-Stormfax
*
Springfield, VA – Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) have submitted an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Caniglia v. Strom. The case involves violations of both the Second and Fourth Amendments, after firearms were confiscated during a welfare check, pursuant to the so-called “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.
-Tom
Only rules now are Biblical.
ReplyDeleteNot even. That has been scrapped a long time ago.
DeleteUnintended Coonsequences. Read it.
ReplyDeleteThere is no rule of law in America.
ReplyDeleteProceed accordingly.
Always remember to never allow police into your home without a valid warrant, unless you specifically called and asked them to come investigate something. Even in a case such as this where they were performing a welfare check, the guy should have stood at his door and talked with the police while they stood outside.
ReplyDeleteThey aint standin outside no mo....no nevvah agin
DeleteThey are cornering a scared and threatened animal.
ReplyDeleteWhen it lashes out and fights back, they will act incredulous. The connection between their actions and reactions, are completely foreign to these people.
A lot like my wife...
Law enforcement confiscating firearms under a “community caretaking” standard.
ReplyDeleteGod help us.
I see no "community caretaking" exception in the 4th amendment. Of course my copy of the Constitution could be outdated. Nah, probably not, tis bullshit.
ReplyDeleteThe Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
ReplyDeleteThe three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.
The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
From the web so a grain of salt. I had never heard of the dick act. If what you say is true why would it not be used in defense of people like in this story?
DeleteThe Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws."
No, the Dick Act repealed the Militia Act of 1792, and created the National Guard system. It says nothing about gun control. And it was extensively re-written in a couple of post-WWI Army Acts.
"It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities. ** SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE ** The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army."
I believe 10 USC 311 survives (and is almost the only section that has survived) from the original Act. That breaks the militia into two classes, organized (Guard) and unorganized. Why would the regular army have been part of the militia?
SHOOT THE FUCKERS.
ReplyDeleteThis is where we are no folks. And if this continues to get worse hunt em down.