It is absolutely this behavior that makes me distrust the ATF even more than I already do. Because, even though they claim they don't have the information, the fact that they know exactly what and when and where this guy bought (legally at that) some firearms is outright overbearing thuggish behavior to begin with.ABATTBQ11 said:BlackGoldAg2011 said:yes but in this case since they had to gather paperwork ahead of time, would it not have been simple to get a warrant to see the guns in question if any true probable cause existed? If the cops happened to be in the area already then I would agree, not harm in asking first, but that's not the case here. They got a notice from a computer system and had to assemble their stuff and go specifically to this house for this specific purpose. Showing up with a warrant to me shows more respect as it shows genuine cause to do this check, and not a power trip induced attempted overreach by a law enforcement agency.ABATTBQ11 said:Dawnguard said:MousepadMarauder said:
I haven't read the entire thread and don't know the backstory, but just wanted to enter this as a possible explanation:
A gun gets used in the commission of a crime. The gun gets traced back as sold by the manufacturer to/through a certain FFL, these guys show up at his shop and demand to inspect his records (he has to comply). In inspecting his records, they notice this gun was sold to Person A, along with a whole host of other guns. Person A is not an FFL but is apparently selling guns including selling guns to original criminal actor. This is a violation of Federal Law, selling for business without a license. ATF thinks FFL is in violation of Federal Law for knowingly transferring guns which he had reason to know were going to be sold (straw purchase or otherwise). In looking at FFL's records they also notice Person B (Ring Camera Guy) is acquiring voluminous weapons as well. In order to build case against FFL and/or Person A, ATF goes to talk to all folks who bought multiple firearms through FFL.
Agreed that I don't want ATF showing up at my door asking about my guns, but I think there are scenarios where this might happen as a result of good law enforcement activity.
And if this was the case, getting a warrant would make a lot more sense than a knock and talk for ensuring that all of the evidence was collected correctly and avoiding additional misunderstandings while also making it appear as legitimate instead of bullying.
It's easier and quicker to just ask first. If your neighbor of blocking your driveway, you could just call the cops and a tow truck, or you could walk over and ask them to move first. If you ask, it might get resolved quicker. If they say no, you can always do things the hard way.
Now, these guys should leave the moment the owner tells them no instead of trying to coerce compliance, but there's really nothing wrong with asking before going the warrant route.
That said, I really don't have a high opinion of cops in general. I'm not making excuses for anything they have done here or elsewhere, and I've posted many, many times about my belief they should be held far more accountable. However, they have a job to do, and like anyone else I would hope they try the easiest and last intrusive option first, because what's worse than cops showing up at your house without a warrant and asking to verify possession of a few weapons is cops breaking down your door at 3am with, and under the protection of, a warrant to search for said weapons.
and to the compliance piece, the 3 am no knock shouldn't really be a concern here as normal warrants are supposed to be knock-and-announce and in daylight hours. And destruction of evidence is hardly a concern here as the legal problems arise only in the absence of the evidence in question, so a no knock shouldn't ever be granted in this specific case.
generally speaking, this type of behavior is the type of thing that causes even the generally law abiding citizens to distrust police.
There is certainly extra work to get a warrant. They'd have to do more research on him, put together evidence to go before a judge, and then make their case. As it is, they just have a printout of what he bought and go ask.
No-knocks are overused and are not used solely for evidence preservation. They could attempt to justify one because they're going to look for a bunch of guns and he's suspected to be armed. There's a half decent chance they ask for and receive it. I'd prefer they knock, ask, and come back later.
ETA It's not this behavior that makes law abiding people distrust police. It's the lying, fabricating probable cause in traffic stops, excessive use of force, and general lack of accountability that makes people distrust police.
To "randomly" show up at his house and ask about said firearms without any probable cause is even worse.
I want the feds to have to go through the hoops of getting a warrant - and the burden of proof to get said warrant should be exceedingly high - before they can initiate such contact. It should be hard for them to request the ability to harass a private citizen over a 100% legal purchase. They and the judge should be held accountable for having the power to do so, regardless of the situation.
