OK, first the cops cannot take your guns away in any type of emergency state...several court cases of recent history have noted this.
Second, if you want to prevent cops from knocking on your door in CT, all you need to do is serve your local town clerk and PD chief with a notice of trespass ordering them to stay off your land. Then the same with the state police.
If they come onto your land w/o a warrant, they have committed a crime, they are the criminals.
Incorrect, A policeman may lawfully go to a person’s home to interview him. In doing so, he obviously can go to up the front door, and if that door is inaccessible there is nothing unlawful or unreasonable about going to the back of the house to look for another door, all as part of a legitimate attempt to interview a person. In addition, there can be no reasonable expectation of privacy in a so-called “open field,” even if the property was obviously private. What is an “open field?” It is essentially any unoccupied and undeveloped private residential property that is outside the curtilage of a home. If property is deemed an “open field,” any evidence observed by officers while they are walking or driving on it cannot be suppressed. A warrantless observation made by law enforcement from an open field enjoys the same constitutional protection as one made from a public place.
This is true even if the area is surrounded by a fences and NO TRESPASSING signs. United States v. Dunn.
Even if an officer’s entry onto private property is a “search,” it’s not an unlawful search unless the intrusiveness of the trespass outweighed the law enforcement interest in being on the property. Consequently, to determine whether a trespass-search is lawful, the courts balance the justification for the trespass against its intrusiveness. If the justification outweighs the intrusiveness, the search is lawful. Otherwise. it’s unlawful.
Because the intrusiveness of most technical trespasses falls somewhere between nonexistent and trivial, not much justification is ordinarily required. Even so, officers must be able to articulate some legitimate law enforcement interest for entering the property—as opposed to “simply snooping.” The following are commonly cited:
TO INVESTIGATE: Officers reasonably believed the entry was necessary to investigate a crime or suspicious circumstance.
TO DETAIN OR ARREST: Officers had legal grounds to detain or arrest a person on the property.
TO INSPECT STOLEN PROPERTY OR CONTRABAND: Officers entered the property to inspect property that they reasonably believed was stolen.
TO SPEAK WITH OCCUPANTS: Officers had a duty to attempt to speak with the occupants.
The fact that officers remained on the property after being ordered to leave by a resident might make the entry more intrusive, but an order to leave does not make their presence unlawful if there was sufficient justification.
If cops want to take your AR? According to CT law, your recourse depends on where...at your dwelling, feel free to resist; outside of your dwelling, you have no legal right to resist.