- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/6/21 at 4:56 pm to wryder1
quote:
“Shall not be infringed”
This has far more reaching 4th Amendment implications than 2nd Amendment implications. Going inside someone's home, without a warrant, to seize anything should be common sense as a no go. I can't even believe it's necessary for the SCOTUS to weigh in. Very troubling there are people who think it should be allowed. Unless we're in even more looney toons times that I thought, this should be a 9-0 decision.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:03 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Unless we're in even more looney toons times that I thought, this should be a 9-0 decision.
It is much more likely to be 9-0 in favor of warrant less entry and seizure that it is to go 9-0 the other way.
Hell there Sotomayor and Kagan are 100% all in for the totalitarian left. So we are at best down 2-0 before the case is even heard.
And someone has something on Robert’s, so I fully expect him to vote against the constitution. So we are really down 3-0.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 5:03 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:05 pm to memphis tiger
quote:
It is much more likely to be 9-0 in favor of warrant less entry and seizure that it is to go 9-0 the other way.
Hell there Sotomayor and Kagan are 100% all in for the totalitarian left. So we are at best down 2-0 before the case is even heard.
And someone has something on Robert’s, so I fully expect him to vote against the constitution. So we are really down 3-0.
There is no way on earth Clarence Thomas would ever vote to allow this. Not in any universe.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:06 pm to memphis tiger
quote:
It is much more likely to be 9-0 in favor of warrant less entry and seizure that it is to go 9-0 the other way.
Hell there Sotomayor and Kagan are 100% all in for the totalitarian left. So we are at best down 2-0 before the case is even heard.
And someone has something on Robert’s, so I fully expect him to vote against the constitution. So we are really down 3-0.
Historically, restricting searches and providing more protections to criminals has been a liberal cornerstone. I get that their politicians love govt control lately, but voting for expanded warrant-less searches would destroy everything they've fought for the last 100 years. This shouldn't be a partisan issue and really isn't the way I see it. Neither side is for warrant-less searches and seizures. This would have a much, much more detrimental effect on the minority population if police can search homes without a warrant. Do you have any idea how much that would be abused in the inner city and how many more minorities (blacks) will be in prison for other things found during these warrant-less searches?
This post was edited on 2/7/21 at 2:34 am
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:08 pm to wryder1
If the SCOTUS rules the guns were legally confiscated, it means the 2nd and 4th Amendments are dead.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:08 pm to lsufball19
If they rule in favor of this, being a cop will become exponentially more dangerous.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:12 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I get that their politicians love govt control lately, but voting for expanded warrant-less searches would destroy everything they've fought for the last 100 years
Seems to be the MO of the left lately.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:13 pm to wryder1
Just wait until cops started getting 86’ed
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:13 pm to lsufball19
quote:
This would have a much, much more detrimental effect on the minority population if police can search homes for guns without a warrant. Do you have any idea how much that would be abused in the inner city and how many more minorities (blacks) will be in prison for other things found during these warrant-less searches?
You think they care about that?
The left panders to minorities to get votes. They don’t really give a shite about them.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:14 pm to jlovel7
quote:
There is no way on earth Clarence Thomas would ever vote to allow this. Not in any universe.
I realize that. But there is no way it will be 9-0 no matter how much it SHOULD BE.
I expect 5-4 to destroy the constitution
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:18 pm to wryder1
This should be an easy case to decide. I can’t imagine the Court not requiring a Warrant.
However, these are strange times.
However, these are strange times.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:22 pm to LSURussian
quote:
If the SCOTUS rules the guns were legally confiscated, it means the 2nd and 4th Amendments are dead.
And the first amendment has been assaulted for the last year or so like never before. Before long, the entire Bill of Rights will be shredded just like the paper ballots that got Biden elected.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:23 pm to memphis tiger
quote:
Seems to be the MO of the left lately.
Undoing everything their own party has fought for hasn't been their MO lately. It's been shoving through every radical idea their party has unsuccessfully tried to implement prior
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:31 pm to LSUwag
quote:
This should be an easy case to decide. I can’t imagine the Court not requiring a Warrant.
However, these are strange times.
IDK the wife consented. the gun grabbers may just sneak in a win.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:35 pm to AMS
quote:
IDK the wife consented
If the Wife actually consented and those have been the findings of every court so far, I don't think this would have even made it to the SCOTUS, as there is no real Constitutional issue to decide. Police can ask to search anything they want and there's nothing unlawful about it. If Wife said they could search her home and that issue was not disputed, then we wouldn't be here I wouldn't think
ETA:
Here's the issue
quote:
Mrs. Caniglia’s consent to have the police search their home was legally negated because the police untruthfully told her that her husband had consented to the seizure of any guns.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 5:37 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:36 pm to lsufball19
quote:
this should be a 9-0 decision.
It won’t be. Sotamayor has long ago gave up any pretense that she bases any of her rulings on the Constitution.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:42 pm to wryder1
Well if the SC rules that this is legal then the Constitution is worth no more than a roll of Charmin
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:48 pm to oldskule
quote:
HR 127 will be THE beginning of the real revolt!
That’s TBD my friend. I’m growing skeptical that there’s any point we’ll reach (save economic collapse) that will lead to a collective response. We’re too flipping comfortable.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 6:45 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:53 pm to wryder1
Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer, Roberts and Kavanaugh will uphold the ruling.
Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett will dissent.
Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett will dissent.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News