Police Abuse

Iowa Cops: If We Know You Have a Carry Permit For a Gun, That's a Good Reason to Invade Your Home Like an Army (Even If You Aren't Who We Are Looking For)

|

UPDATE: Original headline mistakenly said "registered gun"–what was at issue was a carry permit.

Radley Balko at the Washington Post with a disturbing followup to the story about another superviolent police raid over a non violent crime, blogged about here yesterday by Ed Krayewski.

WHO-TV

Why did the cops feel necessary pursuing a credit card fraud suspect to come in like an invading army?

Because they knew someone in the house had a registered carry permit for a gun, the police said.

That's pretty scary, Balko points out:

citing the fact that one of the occupants in the house — Justin Ross — had applied and was approved for a gun permit  is probably most disturbing of all. First, hardened criminals who are a threat to kill cops tend not to be the sort of people who bother with permits, or to register their firearms with the government….

Second, Ross was not one of the suspects for whom the police were looking. It seems highly, highly unlikely that had the police knocked on the door, announced themselves and waited for someone to answer it, a law-abiding citizen like Justin Ross would be a threat to suddenly decide to kill some cops. But it's much more likely that Justin Ross might feel the need to defend himself upon hearing unidentified parties break down two doors, followed by the sight of several armed men in his home. Indeed, that's very nearly what happened.

Finally, think of the implications if this were the policy everywhere. It would mean that if you're a gun owner, the police could cite that fact in and of itself as justification for them to violently tear down your door, rush your house with guns and point those guns at your family — even if their warrant is for a nonviolent crime, even if it's for a white collar crime, even if you've dutifully registered your gun with the government. In fact, given that Ross's permit is how the police knew he was armed in the first place, especially if you've dutifully registered your guns with the government. If I were a gun owner in Des Moines, I'd be asking some questions.

NEXT: Poll: 57 Percent of Americans Think Terrorist Attack Likely at Sochi Olympics

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Well, clearly we shot the one with the Ted Nugent t-shirt first. You always want to eliminate the clear threats right up front.”

    BAAAAAAAAAAAAAALKOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

    *shakes fist*

    1. In case anyone wanders by after hours:

      As I understand it, you need to apply for a permit for each handgun you intend to purchase in the state of IA. A concealed/carry permit serves as a permit to purchase a hand gun allowing the CCW holder to purchase multiple hand guns without getting a permit for each gun individually.

  2. If I were a gun owner in Des Moines, I’d be asking some questions consider never, ever registering a gun. Ever. EVER.

    Fixed

    1. I’d fix it further and get rid of the words “in Des Moines” and “consider”.

    2. As noted below, it wasn’t gun registration at issue in this case, it was CCW permits. I don’t think IA even has gun registration.

      1. In a way that’s even worse. Even a little bit of experience would tell you not to register your guns with the government. But not getting a CCW permit when it is required seems like a far more hazardous flouting of the law.

        Seems like the takeaway is to vigorously assert your Second Amendment right to never tell the police anything about your guns or how you intend to use them, and hope you don’t wind up fighting felony charges as a result.

        1. your Second Amendment right to never tell the police anything about your guns or how you intend to use them

          Is that part in invisible ink?

          Guy walks up to an elementary school with an AR-15 and a bunch of loaded mags, cop walks up to him and asks him what he’s up to… 2A says he can just walk on by unimpeded?

          1. Justin Ross clearly should have considered the implications when he took up residence in that elementary school.

          2. Guy walks up to an elementary school with an AR-15 and a bunch of loaded mags, cop walks up to him and asks him what he’s up to… 2A says he can just walk on by unimpeded?

            Nope. Try reading what I actually wrote.

            Cop walks up to you and asks questions, you have the right to not answer any of them.

            And, you have the right, based on the actual wording of the Second Amendment, to own any weapons you want, and to carry those weapons on your private property, and on other people’s property with their permission.

            A government school is owned by the government, so they can set rules about whether guns are allowed there, same as your neighbor can set rules about bringing guns into their private residence.

            1. Technically, that’s the intersection of the Second and Fifth Amendment rights — you have the right to own and carry guns under the Second Amendment, and the right to not talk to government officials about them under the Fifth.

            2. Cop walks up to you and asks questions, you have the right to not answer any of them.

              And if you’re acting like a threat to public safety, the cop has the right to detain you while (s)he sorts out your intentions.

              A government school is owned by the government, so they can set rules about whether guns are allowed there

              Does that apply to parks, roads, and sidewalks?

              1. They have a right to a Terry Stop. They do not have the right to kick your door down, point guns at you, and try to cover their tracks.

                Please tell me you know the difference. I know that it’s futile to argue with you, but please. For my own sanity.

                1. Oh, I think the raid in this article was abusive and they should at the very least replace or repair the doors that were knocked down.

                  I’m just taking issue with the broad statement Mr. Feed has made here about the implications of right to bear.

                  1. In other words, you’re being a pedantic cuntpickle for no good reason, just like always.

                    Go eat a bag of hot dicks.

                    1. with a side of rotten crotch…

              2. And if you’re acting like a threat to public safety, the cop has the right to detain you while (s)he sorts out your intentions.

                We might differ on what the cop may be allowed to consider a “threat to public safety”, since vigorously asserting your 2nd amendment rights isn’t what I would consider such a threat, but in lieu of particulars we might be in agreement on that.

                Does that apply to parks, roads, and sidewalks?

                I would say that the right to keep and bear arms in multiple private residences implies the right to transport them from one such place to another on public roads and whatnot, otherwise the government is effectively denying you of your rights.

                Privately owned roads, sidewalks and parks — sure, the owners can say no to you entering there, and set preconditions to entry.

                Entering a place like a public school classroom where you wouldn’t reasonably be going from one private residence to another, sure, then the government can set rules about how their property is used.

                1. Entering a place like a public school classroom where you wouldn’t reasonably be going from one private residence to another, sure, then the government can set rules about how their property is used.

                  That’s not the difference. The difference between parks/roads/sidewalks and schools is that the former are considered commons, while the latter allows for restricted access. Thanks to our long dead fore-bearers, there are long established Common Law precedents and traditions regarding the ability of governments to use public property to restrict free travel.

                2. Entering a place like a public school classroom where you wouldn’t reasonably be going from one private residence to another, sure, then the government can set rules about how their property is used.

                  Not all government property is publicly accessible. The difference between roads and schools is that roads/sidewalks are considered ‘common’ while schools and courthouses naturally allow for restricted access. Thanks to our long dead English fore-bearers, there is a Common Law tradition of courts to restrict government’s ability to use public property to quash freedom of travel. This dates back to the emancipation of peasants.

              3. Simply waling with guns is *not* acting like a threat to public safety.

              4. yes it does apply to parks roads and sidewalks, basically any place where one could also expect “free speech” to be protected.

            3. A government school is owned by the government

              Wrong.

              A government school is owned by the taxpayers and managed by the government.

              The government can’t own anything at all.

          3. And the first amendment.

            ‘Course, if the cop’s suspicious, there’s nothing stopping him from following the guy around.

          4. no since unless he has a valid reason for being there he is trespassing, which is against the law, and trespassing with a weapon is typically a felony. Therefore cop can arrest Adam Lanza wannabe all without stomping on the constitution.

      2. You can buy and sell privately in Iowa. You just need a permit to purchase handguns, which you buy every year. No, there is NOT registration, you do not need a permit to carry anything other than a handgun in Iowa. Kinnath is incorrect in the above statement. You do not need a permit for each gun you purchase; in fact, you don’t even need a permit at all for a rifle or shotgun. You only need to buy a permit to purchase (handguns) annually, and you can buy as many as you want. Iowa also recognizes permits from every other state.

  3. I’m thinking that you might be able to create a company that installs booby traps on peoples porches. If your door gets blasted open, a giant pit opens up under the welcome mat and all the intruders fall into it and land on a bunch of sharpened stakes.

    1. Make sure the spikes have green slime on them. Players hate that.

      1. I laughed

    2. It would be murder. The game is rigged folks.

  4. Or you could stop being dutiful.

  5. Registration leads to confiscation… and maybe a heavily-armed home invasion.

  6. Iowa has gun registration? That surprises me for some reason — it doesn’t strike me as a nanny state kind of place.

    1. Lot of places you’d think were gun-friendly aren’t as much so. Texas allows open carry of long guns but not handguns, for instance.

      Going to a monthly long gun open carry walk in a few weeks to assert our open carry rights.

      1. And Tennessee does not allow open carry or vehicle carry without a CCW (a lot of states have clauses for carrying a weapon in the car without a CCW). Oh and Tennessee also apparently has a law against gun racks. Weird right? I miss Missouri’s gun laws. Open carry with no CCW, carry in your car concealed or not with no CCW, the rules were better than those here in Tennessee.

    2. Aha — apparently Radley Balko has caught the New Reason’s habit of distorting relevant information. From the original source at the Des Moines Register:

      Ankeny police Capt. Makai Echer said officers knew at least one person in the house had a permit to carry a firearm.

      So it was a CCW permit, not a registered gun per se. Still pretty alarming of course.

      1. No “registration” in Iowa, but in order to purchase handguns you have to get a permit to buy. If the police are tracking CCW permits they’re tracking the purchase permits as well.

      2. Clearly a reason to take the expensive SWAT gear out of packing peanuts and dessicant packets and go batter down some poor schmuck’s front door.

  7. Perhaps gun registrations need to be held by dummy companies with PO box addresses. This is absurd–I mean, it’s a friggin’ right to be armed, and cops must be assuming suspects might be armed, anyway, given how they behave.

    1. The Constitution says it’s a friggin right, SCOTUS has said it’s a privilege that can be amended or taken away by a 5-4 vote.

  8. As a resident of Des Moines, I guess I won’t get my concealed carry permit after all. I had just decided to get one a couple of weeks ago, but haven’t had time for the class. I had never got the permit, which is easy to get in Iowa. Because I didn’t want to be on a gun owners list. Looks like I was right to be paranoid of the government again.

    1. Get one in Utah. They likely won’t have it on file in Iowa.

      1. They’ve thought of everything… that doesn’t count for safe harbor under the Gun Free School Zones Act (unless you’re in UT).

      2. yeah plus the Utah permit is valid in more states, unfortunately some states like mine require you to get their license If you live there (so they get the fee money) though you can still get the Utah one as well in order to carry in more states.

  9. Thought experiment:

    Al Capone, responsible for hundreds of murders and thousands of assaults, extortions, etc, was famously rung up on the nonviolent charge of tax evasion. Should Elliot Ness and the bunch have politely knocked on his door and not been ready for a firefight when they came to arrest him?

    1. Yes, because a firefight wouldn’t have happened. Capone was smarter than that, until the syphilis rotted his brain, at least.

      1. He wasn’t smart enough. He forgot they make
        the rules, and can change them at will.

    2. In broad daylight? No way there would have been a shootout. In any case, Elliot Ness and his ‘Untouchables’ had almost nothing to do with bringing down Capone.

      There area was investigating his bootlegging operations and they hardly made any disruptions of his business.

    3. You fail the Sentience Test. Again.

      1. Sorry, I have banned myself from recognizing your competence to test my sentience.

    4. Depends whether he had a CCW.

    5. Question: how is that at all relevant to a case where the police didn’t even suspect the person of a crime, didn’t have any evidence that he had ever committed a crime in the past, and didn’t have any indication he was likely to violently resist a search?

    6. thought experiment:

      Is comparing nasty ruthless criminals like Al Capone to innocent law-abiding Justin Ross a proper analogy.

      Justin Ross’ door was kicked in by a bunch of assholes in full battle rattle, because he was a law abiding citizen with a gun, and it must be stressed HE WASN’T THE TARGET OF THE WARRANT.

  10. Authorities acting authoritarian:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/…..h/5235629/

    Taking a 60-year old who shoplifted 37 years ago off the streets. I feel safer already.

    1. “We can’t just write it off,” said Russ Marlan, spokesman for the Michigan Corrections Department. “We don’t have the ability to say, ‘It’s been a long time. You’re free to go.'”

      Yes you do, you statist fuck.

      1. They could, but that what message would that send to current inmates?

        (she was guilty of prison escape, not shoplifting as CE implied)

        1. that if you escape and live for 37 years without committing another crime, they’ll finally leave you alone? horrible lesson.

  11. BTW, tulip, CCW “permit” is a form of “registration”. So fuck off with your MNG arguments.

    1. It’s not necessarily gun registration though. In places like CA and NY it is, since a specific gun is tied to the permit, but in shall-issue states you don’t even need to have a gun at all to have a carry permit.

  12. Totally OT…but really on topic!

    At the same time, the city would take on between $90 million and $100 million in debt to pay off legal settlements made last year. The bulk of those settlements were made in connection with police misconduct cases.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/…..9900.story

    Suck it Chicagoans!

    1. Especially interesting is that Chicago collects part of those settlements as income tax.

      1. I bet you had your “surprised face” on when you typed that.

        Fucking chiselers!

        1. “These transactions are the largest opportunities for people to make money off of government, and so we want to make sure that everybody is included,” Ald. Walter Burnett, 27th, said. “It’s a lot of money. It’s enough for everybody. Folks should make sure everybody is included.”

          Stupid fuckers?.

    2. If you live in Chicago, you deserve what you get in that regard.

  13. Seems like a person who bothered to register/obtain CCW (I’ll leave that to the pedants) would be LESS likely to pose a threat to the police since they, you know, followed the friggin law.

    1. Why inject logic into a perfectly good discussion about the general thuggishness (Oh noes….trigger word) of modern law enforcement!

      1. Trigger word? In this context, that could be a pun.

    2. Not only that they bothered. They also passed a background check, indicating that they aren’t the type person to commit crimes.

      Down here cops look at a CHL as a “good guy” card.

      1. A ‘good guy’? Someone who’s lived a perfect life in the eyes of law enforcement? What is a ‘good guy’ to your cops down there?

  14. Cops have become thugs and cowards. On October 2, 1992, L.A. County cops (crossing over into Ventura County without informing the Ventura County cops), the DEA, and Park Rangers, participated in a raid on Donald Scott’s house, killing him in cold blood. Supposedly they were looking for marijuana. None was found. Scott was a millionaire living on 250 acres that the National Parks people wanted but Scott refused to sell. No cop was charged or went to prison for their brutal execution of an honest, peaceful citizen. http://fear.org/scott15.html

    1. This link adds more to this sad story: http://www.wnd.com/2000/01/3988/

      1. “Sometimes people get warned and we don’t find anything,” Gary
        Spencer, the lead deputy on the raid and the one who shot Scott, told
        an L.A. Times reporter in 1997, “so I don’t consider it botched. I
        wouldn’t call it botched because that would say that it was a mistake to
        have gone there in the first place, and I don’t believe that.”
        ?What a stupid lying asshole?.

    2. I remember that case. Outright theft and cold blooded murder.

  15. This is NOT the norm in Iowa, and everyone but the police involved acknowledges that, and that it was out of line.

  16. We all get to vote on our police budget in the annual taxes, go to your town halls and fight against the militarization of our police. Fancy “cool” equipment always had a way of becoming necessary to use when we were bored in Afghanistan, I cant imagine how bored police are in a town where the SWAT gear comes out for CC fraud. and we all know Public hired mercenaries are only bored because there aren’t enough criminals to warrant their continued employment and they don’t want to relocate. self serving assholes.

  17. This is when people quite registering and/or bother to get conceal carry permits if the police will now treat you worse than a criminal. I know I’ve been thinking twice about what to let the government know. The less they know the better. Of course they are monitoring this post and cite it as a reason to do as they please.
    Once again proof that the more laws you make the more anarchy you create.

  18. “I’m thinking that you might be able to create a company that installs booby traps on peoples porches. If your door gets blasted open, a giant pit opens up under the welcome mat and all the intruders fall into it and land on a bunch of sharpened stakes.”
    It must be kidding

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.