Yeah I got confused by that too; for some reason I thought the locked door house and the caltrop house were the same house (I think, because they were both mentioned in the same article and it was unclear).
I definitely think there are responses that are somewhere between, "Yes, come in and feel free to search all you want" and locking every single entrance to your domicile. If you say, "No, I will not let you in until I see evidence of a warrant," for example, but do not run to every potential entrance to the door and lock it, I would see that as a middle-of-the-road approach. Also if you let a police officer into your foyer and explicitly say, "I have not given you permission to go beyond this point," you have not given consent to search (I THINK; I would need to look into that further).
Also, again, it's a "totality of the circumstances" kind of thing for almost every aspect of a search and seizure incident; a lot depends upon how many police there are; what time of day it is; how dangerous the police think you are; what the potential charge is; etc. Doing something like locking every door in your house contributes to the scenario not necessarily because it is extreme in and of itself; it also tells the police that you are more likely to fight them when they do gain entrance, and that you have a pretty strong distrust of police. Depending on how many police there are, how many people inside the house there are, what the charge is, and whether the police are armed, that may be enough to make the average policemen genuinely fearful for his or her safety. Also, keep in mind that the police generally HATE making arrests in people's houses because it is so much less safe, both legally and physically, than arresting them in public. It's why you see so many arrests out of cars--they are generally safer on pretty much every axis.
no subject
I definitely think there are responses that are somewhere between, "Yes, come in and feel free to search all you want" and locking every single entrance to your domicile. If you say, "No, I will not let you in until I see evidence of a warrant," for example, but do not run to every potential entrance to the door and lock it, I would see that as a middle-of-the-road approach. Also if you let a police officer into your foyer and explicitly say, "I have not given you permission to go beyond this point," you have not given consent to search (I THINK; I would need to look into that further).
Also, again, it's a "totality of the circumstances" kind of thing for almost every aspect of a search and seizure incident; a lot depends upon how many police there are; what time of day it is; how dangerous the police think you are; what the potential charge is; etc. Doing something like locking every door in your house contributes to the scenario not necessarily because it is extreme in and of itself; it also tells the police that you are more likely to fight them when they do gain entrance, and that you have a pretty strong distrust of police. Depending on how many police there are, how many people inside the house there are, what the charge is, and whether the police are armed, that may be enough to make the average policemen genuinely fearful for his or her safety. Also, keep in mind that the police generally HATE making arrests in people's houses because it is so much less safe, both legally and physically, than arresting them in public. It's why you see so many arrests out of cars--they are generally safer on pretty much every axis.