- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
0
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:02 pm to lsufball19
quote:
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.
I was under the impression police were able to lie to gain consent/confession.
I think the issue comes more from the scope of the "community caretaking exception" which is being used to justify the seizure. in other words was there reasonable justification to intervene to prevent some 'transient hazard' while the man voluntarily left the home and agreed to be checked into the hospital.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:04 pm to wryder1
Nope! The people will ultimately decide.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 10:09 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:05 pm to Crimson Wraith
What standing do they have in my home?
None
None
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:09 pm to wryder1
They should be able to enter a home if you've ever "liked" a conservative oriented article, comment, or meme.
Let's just remove the pretenses. They want this. The "God damn america" folks have taken over.
Let's just remove the pretenses. They want this. The "God damn america" folks have taken over.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:09 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer, Roberts and Kavanaugh will uphold the ruling
What makes you think Kav will side with the bad guys in this one? Not saying he won’t, but why him?
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:12 pm to AMS
quote:
I was under the impression police were able to lie to gain consent/confession.
This is a little different. They basically say the Husband consented to seize the guns from a home they both owned and where they both lived. They can't lie to say they got consent. They can lie to get confessions during an interrogation, but they can't lie about having consent to search/seize something when they didn't have it. For instance, they can't lie about having a warrant to gain consent to search. IMO, this kind of falls under that type of situation. They lied to Wife that they had received consent, avoiding the requirement of a warrant.
Here's a similar case
quote:
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals faced a similar circumstance where an officer gained consent to
enter a home by falsely stating she had an arrest warrant for the homeowner’s son. In denying
summary judgment on a 42 U.S.C. 1983 claim against the officer, the court stated that the
consent in this case was obtained “by an outright and material lie, and was therefore ineffectual.”
Hadley v. Williams, 368 F.3d 747 (7th Cir. 2004).
I haven't read all the details of this case, but the article saying the Court previously ruled the consent by Wife was legally negated means that the consent issue isn't what's being heard. Almost seems like the Court ruled that consent wasn't necessary to perform the warrant-less search which kind of blows my mind.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:16 pm to SCLibertarian
The cops are told what to do. The decision makers, who tell the cops what to do, are the real culprits.
Stop blaming cops, blame their civic leaders.
Stop blaming cops, blame their civic leaders.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:16 pm to memphis tiger
quote:
What makes you think Kav will side with the bad guys in this one?
Republican appointees from the D.C. Circuit are generally statists who are more deferential to the expansion of government and police powers.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:17 pm to oldskule
quote:
The cops are told what to do.
And who told the cops in this situation to lie to the wife about the husband giving consent to seize the guns? It's amazing what some of you will justify because the guy has a badge.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:18 pm to oldskule
quote:
The cops are told what to do. The decision makers, who tell the cops what to do, are the real culprits.
Stop blaming cops, blame their civic leaders.
frick that.
Cops following unconstitutional orders are just as culpable as the people who give the orders.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:19 pm to oldskule
quote:
The decision makers, who tell the cops what to do, are the real culprits.
The decision makers in situations like this are just other cops with more seniority. Politicians and judges aren't chiming on the fly to provide guidance when cops respond to pretty standard domestic calls where no one was hurt. In this situation, in particular, I wouldn't be surprised if the responding officers dealt with the entire thing without seeking guidance from anyone, from lying about the Husband's consent to performing the search
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:25 pm to wryder1
quote:
Shall not be infringed”
That phrase means little if there is not a SCOTUS willing to uphold it. Given the current climate it is doubtful the constitution will now be anything more than a historical document.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:28 pm to wryder1
quote:If you're in a state militia.
“Shall not be infringed”
Why do you dolts keep repeating that? Even Scalia said it wasn't absolute.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:31 pm to deltaland
quote:
Well if the SC rules that this is legal then the Constitution is worth no more than a roll of Charmin
Correct.
And at that point we are at crossroads of forming our own Union. We are already at the point IMO, but this would be the last straw.
Let’s roll.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:31 pm to billjamin
quote:
My new policy is that every time I read about gun grabbing tactics or legislation, I buy another AR lower, suppressor, 80% or something else that terrifies anti-gun activists.
At some point you have enough guns and should invest primarily in ammunition.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:32 pm to texridder
quote:
If you're in a state militia.
Why do you dolts keep repeating that? Even Scalia said it wasn't absolute.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It says the right of the people, not the right of the militia, you fricking retard.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:34 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I haven't read all the details of this case, but the article saying the Court previously ruled the consent by Wife was legally negated means that the consent issue isn't what's being heard. Almost seems like the Court ruled that consent wasn't necessary to perform the warrant-less search which kind of blows my mind.
Thats kinda what im saying, its not the consent or lack of warrant at issue.
its the scope of community caretaking doctrine which was originally aimed at vehicle 4th ammendment rights and if/what circumstances does it is extendable to the home.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:34 pm to texridder
quote:
If you're in a state militia.
no quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The comma is significant. Having the right to form a militia (which, by legal definition is a group of private citizens who train for military duty) AND the right of people (no qualifier) to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed.
Do you even understand the purpose of the 2nd Amendment? Just because it has not been necessity to defend oneself against a tyrannical government in some time does not mean that the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment cannot present itself sometime in the future.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 6:38 pm to wryder1
Different topic but for over 100 years we have been required to file federal income taxes which then can be used as evidence to prosecute us in federal court. This, imo, violates our 5th amendment right...... which amendment has the federal government not negated in their power grab? We need our state legislatures to step up and take power away from the feds.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News