Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page

NOTE! This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or any other living person besides the one who posted them. Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion Policy, but there's a bad apple in every bunch, and we have no control over bigots and other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com

The Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:

Supreme Court to consider police searches
Submitted by: Newslinks Admin

There are 10 comments on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments

"The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider how far police can go in searching homes and questioning occupants without violating their constitutional rights."

"Justices will review the case of two Simi Valley, Calif., officers ordered to pay $60,000 to a young woman for their actions in a 1998 search of her family's house."

"The woman, Iris Mena, awoke at dawn to find an officer in a ski mask pointing a submachine gun at her head. SWAT team members led the woman through rain to a cold garage, where she was kept in handcuffs and questioned for up to three hours while the home was searched."

"A jury determined that her right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures was violated..."

Comment by: markht@bellsouth.net (6/14/2004)

"A jury determined that her right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures was violated..."
You could say so!
I see Californa S.W.A.T. teams use Einsatzgruppen
training manuals -- they slip them inside some phony cover with -- what -- the Commiefornya state seal...?

Comment by: tomahawk&keepandbeararms..com (6/14/2004)

"There were at least 18 officers who swarmed the house,he said,and they found no evidence of crimes in the room of 18-year-old Mena, a Salvadorian immigrant."

Might as well move back to El Salvador.Cops aren't so different here anymore.

"Police officer groups had encouraged the court to use the case to make clear that officers can handcuff and question people while searching their homes."

This is why I distrust cops.

"Also Monday,the Supreme Court made it harder for people to try to withdraw guilty pleas...The Bush administration had argued that the case was important because more than 95 percent of convictions in federal courts last year involved guilty pleas."

2 points:If you're innocent,plead innocent.And vote Libertarian!

Comment by: gbs49@comcast.net (6/15/2004)

Could it be that this flurry lately of "justifiable shootings" be to avoid lawsuits such as this?

Comment by: lee2mcgee@aol.com (6/15/2004)

"the decision could hamstring law officers." Duuhhh, that's the general idea.. The entire premise for the Constitution was to limit government. the words 'no' and/or 'not', relative to restricting government's activities, are used 24 times in the Constitution and 22 times in the Bill of Rights. Don't they teach Civics in the schools anymore?

Comment by: gadsen@livefreeordie.com (6/15/2004)

I have very little faith in our Kourt system anymore.

It wouldn't surprise me one iota if the Supremes rule in favor of the JBTs.

Then it will be open season on us all, but this time with the Supreme Kourt's blessings.

Comment by: nospam@nospam.com (6/15/2004)

Just once I'd like to see these storm troopers get what they have coming to them - a barrage of 30 cal machinegun fire.

Comment by: 4freedom@ttc-cmc.net (6/15/2004)

gadsen, you've gotta be patient, O'Connor hasn't had time to check with the UN and EU 'cause our Constitution is outdated ya know.

Comment by: www.evans270win@yahoo.com (6/15/2004)

tomahawk: And how long until the socalist infiltrate the Libertarian party in an effort to destroy freedom, like they have the rep's and dem's? What internal safegaurds are in place to stop this from happening in the Libertarian party or even the Constitutionalist party? Yes, I am voting Libertarian, but I fear the party may become "polluted" in the future, I'm sure I'm not the only one who wonders.

Comment by: madcowburger (6/15/2004)

Another illustration of why it ought to be just about impossible for anyone to enter your home uninvited without having to make a lot of noise doing it, and a pretty hard chore to break in, noisy or not. Ideally, they should be forced to use explosives or heavy earth-moving machinery. I guess once they go to military-level force they're going to get in, but why not make them work for a living for a change? Why roll out a red carpet and make it easy for them? Of course they might charge you with someting extra if they hurt themselves fooling with the C-4 or whatever. I know they charged some guy because they cut themselves on the glass shards of his picture window when they jumped through it from the tailgate of a truck.

MCB

Comment by: tomahawk (6/15/2004)

evans270, glad you asked that! Because I've been thinking about it myself. In the off chance that the LP became mainstream, it would be corrupted quickly by former Rep. and Dem. jumping on the bandwagon. The solution would be to once again shift party loyalty. I once supported Republicans when Reagan was the leader, but the Republicans have outlived their usefullness to us, so we must give them what they deserve: abandonment. It isn't pretty, but this is the "democracy" we're stuck with.