Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Supreme Court affirms police action in Kentucky drug case

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-18-2011, 04:39 AM   #1
Kostriker
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Bigcountry02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southwest
Posts: 6,122
Liked 1747 Times on 995 Posts
Likes Given: 3529

Default Supreme Court affirms police action in Kentucky drug case

A little more of our freedom of the 4th Amendment just disappeared. Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 with Judge Ginsburg strongly disagreed.

What is next, having an illegal candy bar?

Supreme Court affirms police action in Kentucky drug case - The Washington Post

“The court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement in drug cases,” Ginsburg wrote. “In lieu of presenting their evidence to a neutral magistrate, police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, nevermind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant.”

Generally, the Constitution requires police to receive permission or obtain a warrant before entering someone’s home, which Ginsburg called “our most private space.” But the court has recognized exceptions in “exigent” circumstances: For instance, when a life might be endangered, a suspect might escape or evidence might be destroyed.

__________________

Last edited by Bigcountry02; 05-18-2011 at 04:48 AM.
Bigcountry02 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 05-19-2011, 07:29 PM   #2
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 3,087
Liked 756 Times on 449 Posts
Likes Given: 477

Default

Quote:
The court ruled 8 to 1 that Kentucky police who smelled marijuana at an apartment door, knocked loudly and announced themselves, and then kicked in the door when they thought the drugs were being destroyed did nothing wrong.
Oh, for Pete's sake, man! I remember when there was a time when younger we would walk down the streets of New York smoking a bit of weed while police were standing at the corners. Isn't there something BIGGER the police of today should be seeking? Rather than break down a door because they smelled pot. What nonsense! Do I smoke? No I do not. But that's beside the point. Slowly but surely our rights will be watered down or simply suspended. All authorities need is a premise and a philosophical viewpoint to legitimize their actions. Always works.
__________________

Last edited by PanBaccha; 05-19-2011 at 07:33 PM.
PanBaccha is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2011, 07:34 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dog2000tj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,309
Liked 3734 Times on 1824 Posts
Likes Given: 13269

Default

This supposed War on Drugs justifies bloated budgets, costly equipment and military style training and tactics

They have to show some progress

__________________

Member: NRA GOA

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Est sularas oth mithas

"either way, you were guilty by association, so you were smited...." JD

dog2000tj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2011, 09:29 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ta1588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Great Free State of,Tennessee
Posts: 344
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

***Facepalm***

__________________
ta1588 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2011, 09:44 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dnthmn2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Do you see what happens,Larry?!
Posts: 3,317
Liked 5 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Ever hear of an exigent circumstance?

__________________
AMAT VICTORIA CURAM

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
dnthmn2004 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2011, 11:30 PM   #6
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,091
Liked 5240 Times on 2732 Posts
Likes Given: 329

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigcountry02 View Post
A little more of our freedom of the 4th Amendment just disappeared. Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 with Judge Ginsburg strongly disagreed.

What is next, having an illegal candy bar?

.
actually yes. soon as the political scum that inhabit both parties make the connection than candy makes kids fat---candy is bad----candy illegal----more they can steal in taxes to wage a war on sugar for power

this country is almost done
__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2011, 05:30 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
pandamonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,601
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnthmn2004 View Post
Ever hear of an exigent circumstance?
I had never heard the word, looked it up...

Exigent;

1. Demanding attention

2.Requiring precise accuracy

Amendment IV

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.


IMO, if it demands attention, then a warrant must be issued. The 4th is clear, I don't see the word "exigent" in there anywhere!
__________________
GUN CONTROL, I GOT THAT

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. Thomas Jefferson
pandamonium is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2011, 05:45 AM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dnthmn2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Do you see what happens,Larry?!
Posts: 3,317
Liked 5 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pandamonium View Post
I had never heard the word, looked it up...

Exigent;

1. Demanding attention

2.Requiring precise accuracy

Amendment IV

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.


IMO, if it demands attention, then a warrant must be issued. The 4th is clear, I don't see the word "exigent" in there anywhere!
Unfortunately, your opinion is wrong. Ever hear of 'case law'?
Do some Google searching on 'warrantless search and seizure'.
__________________
AMAT VICTORIA CURAM

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
dnthmn2004 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2011, 12:27 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 300
Liked 5 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 40

Default +1

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnthmn2004 View Post
Unfortunately, your opinion is wrong. Ever hear of 'case law'?
Do some Google searching on 'warrantless search and seizure'.
In the Kentucky case, the marijuana smell was coming from one of two closed doors in an apartment building where officers had chased a cocaine dealer into (they knew he was a cocaine dealer because a member of their squad had just bought from him) and heard a door slam around the corner.

They smelled burning marijuana coming from the door on the left and reasoned that a cocaine dealer may very well have gone into an apartment where someone was smoking weed, or that the dealer had been smoking weed there himself before coming outside to sell some coke.

As LEOs, we don't make laws, the legislature (or congress in the case of federal officers) does. We may not agree with all the laws the legislative bodies pass, but we're still expected and paid to enforce them. The SCOTUS didn't "take away" anybody's constitutional rights in this ruling, they merely reaffirmed existing case law.

I suppose those of you who've been so critical of the police on here wouldn't even want officers to force entry into your homes if a neighbor called 9-1-1 to report that they'd heard what sounded like gunfire coming from your house just after hearing glass breaking and officers found a broken window and saw two bleeding bodies on the floor (one of which might reasonably very well be yours otherwise you'd have called 9-1-1).

I can see it now, "Let's see, we have a broken window, sounds of possible gunfire heard by the next door neighbor and can see two bleeding bodies lying in the floor, but nobody's answering the door when we knock on it and ring the door bell to give us permission to come in.....we'd better go get a warrant, oops, can't unless we can find a judge or magistrate awake (because it's 2AM, etc.)....well I hope the homeowner doesn't bleed to death before we can get a warrant because we can't violate the man's 4th Amendment rights.

If you have a problem with the drug laws, don't gripe and complain about them on a forum, lobby your state legislature and congress to repeal them, or better yet, run for office and sponsor a bill yourself if you're elected.
__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2011, 02:21 PM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dnthmn2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Do you see what happens,Larry?!
Posts: 3,317
Liked 5 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davo45 View Post
I can see it now, "Let's see, we have a broken window, sounds of possible gunfire heard by the next door neighbor and can see two bleeding bodies lying in the floor, but nobody's answering the door when we knock on it and ring the door bell to give us permission to come in.....we'd better go get a warrant, oops, can't unless we can find a judge or magistrate awake (because it's 2AM, etc.)....well I hope the homeowner doesn't bleed to death before we can get a warrant because we can't violate the man's 4th Amendment rights.
Thanks for the laugh.
__________________
AMAT VICTORIA CURAM

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
dnthmn2004 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
New 2A cases to go before Supreme Court? BigByrd47119 Politics, Religion and Controversy 3 08-26-2009 02:40 AM
Supreme Court Appointment falseharmonix Politics, Religion and Controversy 28 05-30-2009 10:44 PM
Supreme Court on RKBA bkt Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 03-19-2008 01:30 AM
2nd Amendment - Supreme Court notdku Legal and Activism 5 11-20-2007 05:40 PM
D.C. Officially Petitions Supreme Court To Hear Gun Ban Case opaww Legal and Activism 1 09-18-2007 12:59 AM



Newest Threads