Supreme Court Will Decide Whether Police Can Enter A Home To Seize Guns Without A Warrant

Forbes ^ | February 5 | Evan Gerstmann

[PghBaldy]

The 4th Amendment right against warrantless searches of a person’s home is a pillar of Americans’ constitutional liberties. Before a police officer, or any other government official, can enter your home, they must show a judge that they have probable cause that they will discover specific evidence of a crime.

There are some limited exceptions to this right. There is an “exigent circumstances” exception. If a police officer looks through a home’s window and sees a person about to stab another person, the officer can burst through the door to prevent the attack. There is also the “emergency aid” exception. If the officer looked through the same window and saw the resident collapsing from an apparent heart attack, the officer could run into the house to administer aid. Neither of these cases violates the 4th Amendment and few would argue that it should be otherwise.

However, there is a broader cousin to these amendments called the “community caretaking” exception.

[PghBaldy]

Can't think of anything intelligent to say on this, though that never stops me usually.

[Recompennation]

Choose wisely grasshopper

[Fido969]

The fourth amendment is being chipped away to nothing.

[momincombatboots]

If you have a bumstock, it might be acceptable.

[Uncle Miltie]

Everyone knows where this is is going and the inevitable blowback.

[Bayard]

Can’t seize guns that are lost to a boating accident a few years ago.

[T.B. Yoits]

A warrant doesn’t just protect the occupants, it also protects the home invaders. They may not want to leave the precinct without it.

[knarf]

FAKE KILLING ? ?

[Jarhead9297]

It is times like this that I go back to this video clip and it’s perfect as it pertains to this thread.

https://youtu.be/DNDcd1Fe5lg

[Political Junkie Too]

However, there is a broader cousin to these amendments called the “community caretaking” exception. It originally derives from a case in which the police took a gun out of the trunk of an impounded vehicle without first obtaining a warrant. The Supreme Court held that there is a community caretaking exception to the 4th Amendment’s warrant requirement because police perform “community caretaking functions, totally divorced from the detection, investigation, or acquisition of evidence relating to the violation of a criminal statute." The Court held that police activity in furtherance of these functions does not violate the 4th Amendment as long as it is executed in a “reasonable” manner.

I would think that "community caretaking" stops at someone's front door.

Since Griswold, the Third Amendment prevents agents of the government from monitoring a person's activities inside their home. "Community caretaking" inside one's home would be unconstitutional under the Third Amendment.

-PJ

[elcid1970]

It’s called, “new gun confiscation law results in massive civil disobedience and noncompliance.

I give you CT, NY, MA, & NJ. The govs still haven’t sent out their flying monkeys to seize semi-auto’s.

[Candor7]

Can’t think of anything intelligent to say on this, though that never stops me usually. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How about:

“I don’t have any firearms.

I was taking them all out to a camp and the boat upset,

Danged if I didn’t lose the whole kit and caboodle in 2oo feet of water.”

Many hidden root cellars across this land, in rather obscure locations are about to be opened renovated and used.

Thanks for the warning Attorney Cosmoline.

[RandallFlagg]

Bookmarking

[Antihero101607]

Well, this is fairly disturbing.

[rktman]

Hmmmm! With this SCOTUS? Approved. Next.

[BobL]

“Can’t seize guns that are lost to a boating accident a few years ago.”

As long as you reported it at the time, you’re fine. If not, then you’re giving the police false information, which is a felony.

[motor_racer]

Isn’t this “settled law”?

[John S Mosby]

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956

[JonPreston]

this is fairly disturbing

Concerning? yes.

Worrisome? Yep.

Troubling? absolutely.

But disturbing? That's a bit much.

[Carriage Hill]

“exigent circumstances” exception...
“emergency aid” exception,
“community caretaking” exception.

There’s always an “exception” to our Rights.