ask anything they want (the poll specifically notes "voluntary"). You have the right to say yes or no to the request as your choice.

This is a stupid poll, people aren't reading it completely.

Lawrocket has the right answer, people need to know their rights. Then it doesn't really matter at all if a cop asks or is restricted from even asking. We can always say "no, come back with a warrant, thanks for the warning".

_________________________________

As I said. I would tell them NO. Show me a warrant!


Chuck

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

As I said. I would tell them NO. Show me a warrant!

You won't answer the actual question, but I get your position. Voluntary searches are fine, but you'd personally not 'volunteer'. That's the same as me.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

As I said. I would tell them NO. Show me a warrant!

You won't answer the actual question, but I get your position. Voluntary searches are fine, but you'd personally not 'volunteer'. That's the same as me.

_________________________________

Duh, me! I really wasn't trying to be evasive. I voted NO, actually. A person does not have to submit to a voluntary search and people have the right to say no. Show me the papers! So often, folks think that when an officer 'asks' to search their vehicle or home that they have to allow it or things could get ugly or they think that if they say no they are hiding something. Quite the contrary. The cops might get upset but, that's their problem in that situation.


Chuck

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

So often, folks think that when an officer 'asks' to search their vehicle or home that they have to allow it or things could get ugly

Well, they could get ugly, and sometimes do - look at John's example above: he said NO and they detained him for 2 hours. That's why I feel such requests are, in actuality, coercive. Most judges don't have the guts to rule that way, but that's still my opinion.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

So often, folks think that when an officer 'asks' to search their vehicle or home that they have to allow it or things could get ugly

Well, they could get ugly, and sometimes do - look at John's example above: he said NO and they detained him for 2 hours. That's why I feel such requests are, in actuality, coercive. Most judges don't have the guts to rule that way, but that's still my opinion.

It's a damned good thing the cops did not "make sure" John was guilty.

I think you know what I mean.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

How odd that some of our resident cops have not sounded off...................

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

How odd that some of our resident cops have not sounded off...................

Scoop's a cop, although in the UK, so the legal standards, while similar, deviate a bit from those in the US. I'm also pretty sure that Masterrig's wife is in law enforcement.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So often, folks think that when an officer 'asks' to search their vehicle or home that they have to allow it or things could get ugly

Well, they could get ugly, and sometimes do - look at John's example above: he said NO and they detained him for 2 hours. That's why I feel such requests are, in actuality, coercive. Most judges don't have the guts to rule that way, but that's still my opinion.

It's a damned good thing the cops did not "make sure" John was guilty.

I think you know what I mean.

I know exactly what you mean.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

So often, folks think that when an officer 'asks' to search their vehicle or home that they have to allow it or things could get ugly

Well, they could get ugly, and sometimes do - look at John's example above: he said NO and they detained him for 2 hours. That's why I feel such requests are, in actuality, coercive. Most judges don't have the guts to rule that way, but that's still my opinion.

________________________________

I'm not going to argue your point. Things happen. In a perfect world, all police, know the laws and people's rights and act accordingly. Unfortunately, in this world, that isn't always the case.


Chuck

[slug 1]

Hi 2001

Quote

Personally, if the police knock on my door and I have not called them, no way in hell I am going to open that door or even speak to them.

We actually got the knock on the door 11:00 PM.

According to the sheriff it was in response to a 911 call that was traced back to my home. No words were exchanged just the call and a hangup. They were concerned about our welfare and were just following up to ensure no domestic violence, home invasion etc etc.

Thanks for stopping by, we hope you find out where the call came from because it wasn't from here, and some innocent victim may be in danger. BTW you might want to test you 911 system because it made a mistake.

Good night, thanks for stopping by. They didn't actually ask or insist on entering our home. Not sure what was going on.

What me worry

R.I.P.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

A person does not have to submit to a voluntary search

you see, the above is a complete oxymoron "have to submit" to a "voluntary" search

that statement above is why I think the poll was written confusing - on purpose

I wasn't busting on you (sorry), just using you to prove the point - I think the poll results can't be used for anything as likely 20 people answered 20 different questions in their own heads...



What I do like is that most of the reasonable here have noted the real issue is that people should know their rights and say 'no' to these types of requests. That would be more productive than taking away options from law enforcement personnel.

Even if I had nothing to hide, I'd still say no nearly all the time. But I DON'T CARE IF HE ASKS AND THINK THERE IS LIKELY GOOD REASON FOR HIM TO ASK IN CERTAIN SCENARIO.

The reason I'd say no most of the time is that I live in the socialist state of Minnesota, and if I let a cop in to confirm there isn't a meth lab in my basement, he might end up arresting me for not "disposing of D cell batteries in an environmentally friendly fashion" or "not providing a clean change of water in my cat's drinking bowl" or "not having a state sanctioned prayer room labeled per state code in the house" or something left wing like that.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

The reason I'd say no most of the time is that I live in the socialist state of Minnesota, and if I let a cop in to confirm there isn't a meth lab in my basement, he might end up arresting me for not "disposing of D cell batteries in an environmentally friendly fashion" or "not providing a clean change of water in my cat's drinking bowl" or "not having a state sanctioned prayer room labeled per state code in the house" or something left wing like that.

Traveling through Arkansas in a rented pickup truck one time, I was forced at gunpoint by a State Trooper to install a gun rack in the truck. His trigger finger was itchy, his eyes were beady, and so was the sweat running down my back. He then took a shotgun (one of many!) out of the trunk of his cruiser and forced me to hang it on the rack. He swore that if he ever, ever, caught me desecrating a pickup truck like that again, he would shoot me like a dog. Then he tipped his hat to my wife: "Ma'am", and drove off in a cloud in a cloud of dust, which smelled vaguely like chicken shit from the nearby Perdue plant.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

His trigger finger was itchy, his eyes were beady, and so was the sweat running down my back.

was the sweat beady?
or was it both itchy and beady?

{{that's a scary story, or funny depending on how you look at it, but you did end up with nice shotgun out of the deal.....Did you inform the state patrol about 'their' guy? Did the 'cop' succeed in his fraternity initiation and get accepted?}}

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

His trigger finger was itchy, his eyes were beady, and so was the sweat running down my back.

was the sweat beady?
or was it both itchy and beady?

{{that's a scary story, or funny depending on how you look at it, but you did end up with nice shotgun out of the deal.....Did you inform the state patrol about 'their' guy? Did the 'cop' succeed in his fraternity initiation and get accepted?}}

You realize, of course, it was fiction...

© 2006 Andy9o8