NRA and the Like, Get Out Your Checkbooks

We can only hope that 20 years later, the DIMWITS have forgotten 1994.

 

Go ahead Democrats. Press gun confiscation this election year.

 

Put your glasses back on; it's not realistic.

 

So if laws are passed to the effect that guns must be handed in will all of you shooty folks hand them in or will you happily become the "only criminals will have guns" folks?

Would you be prepared to shoot someone who comes for your gun even if a law is passed?

 

Like in the military where we did not have to obey an illegal order, we should not have to obey a gun confiscation order as it would be Constitutionally illegal. "From My Cold Dead Hands!"

 

So even though laws were agreed upon you'd be prepared to murder those whose job is to enforce the agreed upon laws.

Got it.

 

If an officer pushed his way into someone's home every time there was a complaint called in you wouldn't have any funding left in the city, county, stste, or federal government, the law suits would take it all. did you ever here of a little thing called the 4th amendment?? it goes like this;

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Now, without a warrant, without being hot on someone's tail, having talk to the individual and them seeming to be rational, WHAT REASON ARE YOU GOING TO USE TO GO INTO THEIR DWELLING AND OR TAKE THEM IN FOR QUESTIONING?????? And you have never heard of an over protective parent???

 

Interesting, a person goes and sees a shrink, relates some bazaar dreams and the shrink is going to call this person in??? Try and get something done about it.

 

The mothers complaint is enough for a probable clause warrant.

what does an over protective parent have to do with this? She is the one that called the cops in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

ITs the LAW.

they are just non compliant.

And this kid has been going since he was 8....................

he was not relaying your straw man argument

 

The same as opening your mouth to say something or printing something in the newspaper, or say anything from the pulpit, right??? What do you fail to understand about the word, "R I G H T"??? Oh, you WANT to take the RIGHTS away that YOU disagree with!!! NOW we UNDERSTAND!!!

 

So tell us, Headbanger, what was in plain sight that they could have "just cause" to enter without permission????

 

Please show me where this is true.

 

Straw man.............I was just making a point that "in plain sight" needs no search warrant if the mother allowed them in the home.

 

I agree that locking 'em up before they commit a crime is the only way to stop them. Never gonna happen in the USA. The same people who want guns in every available hand would be the first to step up and shout 'tyranny'. So, I guess we're just going to have to accept than we are always going to be in somebody's crosshairs.

 

The attorney client privilege was also to show you that that sacred cow CAN be violated just as the Doctor client privilege can be. But it's the exception NOT the rule. Hey, Headbanger, my wife had to sign a release order for me got be able to get HER medical records and I have been in with her ever time she has went to the doctor because she doesn't drive, on top of that we both use the SAME doctor. Try getting a family member's medical records some time then tell me about it. Believe me, you will see VERY few psychologist or physicist that will turn over anything for fear of being proven wrong in court.

 

In this case, you would have to establish probable cause (and get a warrant) before you could establish probable cause.

 

And what will the Judge put down as cause on the warrant??? Hey, Headbanger, the Judge HAS to have a reason and he also HAS to sign his name to it. And the idea of, "His mommy called and thinks he might do something unlawful:, will NOT get the warrant.

 

Hey, Headbanger, it's determined by both;


http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause
The requirement, found in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, that must usually be met before police make an arrest, conduct a search or recieve a warrant. Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for arrest) and that evidence of the crime is present in the place to be searched (for search).

http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/probable-cause/
Probable cause is the legal standard by which a police officer has the right to make an arrest, conduct a personal or property search, or obtain a warrant for arrest. While many factors contribute to a police officer’s level of authority in a given situation, probable cause requires facts or evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a suspect has committed a crime.

Common examples of probable cause include the sight or smell of contraband in plain view or plain smell, or an admission of guilt for a specific crime. The presentation of any of these facts would allow an officer to perform a search and make an arrest.

What probable cause means to you

While there are certain situations where police need a warrant to search you or your property — during a traffic stop, police only need probable cause to legally search your vehicle.

The major exception to the probable cause requirement for vehicle searches is consent. Most vehicle searches don’t occur because police have probable cause. They occur because people get tricked or intimidated into consenting to search requests.

Consenting to a search request automatically makes the search legal in the eyes of the law. And the 4th Amendment doesn’t require officers to tell you about your right to refuse. So if you’re pulled over, don’t try to figure out whether or not the officer has probable cause to legally search you. You always have the right to refuse search requests by stating, “Officer, I don’t consent to any searches.” Repeat, if necessary.

If you refuse consent but the officer searches you anyway and finds illegal items, your lawyer can file a motion to suppress — or throw out — the evidence in court. If the judge agrees that the officer’s search violated the 4th Amendment’s probable cause requirements, she’ll grant the motion. Unless the prosecution has other evidence, your charges would be dismissed.

 

Its called a "Power of Attorney"

simple document to get

 

Again you are wrong. But I am enjoying playing

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/search-warrants-and-probable-cause.html

How Officers Obtain Search Warrants

Police officers obtain warrants by providing a judge or magistrate with information that the officers have gathered. Usually, the police provide the information in the form of written statements under oath, called affidavits, which report either their own observations or those of private citizens or police undercover informants. In many areas, a judicial officer is available 24 hours a day to issue warrants.

 

You people and you "mental disorders". For crying out load, WHAT "mental disorders" are you talking about?? My wife has a panic disorder and takes medication for it, does that make her unfit to handle a fire arm?? Come on Gam, that's classified as a "mental disorder". She also has been diagnosed with bilateral dementia, mild at the moment but still a "mental disorder". But I would rather have her protecting my back in a fire fight than most men.

 

Why are you quoting the law to me.....I know all of this

The cops claim probable cause........the judge rules if its valid.......so the judge is decides its fate The are a few exceptions to this rule as I have already said. The car does not have to wait for a judge. If their is a change the evidence could drive away, the police officer gets to make the call. if the car is sitting up on blocks, this exception does not apply

You should know that I have a 40 year veteran of law enforcement as a father............he is a lead investigator for a DA

 

Hey, Wy, I have NEVER considered an eye test as a medical procedure. If it is we could sue the one giving it for practicing medicine without a license.

 

If ever there was a gun confiscation law the criminals would be those enacting it and not those refusing to comply.

 

That is why the 'mental disorder' is met with much fear. What should be done are those that display those certain qualities that are apparent in all of these psychopaths such as talking about killing people should be looked into. This shooter/stabber/runoverer displayed those previously. Parents/friends should have someplace to go for help.