Jump to content
Shepherd9

SCOTUS to hear search and seizure case

Recommended Posts

Does the 4th allow unreasonable search and seizure of firearms without a warrant?  This case going to the SCOTUS may decide.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/02/05/supreme-court-will-decide-whether-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under those circumstances, I feel that the "community caretaking" standard was reasonable.  If the wife wanted to get a restraining order, leave the house or something along those lines, then the police could return said firearms accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

Under those circumstances, I feel that the "community caretaking" standard was reasonable.  If the wife wanted to get a restraining order, leave the house or something along those lines, then the police could return said firearms accordingly.

Perhaps, but I would think overall we are too easily accepting broader circumstances to fall under "community care taking" and cases like these could set precedents allowing for more abuse of such searches.  

We already have Rubio calling for restricting 2A rights for anyone investigated for "domestic terrorism", not even convicted, just investigated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shepherd9 said:

Perhaps, but I would think overall we are too easily accepting broader circumstances to fall under "community care taking" and cases like these could set precedents allowing for more abuse of such searches.  

We already have Rubio calling for restricting 2A rights for anyone investigated for "domestic terrorism", not even convicted, just investigated.  

Specifically in this case, because he pulled the firearm and told her to use it on him, I say use caution.  There are other scenarios that wouldn't warrant the confiscation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good example to be headed to SCOTUS. 

 

The individual openly showed a lack in judgement for his own life, and literally asked his wife to shoot him with his own pistol. 

Will be interesting to see what they decide, i see this going either way. Dumbasses should have found a better example of a redflag law that showed a clear violation.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

This is not a good example to be headed to SCOTUS. 

 

The individual openly showed a lack in judgement for his own life, and literally asked his wife to shoot him with his own pistol. 

Will be interesting to see what they decide, i see this going either way. Dumbasses should have found a better example of a redflag law that showed a clear violation.

Agreed.  Too bad they took this and not a case that interferes with carry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Dumbasses should have found a better example of a redflag law that showed a clear violation.

This has NOTHING to do with red flag laws.  If the wife had properly allowed the search or retrieved the guns and turned them over, there wouldn't be a question.  But, the search and the seizure were sullied by the police lying to her and saying that her husband had given permission.  This, she believed, prevented her from stopping them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EdF said:

This has NOTHING to do with red flag laws.  If the wife had properly allowed the search or retrieved the guns and turned them over, there wouldn't be a question.  But, the search and the seizure were sullied by the police lying to her and saying that her husband had given permission.  This, she believed, prevented her from stopping them.  

That's not what the police are using as an excuse to search the house. They are not claiming consent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

That's not what the police are using as an excuse to search the house. They are not claiming consent. 

No . . . That is not correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EdF said:

No . . . That is not correct.

How so?

The complaint refers directly to the community caretaking exception being used by Law Enforcement as a reason for the search, and that they claim neither the wife nor the husband consented to the search. The entire SOTUS decisions will handle on that. No some lie they told the wife. 

 

"And in this venue, the defendants press no argument that they secured valid consent from the plaintiff's wife to seize the firearms."

In short, the cops may have lied to the woman to gain entry, but they are not using her consent as a reason for the search and seizure. They refer to it as deception to execute the seizure using the community care taking exception. 

Cops lie all the time... and by lying to the wife they broke no laws, if in fact SCOTUS rules the exception holds. The search would be considered legal whether she consented or not, and thus coercing her to consent by lying is moot. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

How so?

The caretaking exception isn't part of a "red flag" law.  The police had to fall to the caretaking exception because of the faulty permission they got from the wife.  

You're becoming a bore.  So, I'm just going to leave this part of the discussion.  Have at it . . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EdF said:

The caretaking exception isn't part of a "red flag" law.  The police had to fall to the caretaking exception because of the faulty permission they got from the wife.  

You're becoming a bore.  So, I'm just going to leave this part of the discussion.  Have at it . . . 

I'm guessing you didn't read the SCOTUS complaint, or the article. Basically everything you claim isnt anywhere to be found in either... 

Of course I'm a bore, who could be bothered with reading the complaint and just pulling an argument out of their ass. 

The red flag laws have been instituted under the constitutionality of the police having reason to believe you will harm yourself or others, using the same caretaking aspect of their duties.. These actions described here are the efforts of police to subvert the courts and ERPO's and use the caretaking exemption to take your guns without even needing a warrant. Since this occurred in 2015, RI didn't have ERPOs. However, SCOTUS can set precedent and require a constitutional test be set prior to confiscation of firearms, that ruling could very well effect how red flag laws are instituted, or worse if they aren't even needed!

 

The cops didn't fall back on anything, they lied to the wife under the guise of using a real exemption that didn't require a warrant. Really not that hard to understand here. Their original report did not at all, ever, state the wife gave permission, and then had to backtrack and find an alternative legal reason. 

Factually speaking, the two arguments of the case are whether a police officer was "reasonable" in the seizure of both the individual and the firearms. Both key stone principles to red flag laws.

Feel free to make the conversation less "boring" by providing citations to your argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  •  

    alderfer921.jpg

  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • Looking to sell a basic NJ compliant Smith & Wesson M&P 15 Sport II rifle in 5.56/.223 with, at best, 200 rounds down the rifle. Works beautifully and will include (1) 10 round magazine.  Willing to meet within 30-45 minutes of Burlington at your FFL or can go through mine. Obviously must have FID, permit, etc. as required by the state for an FFL to do a transfer. All FFL fees to be paid by buyer. The first to post "I'll take it" wins the sale. Asking $625 or best reasonable offer.
    • OK, Here we go! I have been into reloading (.. generally, .. successfully, ... still with 19 or so appendages/digits) for about 12 years now. Basically, 9, 38, 40S&W, and 45- 3 types. I do well and am pleased with my results; I stay within guidelines and don't get too creative. I have availed myself of the wealth of info available on the net and in published manuals. ( I give a particular shout out to Cast Boolits) In light of events recently I have modernized/upgraded my equipment and still try to keep it simple; I do like the Lee products for obvious reasons. I also track roughly the number of rounds that I load. ( currently, completed around 15 - 20 thousand rounds, over the course of those 12 years) [.. and still with 19 or so ...] In my modernization I have attempted to concentrate on quality, ... rather than quantity. I have singled out 38 special as it is my favorite caliber and what I shoot the most of. I can regularly build a round that 10 out of 20 will hit the scoring rings of a 25 yard target, at 25 yards, from a sand bag, with the balance still on the 8 1/2 x 11 target paper. If I could shoot free hand like this I would be a Merc!!!!    NOW!! Here we go. I would like to pick the brains of the best out there and start a dialogue possibly about how different aspects of the reloading process effect performance of the round. I really WOULD like to limit the talk to the 38 special and we are talking bullseye type target shooting here at 25 yards. I'm not particularly asking for load data or what you shoot successfully; I am very curious as to whether anyone has any info on some of the more elusive and non published info; how does powder brand/ variation of charge  ( 3.2 grns Bullseye vs. 2.9 grns on a 148 gr. wadcautter)  (crimping in the groove, over the end)  ( HP 38 vs. Universal)  Does the powder brand/charge/crimp effect velocity that will engage the rifling and just HOW! HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE does a CCI primer make as compared to a Remington? Will you get a "fall off" .. wider spread .. "flyer" ...??  For example, I have recently learned that 38 special cases with a double cannulure were manufactured as wad cutter cases! (thinner wall, and interior stop?) When you load a wad cutter in a "heavy" (thicker) Winchester or Remington case, and run it through the factory crimp/sizer you can "feel" it being squished down. This has to effect engagement of the rifling in the barrel? Considering the different burn rates, ignoring what "everyone likes" how do you select a powder for a 125 grain rnfp bullet?  Did anyone ever get this nutso crazy or is it just me?  ..................  Oh! .. and while you are at it, could you solve world hunger, ... and take care of the reloading primer situation!    I personally shoot a S&W 586   6" bbl,    Ruger Match Champion 4' BBl. ,    S&W Mod 67 4" bbl    and a Rossi Mod 52 3" bbl.  From these I draw my data.  I have used new Starline brass, once fired and new Remington and Winchester brass,  plusP nickel brass, and "wad cutter brass" from Winchester, Federal, and Remington. I regularly load X-treme 125 gr rnfp and coated 148 gr wad cutters over Bullseye, 231, HP38, Titegroup, and Universal in the specified load ranges. Have experimented with other bullet brands and weights but no real difference. In my modernization I am also using a Hornady powder trickler and digital scale.    .... PANT, ...PANT, ... PANT!!!!    Done, now!           ..... am I expecting too much ....?                   Thanks, Guys
×
×
  • Create New...