The right to come to your own door with a firearm (Page 1/2)
2.5 APR 06, 09:04 AM
"This author sees the important issues in this case, clarified by the March 30 opinion, as:
The mere possession of a firearm by a homeowner is not sufficient to justify the use of deadly force by officers.
There is a right to come to the door with a firearm.
Officers must identify themselves as officers to gain qualified immunity.
Mere verbal announcement, without visual confirmation, is not sufficient to gain qualified immunity.
Sufficient precedent exists for officers to be aware of their duty in these situations."

examples in article: Fourth Circuit: A Person has a Right to Come to the Door with a Firearm

I tend to agree that if someone approaches a residence, the homeowner has the right to be armed (in hand). What are your thoughts?

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 04-06-2022).]

maryjane APR 06, 09:26 AM
I agree that if ANYONE approaches the front door the home owner has the right to be armed when he answers the door..
Raydar APR 06, 11:04 AM
I agree. A homeowner has that right. As always, he should (if possible) identify the target before he points it at anyone.
There's something to be said for keeping it out of sight, however. (Why "show your hand", if you don't need to?) Of course, circumstances will dictate.

Now, about those "no knock" warrants/searches...
2.5 APR 06, 11:08 AM

quote
Originally posted by Raydar:

I agree. A homeowner has that right. As always, he should (if possible) identify the target before he points it at anyone.
There's something to be said for keeping it out of sight, however. (Why "show your hand", if you don't need to?) Of course, circumstances will dictate.

Now, about those "no knock" warrants/searches...



Exactly, it all ties together.
ls3mach APR 07, 03:37 AM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

I agree that if ANYONE approaches the front door the home owner has the right to be armed when he answers the door..



I concur. Never been an issue for any of us in Oklahoma or Louisiana. Can't imagine Texas be much different.
MidEngineManiac APR 07, 09:22 AM
Laws are a little different here. Answering the door with a gun is gonna get you problems no matter what.

So is answering the door with a machete.....HOWEVER, if you answer the door with a drywall hammer, you were just doing home repairs when the knock happened.
cvxjet APR 07, 12:33 PM

quote
Originally posted by MidEngineManiac:

.HOWEVER, if you answer the door with a drywall hammer, you were just doing home repairs when the knock happened.



I need to get me one of them (I do have a 10 lb sledge, tho)
Raydar APR 07, 01:57 PM
True story...
One Sunday, a friend of mine and I were going to the range to shoot up some targets.
Since his house was on the way, I told him I'd come by and pick him up.
A while after we got off the phone, he heard a knock on the door. Thinking it was me, he grabbed up his pistol and bag, and opened the door.
Standing there were a couple of very surprised JWs.
"Uhhhh... would you like a pamphlet?"
"No. That's okay."

He said they never came back.
ray b APR 16, 02:06 PM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

"This author sees the important issues in this case, clarified by the March 30 opinion, as:
The mere possession of a firearm by a homeowner is not sufficient to justify the use of deadly force by officers.
There is a right to come to the door with a firearm.
Officers must identify themselves as officers to gain qualified immunity.
Mere verbal announcement, without visual confirmation, is not sufficient to gain qualified immunity.
Sufficient precedent exists for officers to be aware of their duty in these situations."

examples in article: Fourth Circuit: A Person has a Right to Come to the Door with a Firearm

I tend to agree that if someone approaches a residence, the homeowner has the right to be armed (in hand). What are your thoughts?



''Officers must identify themselves as officers to gain qualified immunity.''

NO PIG SHOULD EVER IN ANY CASE BE IMMUNE FOR ANY ACTION THEY DO
THEY SHOULD BE ALWAYS LIBEL FOR WHAT THEY DO BOTH CIVILLY AND CRIMINALLY

THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS A MADE UP RULE WITH NO LAW BEHIND IT BY THE COURTS

and while your defense of I did not KNOW that was against the law is NO LEGAL DEFENSE
THE PIG IN THE SAME WAY GETS THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY if he lacks knowledge OF THE LAWS

now how is that fair or just ?
the PIG who's job is the law get a free pass for NOT KNOWING THE LAWS
BUT YOU THE CITIZEN DO NOT

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

olejoedad APR 16, 02:33 PM
rayb, do you even know any law enforcement officers personally?

BTW, a PIG is a farm animal.

Get with the times.