Does Exercising the Second Amendment Invalidate the Fourth Amendment?

By Dean Weingarten

Fourth Amendment
Does Exercising the Second Amendment Invalidate the Fourth Amendment?
Dean Weingarten
Dean Weingarten

Arizona – -(Ammoland.com)-  The Rutherford Institute is petitioning the Supreme Court to hear the case of Quinn v. State of Texas, a case where the lower courts have held that the exercise of the second amendment is cause to invalidate the protection of the fourth amendment.  

From the Rutherford Institute:

 WASHINGTON, DC — Warning against encroachments on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, The Rutherford Institute has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of a Texas man whose home was subject to a no-knock, SWAT-team style forceful entry and raid based solely on the suspicion that there were legally-owned firearms in his household. Although police had obtained a search warrant for John Quinn’s home based on information that Quinn’s son might possess drugs, the warrant did not authorize police to enter the residence without knocking and announcing their entry. During the raid, Quinn was shot by police because he had reached for his lawfully owned firearm, thinking that his home was being invaded by criminals. In asking the Supreme Court to hear the case of Quinn v. State of Texas, Institute attorneys argue that making lawful gun ownership and possession grounds for police to evade the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment improperly penalizes and limits the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

The Supreme Court hears only a small number of cases each year.   Much as I would like to see this case settled by the Supreme Court, the odds make it unlikely that the Supreme Court will hear it.    This  is an important case because of the precedent established.   About half of U.S. households have firearms in them.   If your home can be violently invaded because police have information to believe that you have a firearm in it, then about half the homes in the United States qualify, once any cause for a warrant has been issued.   If a random sampling of homes would show that one of two homes contain a firearm, and if a firearm is sufficient cause to do a violent home invasion as part of the service of a warrant (no knock warrant), then why would a risk adverse police administration risk “officer safety” half the time?   The logic would suggest that every warrant service should be a violent home invasion.

Combine this with registration lists, which anti-rights advocates claim will be used to “protect police officers“.    Advocates of the recently abandoned Canadian gun registry claimed that a major use of the registry was to check to see if homes, to be visited by police, held firearms.   Further debate shows that this was not the case, but that does not mean that a registry would not be used that way.  Registration lists are already being used to confiscate firearms in California.

If the police have a list showing that there is a gun in the home, and the presence of a gun in the home is sufficient to justify a “no knock warrant”, then being on a gun registration list makes you a potential target  of such a raid.  Given events of the last year in New York, Maryland, and Colorado,  it is easy to believe that you, or a gun you own, could be legislated into a group of either “people  banned from having guns” or “guns that people are not allowed to have”.

This adds a twist to the fact that gun registration is gun confiscation, even if it is in slow motion over time.   With the precedent set by this case, gun registration presents a risk of violent home invasion by police.   Second amendment defenders have been saying this for some time, as have some of the more candid opponents of second amendment  freedoms.

Many will note that this is an incremental step on the slide that we are on, degrading all the protections in the Bill of Rights.

©2013 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973.  He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

  • 8
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    8 Comment threads
    0 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    8 Comment authors
    YaaboooooooyKTRobert FallinAffinityNetNewsExNuke Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    Yaaboooooooy
    Guest
    Yaaboooooooy

    The police are not following the 4th admentment what should I dooooooooo

    KT
    Guest
    KT

    I thought this would be an interesting and thought provoking article, but instead it was purposely misleading and stoking the fears of so many Americans that people are trying to steal there guns. The warrant the police had was a valid warrant due to drugs, obtained lawfully and not having to do at all about guns. We have the second amendment, and most cops love it. To imply that this was a violation against the second amendment by way of the fourth amendment is dishonest, misleading, and adding fuel to a much burning anxiety and fear of having our right… Read more »

    Robert Fallin
    Guest
    Robert Fallin

    It is time for citizens to apply “no-knock” to all levels of government, with the clear consequences thereof.

    AffinityNetNews
    Guest
    AffinityNetNews

    There is no government. There is only a foreign invading hostile privately owned fascist corporation called: UNITED STATES INCORPORATED circa 1783, 1871, 1933, and is copyrighted, trademarked, and registered in Delaware as a foreign owned corporation with no authority or lawful/legal connection to the 50 state Republic stated even in its own corporate bylaws and business charter. This corporation has absolutely no lawful/legal authority or lawful/legal interstate nexus within the common law Constitutional Republic created by the founding fathers ratified in 1789. FBI, CIA, TSA, FEMA, DHS, DIA, DIS, BAFTE, IRS, DOJ, at al, are all “commercial departments”, of this… Read more »

    ExNuke
    Guest
    ExNuke

    Jimmy, the felons and mentally ill already have guns if they want them. Congress can pass a law against breathing or gravity or making water dry they cannot change reality and having a law that can’t possibly be enforced is simple denial.

    Jimmy the Greek
    Guest
    Jimmy the Greek

    well buck then you advocate that felons and mentally ill can have guns , as per the 2nd as i do

    Buck Crosby
    Guest
    Buck Crosby

    NO , I advocate a FULL return the literal words and intent of the United States Constitution as written and explained by the founders and authors , all slime bucket legal jargon omitted and eliminated .( After the original convention ) .

    Darren
    Guest

    We gave up the 4th & 5th Amendments when we submitted to filing tax returns. You know the ones that you have to file but can be used in court against you. We also submit to being audited on the IRS’ whim. Bye, bye 5th. You let them confiscate your money (taxation). You give up your when privacy when you file. Now you don’t have a leg to stand on when they want to raid your house or confiscate your guns. Do you advocate stop & frisk? If you do you’re against the 4th’s protections. Liberty is a package. Stand… Read more »