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 08-20-2011, 06:03 PM   #91
Deader Bears=Better Bears
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: BFE,Mississippi
Posts: 19,097
Liked 5642 Times on 3318 Posts
Likes Given: 4751

Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
This semi-local case is even more disturbing: The Case of Cory Maye - Reason Magazine
I still haven't heard what happened to the allegedly dealer neighbors. Cory Maye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia He should be getting a re-trial soon, hopefully.
I have read that Cory Maye has been freed, at long last, by pleading guilty to manslaughter for defending his life, his family, and his home against an unknown armed intruder. Cory Maye To Be Released From Prison
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.
GANDER MOUNTAIN OF HATTIESBURG, MS IS OVERPRICED, HAS LOUSY CUSTOMER SERVICE, & SELLS BEAT UP PISTOLS TO LITTLE OLD LADIES AS "NEW". :p

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 06:28 PM   #92
Supporting Member
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sniper03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 4,690
Liked 1801 Times on 924 Posts
Likes Given: 971

Default

I believe the decision was correct! Due to the fact the police were pursuing the individual, heard a door shut in the immediate area where he had ran and smelled marijuana. They had reasonable belief that it was the door and location where he would be found! Exigent Circumstances "Yes" And due to the totality of the circumstances involved it was reinforced by the smell of Marijuana coming from that apartment. The facts were more than reasonable for a "reasonable person" to think as the police did in this situation. No violation of the 4th. If they had been just walking through the hall without being in pursuit of the suspect. The warrant would have been the best way to go. No plain view at that point and might not have been if the police would have knocked hoping when the door opened to see a plain view situation. A warrant would have been the way to go. But the fact that they were in pursuit changed everything in this matter.
Just with a little sarcasm! If Ginsberg voted against the decision that alone would almost be enough for me to vote the opposite position from hers!

__________________
Sniper03 is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 06:36 PM   #93
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,282
Liked 3710 Times on 1829 Posts
Likes Given: 1010

Default

Davo45

I'm sorry but your example is ridiculous and juvenile.
There is no warrant requirement to entry if evidence indicates probable risk of loss of life. Your example, if remotely possible, would have fireman standing outside a burning home because they work for the government and do not have a warrant to enter.

The ability to debate laws, the SCOTUS interpretation of those laws, the political application, or lack of application of laws is the basis of a free society and big reason forums like FTF are so popular.

I've not yet come across a member here who does not share my deep respect for LEO's, however, we have a deeper respect for the free exchange of ideas.

TACK

__________________

Last edited by Tackleberry1; 08-21-2011 at 04:09 PM.
Tackleberry1 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 03:59 AM   #94
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
deathkricket's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Classified
Posts: 613
Liked 50 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 54

Default

I don't have a problem with this because i don't do drugs and I'm sure most people who don't do drugs also don't have a problem with this.

__________________
deathkricket is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 11:12 AM   #95
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 288
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 23

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
Davo45

I'm sorry but your example is ridiculous and juvenile.
There is no warrant requirement to entry if evidence indicates probable risk of loss of life. Your example, if remotely possible, would have fireman standing outside a burning home because they work for the government and do not have a warrant to enter.

The ability to debate laws, the SCOTUS interpretation of those laws, the political application, or lack of application of laws is the basis of a free society and bid reason forums like FTF are so popular.

I've not yet come across a member here who does not share my deep respect for LEO's, however, we have a deeper respect for the free exchange of ideas.

TACK
I was being sarcastic in my post while responding to another post. I also have a deep respect for the free exchange of ideas except when someone states that no government agent may enter their house without a warrant. I was responding to the member who made that statement, which I agree was ridiculous and juvenile and merely replied using his own "logic".
__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 11:25 AM   #96
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 288
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 23

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnthmn2004 View Post
Ever hear of an exigent circumstance?

Pandemonium's response to the above question?

"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!"

According to Pandemonium, if an incident demands attention, a warrant must be issued. My "ridiculous" scenario was an attempt to show him (and anyone else who might think he's right) how ridiculous it would be for LEOs, firefighters or EMS personnel to have to wait until they obtained a warrant in exigent circumstances by giving him an example of one. It's all about context Tack.

__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 11:42 AM   #97
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 288
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 23

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
Davo45

I'm sorry but your example is ridiculous and juvenile.
There is no warrant requirement to entry if evidence indicates probable risk of loss of life. Your example, if remotely possible, would have fireman standing outside a burning home because they work for the government and do not have a warrant to enter.

The ability to debate laws, the SCOTUS interpretation of those laws, the political application, or lack of application of laws is the basis of a free society and bid reason forums like FTF are so popular.

I've not yet come across a member here who does not share my deep respect for LEO's, however, we have a deeper respect for the free exchange of ideas.

TACK
I guess you missed Txhillbilly's comments then:

"I'm about as against law enforcement as one can be.
To me all Law Enforcement has become is a Government Mafia,and has gotten too big for their britches.
They need to change their motto from-To Serve and Protect,to Harass and be a General Pain in Everyone's Ass.
There are so many laws that they don't enforce (Illegal Immigration) for #1 because they might offend some ethnic groups,or it's not Politically Correct."
__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 12:20 PM   #98
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 288
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 23

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
In general, the LEO's do a good, thankless job, but there are knuckleheads out there making the rest of you guys look bad. It's like the Priest thing; if a public servant screws up, it looks soooo much worse than if a regular civilian screws up due to higher expectations of public servants.
I agree completely! Have there been, are any now and will there be corrupt LEOs in the future who plant evidence, file false reports, use their authority for personal gain, etc.? Yes, but when they have been caught, are caught now and in the future they too reap what they've sewn.

Others have tried to imply that drug laws are about what individuals choose to ingest into their bodies. They are mistaken, nobody in government cares what adults choose to ingest, but rather the loss of revenue due to the inability of government to tax and regulate illegal drugs. The feds use the interstate commerce clause to regulate a multitude of things, including firearms and ammunition.

Like many, if not most here I don't agree with a number of the laws and ordinances passed by congress, state legislatures and municipalities, nor do I agree with some of the rulings passed down by the SCOTUS. But other than contacting my representatives and joining with others in an effort to have those laws and ordinances repealed I (like any other individual) am powerless to change any of them.

As a sworn LEO in the State of Alabama I am empowered to enforce the laws of the state (including municipal ordinances since I am a municipal officer). I also took an Oath of Office to support and defend the constitutions of the State of Alabama and U.S., enforce the laws of the state and protect the civil rights of all people.

I take that oath seriously (just as I took my oath seriously when I enlisted in the Army). I personally will not enforce a law or municipal ordinance which I believe violates the U.S. or Alabama constitutions or the civil rights of "the people".
__________________
Davo45 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