Locked and loaded. Somebody say when.
Just spent a few minutes reading this OLD NEWS story. This happened in 2011, the charges that landed the homeowner in jail were dismissed a month or so after the event, the 3rd amendment was dismissed in 2014, the remained of the case seems to be dragging out (at least I do not see anything very recent). Of course, as one site reported: “None of the officers were fired, subjected to official discipline, or even inquiry.” The police are safe, even if citizens obviously are not. The Constitution, what Constitution?
“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail — its roof may shake — the wind may blow through it — the storm may enter — the rain may enter — but the King of England cannot enter — all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!” William Pitt
I’m sorry you don’t agree with decision, but it’s a case of reading the whole decision, not just some headline writer’s version of it.
Last week we were all upset when SCOTUS did not rule that the ACA letter of the law was exact in dealing with state-established healthcare funds.
In this case, the judge ruled that the Constitution means what is says. Exactly: “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”
#!: This was included in the Bill of Rights to ensure homeowners did not incur the COST of quartering soldiers. It was in response to the British Quartering Acts of 1765 which required homeowners to house, and pay for the cost of housing British soldiers. This law required the homeowner to provide, bed, food, washing, etc. AT THE HOMEOWNER’S COST. This Amendment was designed to address that cost issue , not the entry into a home.
#2: Cops were there for 7 to 9 hours. That is not quartering.
#3; Government has the right to abridge occupancy and ownership laws in emergencies. For example; they can prevent you from entry into your home if it is on fire, a hostage is being held there, or it can be reasonably be expected that your entry would expose you to harm, such as gunfire from a neighboring house.
#4; The law specifically applies to soldiers, and only soldiers, not cops. That’s the exact wording of the amendment.
On ANY of these grounds, this case must fail.
If we want exact wording of the Constitution to apply, and I do, then it must apply in all cases, not just the ones we like.
Tresspassers will be shot.
Have a nice day.
I would most likely hunt each one of them down until I got caught.
This is a case of another Federal Judge violating the Constitution. Please note that Judge Andrew Patrick Gordon was appointed by Barack Obama. That is where most all of these bad decisions come from.
2nd Amendment says they better have good reason. And knock.
And, sadly, every single one of the “conservative” Judges would agree.
Did the lawyers also make a seizure sans due process argument?
Excessive force?
Eminent domain compensation?
Truthfully, I think the judge was technically correct in this case, and it was a poor legal strategy to claim a violation of the 3rd Amendment, since it has very little precedent.
It *should* have been brought on 4th Amendment grounds. Had they done so, they would have likely won.
We are living under the government our ancestors tried to protect us from.
BKMK
are you freaking kidding me?!
judges don’t even bother to read the cliff notes of the bill or rights these days
if little ol’ me sitting in the florida woods knows this is a clear 3rd Amendment violation, any judge that doesn’t see it should be immediately dismissed.
If there was a freedom loving member of the police force, they would be looking for any and every possible opportunity to invoke this ruling in order to occupy the judge’s house.
I used to say that nine out of the ten amendments have been rendered dead letters.
Now it appears that it’s a perfect ten out of ten.