Negligent Discharge in Home

[FastFinger]

Just curious...

Single family dwelling - you own. Let's say you have a ND (or AD if you like) no one is hurt, minor damage to property, but nothing visible outside the home, or from the front door. Neighbor call 911 to report gun shoots heard. The police arrive and knock on your door, they ask if you know of anything about a noise.

What do you need to tel them? If they ask, must you let them inside? If so, do you show them the gun involved, or the whole collection? Open safe or not?

[jakemccoy]

Just curious...

Single family dwelling - you own. Let's say you have a ND (or AD if you like) no one is hurt, minor damage to property, but nothing visible outside the home, or from the front door. Neighbor call 911 to report gun shoots heard. The police arrive and knock on your door, they ask if you know of anything about a noise.

What do you need to tel them? If they ask, must you let them inside? If so, do you show them the gun involved, or the whole collection? Open safe or not?

A cop must have a search warrant, other probable cause or your consent to enter your home lawfully.

A 911 call alone does not amount to probable cause. Imagine the problems if that were the case. Anybody could randomly call 911 and give the cops probable cause to enter a home. If the cops themselves heard a gun shot and they are sure it was a gun shot, then that may (or may not) amount to probable cause. From my house, a gun shot would not be clearly noticeable while outdoors. Even if the cops did hear a gun shot, it's questionable if the gun shot alone amounts to probable cause because a ND in the home is not illegal.

I would NOT consent if the cops asked to enter. Regardless of probable cause, I would be polite, but I would let them know that "I am not consenting" to them entering my home. I would use those words. I would provide as little information as is legal. Ideally, I would also have my digital recorder around my neck. I don't have an obligation to provide evidence for the cops to make a case against me if they're on a fishing expedition.

Be careful because most cops are slick at being able to get consent. They'll ask for your consent in a non-threatening manner. I'll bet that most people who don't know their Fourth Amendment rights freely consent. They'll say they have "nothing to hide" or some other ignorant nonsense.

[Meplat]

Just curious...

Single family dwelling - you own. Let's say you have a ND (or AD if you like) no one is hurt, minor damage to property, but nothing visible outside the home, or from the front door. Neighbor call 911 to report gun shoots heard. The police arrive and knock on your door, they ask if you know of anything about a noise.

What do you need to tel them? If they ask, must you let them inside? If so, do you show them the gun involved, or the whole collection? Open safe or not?

NO, NO, NO, and NO

[mmartin]

Are you talking about ND in public or ND in the home? California generally has a broad definition of ND in public. However, this thread is about ND in the home because I said so. A different standard applies in the home. If you could cite the law or point me to a case to support your point (for in the home), that would be great.

don't know about specific case law or PC regarding inside or outside, but I will see what I can find. if you can cite law related to discharge inside a house, I would be delighted to read it, I am *always* looking to expand my education on the subject.

what I do know in one recent case is this:

what WAS considered in charging ND with gross negligence was:
1) the "theoretical range" of the weapon (distance the bullet could travel, which is different from "effective range" which is the distance at which it would cause significant injury or death) and
2) distance from shooter to occupied residences (regarless of direction fired),
3) "ear" witnesses stating shooting was in the direction of the house

what was NOT considered was:
1) the absense of any dwellings within the "effective" range for the weapon in the direction fired,
2) that it was fired into the ground,
3) the direction it was fired was not in the direction of occupied dwellings,
4) theoretical or actual ricochet effective range,
5) reason for discharge (varmits causing property destruction)
6) eye witnesses indicating safe discharge into the ground not in the direction of dwellings
7) discharge was on the shooter's property

given what was considered and what wasn't, the same case could have been made if the shooter was inside or outside a dwelling (say from inside a house, out a window), provided the range from shooter was under the prohibited 150 yd distance from an occupied dwelling.

so my contention is that same charge could have been made if the shooter was inside or outside the house, as where the bullet struck was not considered, only where it theoretically could have struck.

not case law or PC as you asked, just my take on what charges were made and the basis for those charges.

Megan