Police Justify Illegal No-Knock Raid Because Owner Might Have Gun
Hey, I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating. Welcome to the Police State! Yee haw!
John Gerald Quinn of Texas was recently (and abruptly) woken up from slumber by police who busted through his door without knocking or notifying him that they were there. Why did they do that? It’s because they are police officers and apparently, the law is not something they need to worry about upholding while they’re going after people whom they believe have broken the law…or something.
I have to apologize ahead of time because I’m just not in the mood to choose my words carefully these last couple of days. In fact, I’m generally annoyed at the total amount of corruption and satanic influences I am seeing in society and it’s enough to make me want to puke. Instead of doing that, I’ll just vent my spleen here since it’s my blog.
In truth, and in a nutshell, here is what happened. “The police had obtained information that suggested that Quinn’s son was involved with illegal drugs. They followed the law in obtaining a search warrant for Quinn’s home. When the SWAT team arrived, they did not knock on the door or announce their presence when they forcibly burst through the door to conduct their search. Against normal police protocol, they executed a no-knock raid on the home.”
There you have it. The warrant was directed toward the son (who apparently was not home at the time). The gun in question? An AK-47. Unfortunately for the police officers, “the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a no-knock entry is justified only with a specific warrant or if officers believe someone might be hurt or evidence might be lost.”
I guess Quinn could have tried to flush the AK-47 down the toilet if he had known the police were coming. It appears that the law is on Quinn’s side as noted by attorneys from the Rutherford Institute, which has taken his case.
As Freedom Outpost noted in their article, “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.”
“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.” Sadly, we don’t even know whose cocaine they found. If the son was the user and the father did not know it was there, should he be charged? Then again, even though police had a warrant, since they violated the terms of the warrant during the raid, wouldn’t whatever they found not be admissible in court? I’m sure the attorneys will figure it out.
Apparently, the police did not find an AK-47 in the house. As one article notes, an AK-47 is no more dangerous than many hunting rifles that are available. In fact, there are numerous hunting rifles that fire a caliber of ammo that is far more dangerous than the AK-47.
But aside from all this, did the police have the right to ignore the terms of the warrant all based on a suspicion that there was an AK-47 in Quinn’s home? The simple answer is no.
As another article notes, “on the issue of the gun in the home, the brief argues that the Supreme Court never has held that suspected possession of firearms is sufficient cause, without more, to justify a no-knock entry.”
Much hangs on the outcome of this case. “If the courts rule in favor of the police, it would set the precedent to be followed by every law enforcement agency in the country. All they would need to do is suspect that someone has a weapon in their home to give them the legal right to make a no-knock raid on anyone’s home. It doesn’t matter if there is a weapon in the home, your Fourth Amendment rights could be legally violated based on just a suspicion if Quinn loses his case.”
The government is working very diligently to eradicate our rights and not just rights under the 4th amendment either. There are too many individuals in law enforcement who play fast and loose with the law to obtain what they want, even if that means violating the rights of citizens. It shouldn’t be happening, but it is and at an unprecedented rate too.
Let’s hope wisdom, good judgment, and the rule of law wins the day in the courtroom for John Quinn of Texas.