TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Neither article indicates the house was "raided" as that term is commonly used. They went to his house and talked to the owner.

That said, I think also points out the continuing unnecessary expansion of the use of SWAT teams. Apparently, the call to the PD said a man MAY have threatened them but they are sure, and he MAY have had a gun. In my view, this does not justify a military-like response.

I know some of the responses I'll get, so let me say this, if you don't want the risk of being a COP, do something else. When an agency or officer put the lives of the officers above those of the people they are sworn to protect, then they are not fit to wear a badge.

Chas.

MechAg94 wrote:

Police armed with assault rifles descended on a Maine man’s home after members of a tree removal crew he’d told to clear off his property reported that he had a gun.

Why would this be required simply due to a report of a homeowner with a gun on his own property? That is an excessive response I think. The only mitigating factor might be if this guy was a known fellon with a history of police interaction.

anygunanywhere wrote:

texanjoker wrote:I think the key quote is missing from your post. He went out and yelled at them. They obviously thought they saw a gun being a life sized tattoo and called 911 which would be a man with a gun yelling at people.... police arrived, sorted it out and left with no arrest. Can't see an issue there. If I were on a cover position I would probably have my rifle as well.

He went outside shirtless and yelled at the workers to leave. When he’s not wearing a shirt, the tattoo looks like a gun tucked into his waistband.

You can't see an issue with raiding a man's house because he might have a gun?? Police raid a man's house because people can't tell a tattoo is a tattoo?

Anygunanywhere