Does the ruling on consuming carrion under duress differ between residence and travel?

Primary text

It is reported from Ahmad that the eating of carrion is only permitted while traveling. However, this statement from Ahmad is interpreted as being based on the usual or dominant case, as food is typically available in residence, and necessity can be averted by asking. Nonetheless, necessity is a state judged by its actual existence, not by mere presumption. Therefore, whenever the true necessity is present, it grants permission, whether the usual presumption exists or not. Conversely, if the necessity is absent, consumption is not permitted even if the presumption of necessity exists.