Seeking advice - Sheriff Dept continues to search my guns everytime I shoot

[willygene]

because of the past calls about them and having been there more than once just because some one said they heard automatic gun fire does not give them the right to go onto the property and search them. i can tell you as a master licensed peace officer being an instructor and already having my criminal justice degree that they most certainly cant just keep going onto this property to search them without a warrant and they know they shoot there so their is no probable cause for them to be there unless they actually hear what they think is automatic gun fire. as for exigent circumstance now that they are aware that these people shoot there mere gun fire wether automatic or not is not exigent circumstance, for them to enter the property and search them, hence the fourth amendment we still have to follow the rules of law, thats why we for now are still a free country, god hope we stay that way.

 

[codygjohnson]

correct.

 

[Big country]

I wouldn't let them back on my property without a warrant again. I would be kind and polite but I would only stop my target practice long enough to set my fire arm down and walk over to the gate and tell them I'm target practicing and if they would like to legally search the property and my firearms then they should go and get a warrant to do so. After that I'd go target practice to my hearts content and leave when I'm done.

 

[robocop10mm]

Reported machinegun fire or machinegun fire as thought heard by an officer would be called an "exigent circumstance". But, overuse of such would get an officer fired. It would work once, or with a different officer, but if the same officer(s) were the ones reporting to the call, you would have a pretty good defense in a case against you. The problem with that is, you wouldn’t have a case against you unless you were actually doing something wrong. You could file a suit against the department, but the officers would know the slim chances of you actually going through with that.

I do not buy that one. Machine guns are not illegal in Texas, Unregistered machineguns are illegal (prohibited). To use the exigent circumstances argument one would have to articulate why the sound could only be coming from illegal activity. There is an equal likelyhood the sound is coming from legal activity.
You would first have to rely on the "Plain View Doctrine". This includes smell, hearing and touch. Under the "Plain View Doctrine" the officer must immediately recognize the sound, sight, smell, touch as unlawful. If you smell the odor of burnt marihuana eminating from the passenger compartment of a vehicle, you have probable cause to believe there is an illegal drug in the car. You could get a warrant to search the car. Because of the moveable nature of a car, exigent circumstances kicks in allowing you to search with out a warrant.

The sound must be immediately reconizable as 1. gun fire 2. fully automatic gunfire 3. coming from an unregistered machinegun to fall under the "Plain View Doctrine". There must then be articulable facts that make obtaining a warrant impractical because of "exigent circumstances" to make a warrantless serarch. In the absense of any of these facts the warrantless search is illegal.
Could the sound have been backfires? Maybe. Could the sound have been made by someone with a really fast trigger finger? Sure. How can you distinguish between the sound of a registered machinegun and an unregistered machinegun?
This situation has so many holes in it a first year law student could defend you.

 

[willygene]

exactly my point to many people are to willing to forgo their rights and don't fully understand their rights and the laws that protect them.