Satisfactory but unnecessary LEO interaction today...


PDA






Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 08:54 PM
I guess I'm fortunate in that the guy that runs the company I work for is an exceptionally intelligent and enlightened person. (OK, It's really me :neener:) Not only is CCW allowed at work, I have built a small (25yrd) range behind the office. The company sits on 10 acres in a business park. There is maybe 300 feet between our building and the next closest business. The range is off the back of the empty lot that separates us, extending down into the trees and ending with a 5' berm. There is a chain across the road with a "Posted-No Trespassing" sign on it. Remember that point. Because on workdays I usually have the courtesy to wait until after hours to cut loose with big stuff, I went out about 5:45 this afternoon and let the SMLE I just finished cleaning up talk a little bit. I loosed my 20 rounds of destruction upon the plastic bottles I brought in short order. I policed up my litter and pulled back out, stopping to lock the chain on the way out. As I'm leaving I see an employee from next door standing out at the road at the end of their driveway talking on a cell phone and looking to his left at the two approaching Sheriff's vehicles. I would normally turn right and go home. I put two and two together and turned left instead and pulled into our main parking lot. I got out and unlocked the building and went in and sat at my desk. After 15 minutes when nothing happened, I was on the verge of leaving when I heard the door chimes announce a visitor. A deputy stuck his head in my office door and asked if I could come out and speak with them. I replied "Sure" and followed him down the hall to the glass lobby door. He stepped outside the door, then still holding the door open turned to talk to me. His first words were "Were you just back there shooting?" He was a young guy and fortunately his demeanor was friendly so I didn't make any crude suggestions in reply. I said "You mean a few minutes ago at our range on our lot out back?" He said "Yes, and let me start off with saying that you aren't in any trouble, I just wanted to touch base with you because we had a complaint." I told him that I had put the guy on the cell phone together with two cruisers driving down the street and came to the conclusion that he had called me in, and that's why I stuck around rather than heading home. Then he told me that they had gone back there and checked out the area I was shooting in and they were pleasantly surprised at what a good job we had done from a safety aspect and that it was a perfectly acceptable place to shoot and that it violated no county ordinances. He told me that he informed the complainant that it was perfectly safe and that there was nothing that either he or the deputy could do about us shooting there. I thanked them for their time and turned around and walked back down the hall. Then it occurred to me....the ONLY way they could have checked out the range was to have stepped over the chain across the road with the "NO TRESPASSING" sign to walk down there and basically, trespassed. All ended well and I'm not going to raise a stink, but my question is, is it allowable for them to trespass onto clearly unoccupied (they watched me pull out of that driveway) posted property to "check things out"? As a side note, SC requires notification of carry status if you are actually asked for ID. Because they didn't even ask my name, much less for ID, I felt no need to mention the .40 I was carrying. That's why I despise the concept of disarming a CCW holder for "officer safety" during a traffic stop. The kinds of people who lead the kinds of lives that allow for CCW aren't the kinds of people who will shoot you over a speeding ticket, you know? If I were of such a mind I could have easily gotten impolite when he turned around and walked down the hallway with his back to me. I considered saying "Bang" just to reinforce his lack of tactical common sense...I mean, if I'm responding to a shots fired kind of call, I'm not turning MY back on the very person I have reason to suspect FIRED those shots. But discretion won out :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Satisfactory but unnecessary LEO interaction today..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Poor East Texan
September 25, 2008, 08:57 PM
Glad everything turned out ok. Betcha ain't seen the last of the next door guy though.

stolivar
September 25, 2008, 09:02 PM
There is no such thing as trespassing on a LEO. He can go anywhere he pleases if he thinks there has been a crime committed. It is called reasonable suspicion.



steve

Code3GT
September 25, 2008, 09:02 PM
time to get a .50 BMG :D

EDIT: Ok, not really the HighRoad thing to do...how about inviting the guy down for some "group therapy"?

Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 09:14 PM
time to get a .50 BMG
I think I'll try calling next door first. They've only been in that building for about 6 months. The last company in there called us in on so many saturdays that the SD send a patrol sgt out to tell them in as polite a way as possible to stop calling them, there was nothing they could/would do. I guess these guys just need to learn too. I'm not unreasonable, I understand their concern if they don't know what we are shooting or in what direction. But after being told by the deputy that it was a legal, and more importantly, safe area then I really don't want to hear a whole lot more out of them. One of my shop guys has a BFR 45-70. I guess if they keep calling, I'll invite him out for a little plinking session every day after lunch. Oh, Ain't I a stinker?

Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 09:17 PM
There is no such thing as trespassing on a LEO. He can go anywhere he pleases if he thinks there has been a crime committed. It is called reasonable suspicion.


I guessed as much. I assume the same goes for entering the office uninvited. That I can see, it's a place of public access. But it wouldn't do for me to see somebody crawling around my back forty, badge or not. You don't have enough "reasonable suspicion" to get a warrant, you have no legitimate business on my property unless I called and invited you there.

Aguila Blanca
September 25, 2008, 09:25 PM
There is no such thing as trespassing on a LEO. He can go anywhere he pleases if he thinks there has been a crime committed. It is called reasonable suspicion.

Wrong.

First, "reasonable suspicion" does not generate any right to enter private property without the owner's consent, or to conduct a warrantless search. Secondly, "reasonable suspicion" is generally not even sufficient grounds to GET a warrant. To get a warrant usually requires "probable cause," which means the officer(s) have to (a) believe a crime has been committed, (b) believe they know who may have committed it or who may have evidence relating to it, and (c) have at least a vague idea what that evidence might be.

Since the officers had no indication that the reported shooting was illegal, there was no indication that any crime had been committed so technically they did not have any right to go onto the private property. Since they ultimately told the complainant to take a hike, I concur with the OP in thinking it's not worth making a stink over, but I do believe they acted unlawfully. Had they found anything they considered illegal, a half-decent attorney would probably get it tossed out of court as inadmissible "fruits of a poisoned tree."

bogie
September 25, 2008, 09:33 PM
If I could make a suggestion...

Make yourself a detached suppressor - either a box, or a few tires stuffed with something non-flammable (and cheap, because you're going to want to pull it out and throw it away occasionally). Put it on a little cart, and move it in front of the bench.

That way you're happy, and the neighbor is happy.

And go say hi to 'em...

jonmerritt
September 25, 2008, 09:36 PM
If they did enter the property, it was probably to get your neighbor to shut up and quit calling.

Dgreno
September 25, 2008, 09:38 PM
Glad everything turned out ok. May I suggest paragraph breaks in such a long post? Makes it a lot easier for tired eyes to read.;)

stolivar
September 25, 2008, 09:39 PM
:banghead:


steve

Erik
September 25, 2008, 09:39 PM
"...is it allowable for them to trespass onto clearly unoccupied (they watched me pull out of that driveway) posted property to "check things out"?"

It isn't trespassing. Yes, they may enter onto, remain on for short durations, and move through private property, posted against trespassing or not. It's called the Open Fields Doctrine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_fields_doctrine

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/04.html (third down)

Which makes is legal for law enforcement to enter onto private property up until they reach the curtilege:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtilage

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_n4_v67/ai_20576402

Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 09:45 PM
Put it on a little cart, and move it in front of the bench.
There is no bench, usually it's handguns and I shoot them standing up on my hind legs. It's really just set up for casual plinking and stress relief. I'll certainly go say Hi, I would hope that if they understand that there is no danger to them, they won't care. I believe their second shift does shipping/receiving only, so those guys on their loading dock can just get over it. I have the courtesy to not go out and shoot during business hours when they could possible be entertaining client meetings. And I suspect that whoever called did it on their own initiative. Perhaps their powers that be can discourage that type of action.

COMPNOR
September 25, 2008, 09:46 PM
The kinds of people who lead the kinds of lives that allow for CCW aren't the kinds of people who will shoot you over a speeding ticket, you know?


While I'd agree that most people who CC wouldn't, its silly to assume that all would. People who CC can still act stupid and rashly.

Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 09:47 PM
May I suggest paragraph breaks in such a long post? Makes it a lot easier for tired eyes to read.
You're right...sorry about that. I got to typing and didn't really realize it ran to half a page. I have verbose fingers :D

DeathByCactus
September 25, 2008, 10:01 PM
My father has a co-worker, whose husband was a detective. During his time as a patrol officer a man with a CCW who he pulled over for a broken tail light ended up opening fire on him. The man apparently wanted death by police officer because he found his wife having sex with another man and had killed both of them, then fled the scene. Thankfully the second round jammed and the man threw the gun and tried to flee.

*It was at that point he "had" to step up to being a detective...(wife)*

Officers need to think about these sort of things, you do not. I would also like to add that I find it an acceptable stop. Seems like the man was nice and had a decent grasp on what had happened. If anything he might just be less experienced but...

Steve in PA
September 25, 2008, 10:01 PM
Sorry, the officers were investigating a complaint. They do NOT need a warrant to see if your range was wihtout a problem.

Just what do you think the warrant would be for?? To check things out?? Way too many people on here have no idea what warrants are for.

The officer checked things out, told the OP he was not in violation of anything and that will be the end of it.

My town has a "no open burning" ordinance. Which means no burn barrels. However, those metal backyard patio heaters are legal. We often get complaints that someone is open burning. I do not need a warrant to walk into the backyard to check out the complaint.

Officers'Wife
September 25, 2008, 10:09 PM
Sorry my friend, search warrents have been done away with by something called 'reasonable suspicion.' In short, one call from any source no matter how unreliable negates any and all Constitutional restrictions of power. Just be glad you didn't have cattle back there. Had one attacked the officer you would have been criminally liable.

Selena

Jeff White
September 25, 2008, 10:25 PM
Sorry my friend, search warrents have been done away with by something called 'reasonable suspicion.' In short, one call from any source no matter how unreliable negates any and all Constitutional restrictions of power.

Please post the link to the Supreme Court decision that eliminated the need for search warrants? If you can't you should edit your post to reflect the truth.

I just love the way everyone who has never had any involvement in the criminal justice system is an expert on Constitutional law.

It takes a lot more then an anonymous call to get a search warrant. There are volumes of case law on that issue. Of course the truth isn't near as dramatic as hyperbole :rolleyes:

Jeff

jfdavis58
September 25, 2008, 10:27 PM
...all this talk about the law and the cops--my, my aren't we a self-serving smug bunch. About as 'High Road' as the sewer!

Gottahaveone, where is your down home friendliness, your neighborliness?

They've been there six months and all you know him by is 'guy with cell phone'?

Did you ever introduce yourself? Tell him about your little range? Offer to take him out and show him around? Give him a chance to see that it's safe, that you're responsible, that you might be friendly?

NO

You cranked it up, plan on doing it some more and to hell with what he thinks or feels.:neener:


Well that's certainly one way to make friends and influence people!:cuss:

Treo
September 25, 2008, 10:29 PM
I'm W/ Aquila on this one, The police can't just wander onto your private property uninvited. I worked at a company once that had two cops trying to set up a speed trap in the parking lot, the manager told the cops they weren't welcome on company property. The cops left.

Jeff White
September 25, 2008, 10:31 PM
The police can't just wander onto your private property uninvited.

They were invited. The complainant invited them when he called in the complaint. There is a big difference between parking on someone's parking lot to run radar and investigating a complaint.

Jeff

scrat
September 25, 2008, 10:33 PM
Yep Jeff is correct. When ever you or someone invites them. Then they get there they are pretty much obligated to check things out.

Gottahaveone
September 25, 2008, 10:43 PM
They've been there six months and all you know him by is 'guy with cell phone'?
Ummm....It's a business. There are probably 125 employees. I should know them all?

NO

You cranked it up, plan on doing it some more and to hell with what he thinks or feels.
I think that if you reread all my post on this topic, you will find that I have consistently expressed my understanding of their running a business and my willingness to limit my shooting to off business hours. I feel that as long as they have been there, they HAVE heard gunfire before and if there were concerns, they have had ample time for whoever is in a position of authority there to call over to my plant and discuss it. Keep in mind this is a business park, not a neighborhood and these are workers there, not people trying to live peacefully in their own homes.

VPLthrneck
September 25, 2008, 10:53 PM
IMHO I feel you're being a good neighbor by waiting until latter in the day to do your shooting. However, being the owner go out and talk to the other business owners around there and inform them that you have a private range and go shooting in the early evenings. Leave it up to them to spread the word to their employees as to prevent this from happening in the future.
Although, after the deputy complimented you on the way your range is built, you should have suggested that you and your friends could build one for them over at the police/sheriffs office. You might have found another line of work. :)

driftpin
September 25, 2008, 10:59 PM
I don't think he had reasonable suspicion either. I'm sure the county keeps records of the past complaints in triplicate and on the computer, so before the officer even arrived, he most likely knew what was going on back there, he probably knew a minute after he got the call. I probably wouldn't have called him on it though. Heck piss the neighbor off and invite the deputy to a Saturday shoot.

cassandrasdaddy
September 25, 2008, 11:10 PM
"The kinds of people who lead the kinds of lives that allow for CCW aren't the kinds of people who will shoot you over a speeding ticket, you know?"

not like this guy?
http://blog.cleveland.com/plaindealer/2008/07/slain_officer_was_shot_four_ti.html

pbearperry
September 25, 2008, 11:25 PM
Putting a no trespassing sign outside of a meth lab will work about as well as garlic keeping vampires away.If the cops came onto the property on their own,that would have been trespassing.However once someone makes a complaint,they have the right to investigate it,or at least have a threshold inquiry.Some of the people in here that complain about the cops overstepping their bounds probably bad mouth the cops for doing nothing when they are the complainant of something.Thank God I am retired.Hey John Q Public...F*CK OFF. Hey it's my right under the first ammendment.lol

Treo
September 25, 2008, 11:30 PM
There is a big difference between parking on someone's parking lot to run radar and investigating a complaint.

I stand corrected

Treo
September 25, 2008, 11:36 PM
Some of the people in here that complain about the cops overstepping their bounds probably bad mouth the cops for doing nothing when they are the complainant of something

What about those of us who don't call the cops?

To clarify the above, I would call the cops if I was the victim of a crime, but not W/ any expectation that they'd do any more than come take a report of the crime.

nicademus
September 25, 2008, 11:38 PM
Letís get to the important stuff; do you have any job openings???

P90shooter
September 25, 2008, 11:41 PM
Ok can we get a true answer from someone who knows? I know everyone here wants to be a monday morning quarter back and give their opinnion but please I think we lost the point of the OP's original question.

Can a LEO or even a lawyer give us their interpretation of the law and back it up with actual proof?

Sorry not trying to be rude but the OP has a good question that I would love to see the answer.

Erik
September 25, 2008, 11:44 PM
I've seen "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause" mentioned as justification standards. Neither are necessary, along with notification or invitation. The standard is "on official business."

Erik
September 26, 2008, 12:02 AM
"Ok can we get a true answer from someone who knows?"

Yes. I submit posts 12 and 33 for your review.

Gottahaveone
September 26, 2008, 12:03 AM
The standard is "on official business."
Sure, the roll out was official business. So is hauling drunks to detox. I just don't buy that all it takes is a complaint to allow uninvited (by the property OWNER... YOU can't invite somebody onto MY property) access onto private property to to investigate an alleged crime. The officer KNEW that there were legal circumstances under which a firearm could be discharged on that particular piece of property. So even if he were reasonable in assuming that the caller had in fact heard shots, he had the obligation to assume the discharges taking place were in fact legal because he had NO REASONABLE evidence to say they were not. Therefor, there was NO reason for any "investigation", or any entry onto the property. If he had reversed the sequence and came to the office first, I would have almost certainly allowed him access to the range. Almost. But the point is, it should be MY choice to make.

Jeff White
September 26, 2008, 12:25 AM
I just don't buy that all it takes is a complaint to allow uninvited (by the property OWNER... YOU can't invite somebody onto MY property) access onto private property to to investigate an alleged crime.

That's all it takes, if you buy it or not, that's the law. When the complaint was called in, the officer was given the right to investigate. If your theory was true one could commit all kinds of crimes on his property and be protected by his no trespassing sign.

Say someone put up a no trespassing sign and then proceeded to rape and brutally murder a prostitute they just picked up. Neighbors heard the screams and called the police. The police arrived, stopped at the property line because of the no trespassing sign and failed to discover the dismembered body in the bushes.

Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. If you want them to have to have a warrant to enter, do it indoors.

The officer KNEW that there were legal circumstances under which a firearm could be discharged on that particular piece of property.

The officer also knew there were illegal circumstances under which a firearm could have been used on that property too. Someone could have been murdered, some drunk could have been shooting up the place. Are you suggesting that it should be illegal to investigate an alleged crime involving gunfire if it's legal to shoot where the complaint was made?

So even if he were reasonable in assuming that the caller had in fact heard shots, he had the obligation to assume the discharges taking place were in fact legal because he had NO REASONABLE evidence to say they were not.

What reasonable evidence did he have that every was in fact on the up and up? You could have been lying there bleeding out because a disgruntled employee shot you, or you had an ND and shot yourself. Maybe they issue crystal balls to the officers where you work, but I dropped and cracked mine and I never knew for sure what was involved with a call until I got there and investigated.

Therefor, there was NO reason for any "investigation", or any entry onto the property.

What part of; "There was a complaint" is so hard to understand. I always used to apologize and explain that when someone called in a complaint that we were obligated to respond even if we were almost positive it was unfounded.

f he had reversed the sequence and came to the office first, I would have almost certainly allowed him access to the range. Almost. But the point is, it should be MY choice to make.

Not your choice to make now, nor will it be until all kinds of state and federal court precedents are overturned. If you feel so strongly about this, why don't you get status to take the case to court. Commit a crime behind the protection of your no trespassing sign, and use the argument that the police violated your Fourth Amendment rights when they entered the property without a warrant to investigate. I don't believe you would prevail, but you're welcome to try.

Jeff

Erik
September 26, 2008, 12:30 AM
Someone called you in. I agree that was unnecessary, by the way. You have no idea what information was relayed to the dispatcher, except that it was sufficient to merit marked units being dispatched to your location.

The units, upon receiving the dispatch for service, are expected to clear it.

Upon arriving at you location, the units are not bound by trespass law. Nor do they have to ask permission of, or even notify, the property owner(s). So they proceeded, clearing the call. Professionally by your own accord.

---

Edited: Doh! I took to long typing and editing and Jeff beat me to the play-by-play answer.

---

There does not have to be an "investigation," so don't get too wrapped up about that It can be about papers, about the view of another property, about convenience, whatever... so long as it is of an official business nature. I use the Open Fields Doctrine to my advantage regularly.

Officers'Wife
September 26, 2008, 10:43 AM
I'm sorry Jeff White. Please point me to the portion of the Constitution which grants the state 'reasonable suspicion.' I missed the first four times I was forced to read it.

Selena

GonHuntin
September 26, 2008, 12:19 PM
What if, instead of a chain, the area had been surrounded with a 6 foot fence and a locked gate........does law enforcement have the right to climb the fence or cut the lock based on a simple shots fired call in an area where it is LEGAL to shoot???

At what point do they need a warrant to enter the property????

Jeff White
September 26, 2008, 12:33 PM
At what point do they need a warrant to enter the property????

When the property is a building. Although there are laws that give officers the right to enter outbuildings to investigate things like animal abuse without a warrant. Those laws vary by state. Conservation officers also have statutory powers to enter some structures and look for violations of the wildlife code. In fact a conservation officer has more powers granted to him under the state and federal wildlife codes then probably any other peace officer.

Tyris
September 26, 2008, 01:32 PM
Gottahaveone: buy a silencer.

Here's the order of events and how they will eventually unfold:

1. you keep shooting to the annoyance of the other neighbors/businesses
2. cops show up and do nothing
3. callers eventually realize that it is not illegal and stop calling cops
4. callers start calling city council or the county to stop you from shooting
5. some form of restriction on weapon discharge is passed after enough complaints
6. you're SOL and your little range is no more.

I dont think "showing him around", etc, will quell the annoyance of gun shots in his place of work.

Put a silencer on your pistol and the annoyance factor of shooting outdoors near others goes away. You can keep your range and not piss off the other guy.

-T

GonHuntin
September 26, 2008, 02:06 PM
Thanks Jeff.......not doubting your word at all, but can you tell me where to find the laws that support your answer???

Guns_and_Labs
September 26, 2008, 03:03 PM
I'm sorry Jeff White. Please point me to the portion of the Constitution which grants the state 'reasonable suspicion.' I missed the first four times I was forced to read it.

Selena

Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 59 (1924)
Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984)

The links and articles are up in post 12 by Erik. Good reading, thanks, Erik.

Erik
September 26, 2008, 03:13 PM
You're welcome. There's lots out there on the 'net if you know where to look; running down references, etc. I thought those links where as good a place to begin as any for those interested in discovering more. I'm glad it was helpful.

Erik
September 26, 2008, 03:37 PM
Those of you confused about whether law enforcement can enter certain parts of your property should familiarize yourselves with what your curtilage consists of. In a nutshell, areas outside the curtilage have no 4A protections, while areas inside the curtilage have 4A protections. Those protections vary from the home to the place of business; something to be mindful of. Yes, it is nebulous and evolving.

And although it hasn't come up, no, you may not justifiably shoot people you believe are trespassing in open fields out of hand, whether they are civilians trespassing, or law enforcement personnel exercising the Open Field Doctrine. Because... it is illegal. Anyone live in the USA where that isn't the case, or at least believe that they do?

jonmerritt
September 26, 2008, 09:02 PM
I forced two leo's off my property a couple years ago. They were prying open they corners of plywood doors on one of my locked sheds, trying to see what I had inside. I opened the back door and asked what the he@@ they were doing. They looked very surprised and put there hands on ther weapons. I stepped outside and again asked ***. They said a neighbor up the road had a gokart stolen. I said your tresspassing and have to leave now. They turned and left without another word. I had nothing to do with there service call, they were way out of line and Knew it. I called the head office and complained with their badge numbers. I got a very friendly and apolagetic visit from the chief.

sacp81170a
September 26, 2008, 09:16 PM
They said a neighbor up the road had a gokart stolen. I said your tresspassing and have to leave now. They turned and left without another word.

They were definitely out of line. The subject has been covered pretty thoroughly here, but I have to inject the little tidbit about the marijuana patch over in Madison County that was "protected" by "No Trespassing" signs. The Drug Task Force guys still get a chuckle out of that one. :rolleyes:

Sergeant Sabre
September 27, 2008, 12:55 PM
The police can go anywhere the general public can. The general public could have wandered back to your range.

In Michigan, "no trespassing" signs usually don't mean much (except under a specific "recreational trespass" law). Trespassing doesn't occur until the accused is told to leave, and disobeys.

Officers'Wife
September 27, 2008, 01:19 PM
Hi jonmerritt,

Well, the apology was something, but were you reimbursted for the vandalism on your buildings?

Selena

Erik
September 27, 2008, 05:30 PM
Jonmerritt,
Depending on if the shed was an area of curtilage, and I cannot comment from the information provided, their presence may have been allowable. Their attempted forcing entry, given the circumstances described, was not.

I am glad you followed up and the matter was addressed at the executive level, hopefully to your satisfaction.

Mannlicher
September 27, 2008, 05:38 PM
it would be easier to read that if you put in some page breaks, some paragraphs and punctuation.

As it stands, I can't read it.

M203Sniper
September 27, 2008, 06:15 PM
Letís get to the important stuff; do you have any job openings???


+1

I am in Arizona but willing to relocate! :):)

telkontar
September 27, 2008, 06:17 PM
While I have not Shepherdized the cases, US v. Dunn indicates how little is now protected by the 4th Amendment. Basically, only the home and immediate surroundings are protected.

[C]urtilage questions should be resolved with particular reference to four factors: the proximity of the area claimed to be curtilage to the home, whether the area is included within an enclosure surrounding the home, the nature of the uses to which the area is put, and the steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by people passing by. We do not suggest that combining these factors produces a finely tuned formula that, when mechanically applied, yields a "correct" answer to all extent-of-curtilage questions. Rather, these factors are useful analytical tools only to the degree that, in any given case, they bear upon the centrally relevant consideration ó whether the area in question is so intimately tied to the home itself that it should be placed under the home's "umbrella" of Fourth Amendment protection. [Dunn, at 301]

While this sounds pretty broad in defining curtilage, in this case the barn (a building with opaque walls and a roof) was 50 yards from the home and surroundd by barbed wire fences (yes, plural) and a wooden fence. No protection under the 4th Amendment. [While there was a drug smell, the USSC stated the barn was outside of curtilage.] The open field now includes outbuildings.

I remember when the question was whether trash cans were protected. The USSC said "no" since even dogs can access garbage cans.

chipperi
September 27, 2008, 07:16 PM
I am thinking you should start shooting at Tannerite or maybe getting a black powder cannon from Dixie and rock their world.

NASCAR_MAN
September 27, 2008, 07:24 PM
Gottahaveone,

What wasn't said by the Police Officer was the full story. I mean, there is no telling what your neighbor told him about your shooting. As a minimum, the policeman probably wanted to confirm no one was hurt (that's what I would do if I were a cop). From what you've said, I don't think the cop was on a fishing trip.

On the bright side, I'm sure the police have made a few observations about your neighbor and have an "Ignore this Putz" comment next to his name and address in their database.

I think all ended well.

NASCAR

Officers'Wife
September 27, 2008, 09:41 PM
Hi Chipperi

A little calcium carbide in a coffee can with just a little water and the activator from a shock prod attached to a LONG cord would be less expensive and tends to be more fun. It's just a matter of running over to the can and putting the lid back on after every shot.

Selena

loosecannon
September 27, 2008, 11:30 PM
Invite the young officer back for a friendly chat and offer him and his buddies access to your coffee pot and restrooms. Also, make your range available for them to testfire their duty weapons. I think that you will meet nice people and make some good friends. Besides giving our cause some good pr, you will be supporting those who serve--often without praise when praise is due.

Remander
September 27, 2008, 11:50 PM
paragraph

breaks

please

LongRider
September 28, 2008, 11:44 AM
No one mentioned inviting the officer to come shoot with his buddies. Ask him to help you out that once the neighbors see PD coming over to shoot they will get a clue and stop complaining. Save everyone some time and aggravation. Maybe offer to supply ammo

Jaybird78
September 28, 2008, 07:00 PM
.all this talk about the law and the cops--my, my aren't we a self-serving smug bunch. About as 'High Road' as the sewer!

Gottahaveone, where is your down home friendliness, your neighborliness?

They've been there six months and all you know him by is 'guy with cell phone'?

Did you ever introduce yourself? Tell him about your little range? Offer to take him out and show him around? Give him a chance to see that it's safe, that you're responsible, that you might be friendly?

NO

You cranked it up, plan on doing it some more and to hell with what he thinks or feels.


Well that's certainly one way to make friends and influence people!

Not to get this poster all excited but what is he supposed to do? Invite everyone over for cocktails and free money? Do you let all your neighbors in your "business"(home) and show them all of your "stuff"? It's none of their business to know his business.....END OF STORY.

To the original poster........YOU did good.

TEDDY
September 28, 2008, 07:43 PM
seems it depends on were you live.
SC seems to be very strict on trespass law.
I too had a visit, one DS.complaint of shooting.we were still in my back field and the drive went to it.he walked to us was shown the area and stated they got a call of shooting.he was satisfied and left.its been 4 yrs and I shoot from time to time.so do others in my area.sept 1 sounds like a war. doves you know.you dont treaspass on someone elses land.
I lived in Mass and they are strict on search warrants.the poster is in NW SC.? in a lot of states the authorities take alot on their own.legal or not.as long as they know he is legal its best to keep your distance.do you own the property??that can make a lot of difference.:uhoh::rolleyes:

evan price
September 28, 2008, 09:23 PM
While it may not be germaine to this specific instance, I did not see mentioned the premise of "Exigent Circumstances" in which no warrant is needed, even for curtilage. Such as "Heard a scream for help from inside the residence"...

hopelessjoe
September 28, 2008, 10:38 PM
While it may not be germaine to this specific instance, I did not see mentioned the premise of "Exigent Circumstances" in which no warrant is needed, even for curtilage.While it may not be germaine to this specific instance, I did not see mentioned the premise of "Exigent Circumstances" in which no warrant is needed, even for curtilage. Such as "Heard a scream for help from inside the residence"...

Now you need to realize that from here on in (in this post) that not all people live in a sanitized, white bread, common world.

As a background note...My Ex wife was LOUD in bed...she also enjoyed a "false rape" fantasy.

Had my neighbors called the cops about her "noises" I might be dead. Just because of the fact that I would be found to be "raping" a girl and I keep a loaded weapon under my pillow.

How do you think that would gone down if LEO was to storm the place?

One dead man (and possibly one dead wife) who were perfectly legally satisfying "adult" desires.

Yes, let's give them more power to step into any place they chose to....

I am all for protecting people, but it swings both ways...

Let's say you love horror films (or porn...oh lord someone watches a screaming girl in the act of procreation and pleasure)...you have a great home theater....the chick screaming sounds real to anyone who wouldn't know that you are a perfectly normal person...

Reasonable suspicion means the cops get to kick in your door and your head into the concrete.

You are dead without the benefit of investigation (this includes a simple "knock and ask if all things are well by a street walking LEO") and you were innocent from the start.

Give them an inch of of power and they will tell you that they own the mile.

We have the Fourth for a reason...

Until they determine that a real criminal act has/is occurred...

They have to stay away...

Invite them in...

According to old vampire lore, once you invited the vampire in you couldn't make him leave until you killed him...

Same goes for LEO and any other government agency.

If you enjoyed reading about "Satisfactory but unnecessary LEO interaction today..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!