Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Biden Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Seize Guns Without A Warrant
Posted by:
dumb-dumb
()
Date: March 25, 2021 05:38AM
i hope his voters are happy.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/03/23/biden-administration-urges-supreme-court-to-let-cops-enter-homes-and-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=105d61362829
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/03/23/biden-administration-urges-supreme-court-to-let-cops-enter-homes-and-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=105d61362829
Re: Biden Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Seize Guns Without A Warrant
Posted by:
take all guns kill 2a
()
Date: March 25, 2021 07:50AM
only pussies need guns
i'll kick your goddam ass & i don' need a gun to do it
i'll kick your goddam ass & i don' need a gun to do it
Re: Biden Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Seize Guns Without A Warrant
Posted by:
what is really at stake
()
Date: March 25, 2021 09:33AM
This case involves a very narrow issue. It isn't about whether the officers could legally enter the house. They did so with the owner's consent. It also isn't about whether the firearms could be retained, as they were immediately returned when the lawsuit was filed.
The case being presented is nothing more than a police shooting case wrapped up in gun rights ownership clothing. If a police officer should have the discretion to shoot down someone who is not in fact posing an immediate threat to the life and safety of another person based on the subjective belief that the person might, then the police also have the discretion to temporarily take away a person's weapons for the same reason. It is also the same reasoning that would allow an officer to temporarily take a drunks car keys.
The case being presented is nothing more than a police shooting case wrapped up in gun rights ownership clothing. If a police officer should have the discretion to shoot down someone who is not in fact posing an immediate threat to the life and safety of another person based on the subjective belief that the person might, then the police also have the discretion to temporarily take away a person's weapons for the same reason. It is also the same reasoning that would allow an officer to temporarily take a drunks car keys.
Re: Biden Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Seize Guns Without A Warrant
Posted by:
not really
()
Date: March 25, 2021 10:13AM
The community caretaking exemption has already been pushed to the edge of the slippery slope. This SCOTUS will rightfully bring this back to the proper context and clarify the section.
Re: Biden Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Seize Guns Without A Warrant
Posted by:
Really in the real world
()
Date: March 25, 2021 11:46AM
The community caretaker exception is itself a slide down the slippery slope. That police officers are permitted as a function of their law enforcement activities to go beyond the mere task of enforcing criminal statutes is a given. It is when police use that authorization as a justification for ignoring positive constitutional protected procedural and substantive rights that is where the problem arises. We have had a Supreme Court that for the past 50 years has bent over backwards not to allow the "pursuit of justice" to be interfered with because of "technicalities", and that has maintained that police officers who were just "doing their job" should not be questioned for their activities after the fact.
This is a case that lends itself to a nontraditional breakdown of the judges. I would not be surprised to see a majority of the justices affirm the theory that police officers should be permitted to take temporary possession of firearms under certain circumstances, while at the same time a majority also agreed that summary judgment was inappropriate as there are facts in dispute which go to whether the police reasonably believed they should take possession of the firearms under these circumstances.
This is a case that lends itself to a nontraditional breakdown of the judges. I would not be surprised to see a majority of the justices affirm the theory that police officers should be permitted to take temporary possession of firearms under certain circumstances, while at the same time a majority also agreed that summary judgment was inappropriate as there are facts in dispute which go to whether the police reasonably believed they should take possession of the firearms under these circumstances.