Search Warrant + Knock = Shots fired

TheeBadOne

Moderator
3 arrested after shots fired from Virginia house


Two Iron Range men and a woman are charged with first-degree assault in connection with a shooting incident Thursday in Virginia.

Jeffrey John Golnick, 28, whose address is believed to be Hibbing, Shane Spencer, 20, of Hoyt Lakes and Dakota Ruth Lovett, 19, of Virginia are in custody in the St. Louis County Jail in Virginia.

Virginia Police Department officers and members of the Boundary Waters Task Force were executing a search warrant at Lovett's residence in Virginia when shots were fired from within the residence, said Virginia Police Chief Dana Waldron.

"Officers knocked on the door and didn't get a response," said Waldron. "They knocked the door open and when they reached the bottom of a stairway, somebody fired some shots. Probably about five shots were fired."

The incident was reported at 5:40 p.m.

Virginia, Eveleth, Gilbert and Biwabik police responded to the residence at 107 Sixth St. S. along with St. Louis County sheriff's deputies, the St. Louis County Emergency Response Team and the State Patrol.

The three suspects came out of the residence after about 45 minutes and surrendered to law enforcement without incident, said Waldron.

No shots were fired by law enforcement, said Waldron.

A search of the residence found a small amount of a controlled substance and a .45-caliber handgun, he said.


link
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TV news says 2 charged with Murder charges (attempted I imagine). I wonder what type of defense the tweakers will use.... :confused:
 
Not enough information.

Were the shots fired AT the LEO's or just shots fired?

Did the LEO's announce that they were LEO's (Most likely, that would have been a stupid mistake on their part if they didn't).

What was the warrent for? Constitutional law, unconstitutional law, war on drugs, war on (insert war here).

Too many if's, and's and but's here to really make a opinion on what happened.

Wayne
 
"What was the warrent for? Constitutional law, unconstitutional law, war on drugs, war on (insert war here)."

:confused:

Warrants are issued by an impartial magistrate upon application of a sworn affidavit. What difference does it make what it was for. What is an unconstitutional law? What is a "Constitutional law?
 
Well if the LEOs didnt announce themselves and just kicked down my door I would have to assume it was a home invasion and would fire at them. Like USP said, needs more info before coming to a conclusion. Granted that there was drugs found in their possession I would assume the warrent was for the drugs.
 
What difference does it make what it was for. What is an unconstitutional law? What is a "Constitutional law?

:D, good ol' sendec. Don't argue the law or the courts, they can do no wrong.

Wayne
 
sendec said:
What is an unconstitutional law?
To name a few...

National Firearms Act (1934)
Gun Control Act (1968)
Firearm Owners Protection Act - some of it (1986)
Gun Free School Zone Act (1990)
Brady Bill (1993)
Omnibus Crime Bill - some of it (1994) (aka AWB)
reason: no federal power to regulate or criminalize firearms

Harrison Narcotics Tax Act (1914)
Controlled Substances Act (1970)
Psychotropic Substances Act (1978)
Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act (1988)
reason: no federal power to regulate or criminalize "drugs", certain plants, or "drug precursors"

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) (aka McCain-Feingold)
reason: no federal power to restrict the 1st amendment based on (poorly constructed) heuristics rather than end results

Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (1998)
reason: the federal power to promote the arts and sciences cannot be an excuse to extend copyrights for already existing works; they have already been created, and extending old copyright terms provides no incentive to create new works.
 
Oh, I get it, it is unconstitutional if you decide it is, the heck with that whole "rule of law" crap. Why do we even bother with the executive branch and the courts, let's leave it up to the individual.
 
sendec,

We've had this discussion before, remember. It didn't turn out all that well and no one changed their minds.

And I've found that if you argue your case without emotion or anger, it seems to go better ;)

Also, it's not that we are against laws, just bad laws.

Wayne
 
Back
Top