what's your thoughts about this!!?? - The Firearms Forum

Brob73 · 03-31-2004, 07:42 PM

Hhmmm...wonder what's in here!? Maybe I'll just look around!!

Remington597 · 03-31-2004, 09:31 PM

I thought this was always the case in Lousiana since they replaced the 4th ammendment with The Napoleonic Civil Code of Justice.

SouthernMoss · 03-31-2004, 09:31 PM

I don't like it. Too much chance for abuse.

Brob73 · 03-31-2004, 09:43 PM

what's next!!?? Are they gonna start arresting ppl for no apparent reason!!?? Nevermind...they already do that!

Marlin · 03-31-2004, 10:22 PM

There was a time when I would have said the Supremes would correct that. Not so sure with the present court.

Definitely NOT pursuant to the Constitution in any way.

rosierita · 03-31-2004, 11:36 PM

i dont like it either!

rnshooter · 03-31-2004, 11:53 PM

yeah, i saw that on the news the other night...that's just another reason why i'm ashamed to call this city home.

corpis66 · 04-01-2004, 07:51 AM

i don't like it much either BUT, ::thinking here we go...::
i think it will be a very useful tool in the search and seizure of illegal guns and narcotics. if the LEO do not have to wait for a search warrent they can just 'go in' search for whatever and leave if nothing is found...but those of us who have nothing to hide will feel very much so violated, but think of the good...? i know i would rather have the cops be able to bust into joe smoes house without a warrent today, than to have given him time to move his drugs or whatnot. at least now, the bad guys can't as easily slip away.
i am half and half with it...yanoe there are just some crooked cops out there...but there are good ones that are out to get the crooked people...i hope, very very much so it will not be abuse as we all expect it.
another bad part...how many of us have guns not registered to themselves...? gift from dying family members, or bought from a friend, no records...? damn thats alot of trouble alot of people will go through, just for protecting thier 2nd...it's worth it , yes.

SouthernMoss · 04-01-2004, 08:15 AM

Gotta disagree with you, Corpis66. Ben Franklin said, "Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I'd rather live in a world that's a tad bit less safe than to allow anyone to take my Constitutional rights away from me.

inplanotx · 04-01-2004, 08:31 AM

Quote:

i think it will be a very useful tool in the search and seizure of illegal guns and narcotics. if the LEO do not have to wait for a search warrent they can just 'go in' search for whatever and leave if nothing is found...but those of us who have nothing to hide will feel very much so violated, but think of the good...?

I want to hear you say how good it is when they come knocking on your door at 3 am with your family sleeping and your children are carried downstairs where you and the wife are handcuffed and laying on the floor with the nice cops with weapons drawn. Now, will you just say, geez guys, I think you made a mistake and do nothing as they walk off into the night?

I Don't Think SO!!!!!!

1952Sniper · 04-01-2004, 08:49 AM

Maybe one of you smart fellers can 'splain this to me....

From what I can tell, the officers asked to enter the house, and were given permission. Then, after finding Gould, they asked if they could search the house.

When a cop asks you if he can search, even if he has no warrant, you have just relinquished your rights by agreeing to it. This precedent has been set for years now, in searches of automobiles during traffic stops.

Did I miss something in this article that gives cops the right to search your house without a warrant or without asking?

SouthernMoss · 04-01-2004, 08:58 AM

Sniper, the first paragraph of the article says:

Police officers in Louisiana no longer need a search or arrest warrant to conduct a brief search of your home or business.

I admit I haven't read the case to see exactly what the facts are; I was basing my comments on that sentence.

But they did "search" the house and found the weapons before they asked permission. Would they have asked permission to search if they had not already seen the weapons in the closet?

mameral · 04-01-2004, 09:19 AM

I would have to read the entire case also. There seems to be some missing info, such as who consented to allow them to search. The other thing is, if they were allowed by someone who had the right, I would believe that they were justified in looking in the closets as a closet is large enough for a human to hide in. It would be different if they searched his dresser drawers or searched for anything smaller than a human at that point. I just think that there are to many unanswered questions to form a judgement. The judges probably had 500 pages of deposition to mull over.

1952Sniper · 04-01-2004, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Police officers in Louisiana no longer need a search or arrest warrant to conduct a brief search of your home or business.

Granted, the article said that. But that doesn't make it true. In this particular case, there was never an entry without permission. From the facts and proceedings section of the case:

Quote:

They knocked on the front door of the trailer home where he lived, which was answered by Dennis Cabral, who also lived in the trailer home. Forehand was also inside the home. The officers asked to speak to Gould, and Cabral told them he was probably asleep. The officers asked if they could look inside for the defendant, and Cabral agreed, pointing in the direction of Gould's bedroom.

So they asked to enter, and were given permission to enter by another resident. They specifically asked to look for the defendant. In the course of looking for the defendant, they saw the weapons. They proceeded with their search for the defendant, and upon finding him asked if they could search the house. Only after asking him to search the house did they do anything about the weapons.

I really don't see anything wrong here. All of this wouldn't have happened if Dennis Cabral had simply said, "No, officer. You'll need a warrant to enter this house".

inplanotx · 04-01-2004, 09:43 AM

Quote:

But former U.S. Attorney Julian Murray said the ruling is problematic.
"I think it goes way too far," Murray said, noting that the searches can be performed if an officer fears for his safety.

So, an officer approaches your house because you neighbor doesn't like you and tells police that you have yelled despicable epithets at him and you fear that he will harm you. The officer goes to your house, knocks on your door and suddenly feels he is not safe, he can then proceed to call for backup and search your house without a warrant?

What if he got the address mixed up and you were sitting on the porch carving a piece of wood for your children with a knife. The officer see's the knife and is fearful of his life. Calls for back up and now wants to search for more weapons. He then gets to look in all your closets and finds ten legal weapons. Now what? He does not know they are legal, whats more, he does not care, but you're gonna pay a lawyer to get it cleared up! How much is that gonna cost ya?

Not on my Watch!!!!

SouthernMoss · 04-01-2004, 10:14 AM

Quote:

The district court–without appellate challenge–found that “the officers’ initial entry into the mobile home was legal, because they had the voluntary consent of a resident. However, Mr. Cabral [the housemate] had neither actual nor apparent authority to consent to the search of the master bedroom.”

Quote:

the district court suppressed the guns, finding that the search of the closet, characterized as a protective sweep, violated Gould's Fourth Amendment rights because it was not incident to an arrest.

corpis66 · 04-01-2004, 03:31 PM

well i'll put it this way, i have nothing to hide. they can search my house all day long and will only find registered guns, legally prescribed drugs. and other crap that will be useless to them.
i dont live in N.O. but near...and i have no problem with this. if i have bitchy neighbors that want to 'rain on my parade' so be it, i've got nothing to hide and theres nothing here for them to legally take.

tuckerd1 · 04-01-2004, 03:37 PM

Quote:

i've got nothing to hide and theres nothing here for them to legally take.

corpis66,

I hear what you are saying, and I can sympathize with you, but if they decide to take then you may spend tens of thousands to prove your innocence.

corpis66 · 04-01-2004, 04:01 PM

true, and thats always a thought that has crossed me, but, i feel if i told them 'no...you cant search my place', then i will bet they will find something illegal, all it takes is one bad cop. but if i let them search it, it'll prove i do have some guns, all legal and nothing to hide. there are alot in america i dont like, but alot i love. in some respect - seeing the crime first hand, i would feel safer knowing cops dont have to wait a couple of hours to get a search warrent for that bums house...and when they get there.. all the illegal stuff is gone. get it while you can, without a warrent...i am for it, becuase it may (and yes i believe it will) cut down on alot of crime, or catch/find the problem in the house without the court restrictions. i maybe niaeve (sp?) but i am sick and tired of seeing crap around here getting worse. if i could i would shoot the mofo's on the street if it were legal. just to prove they did something wrong. the world is getting so bad, and unreal i hate it. when we can afford it, we'll be moving to the country, so i wont have to worry as much about my childs saftey in the yard, i am pissed because criminals have WAY more rights than a homeowner.
you all are looking at it as...infringement on rights, i see it as getting one step closer to the bad guys stash of whatever.

whoops..i think i went a lil nuts for a sec. sorry about that.

1952Sniper · 04-01-2004, 04:09 PM

Quote:

get it while you can, without a warrent...i am for it

Wow. That is shocking. I'm disappointed to hear an American say those words.

Have you no respect for the Constitution, or the liberties that our forefathers shed their blood for?

I don't mean this as a personal attack, so please don't take it that way. I merely want to force you to defend your stance on this.

Protection from search and seizure is one of our most basic rights. Without that protection, our police forces would quickly turn into the Gestapo. As Americans, our homes are our castles. I'm really surprised to hear you say that you're OK with giving up your rights just because you have nothing to hide. That is the mentality that leads to a police state.

gpostal · 04-01-2004, 04:21 PM

How dare anyone suggest that police officers would exploit and abuse an unconstitutional law

Alright you guys are going to get me started again, here we go this is another chip away at our rights as citizens ,just like the war on drugs and the homeland security act , people will justify it because they have nothing to hide , well I do ,its called the united states constitution ,and it is coming to a point that if we want to keep it safe we have to hide it

Remember some places you can be charged with having a meth lab if you possess ,three of the following ,coffee filters ,drain cleaner ,starting fluid ,a hot plate ,sinus medication that contains ephedrine {name one that don’t}, you only have to have three of them in any combination

Ok now that this is understood , what if you where to be arrested for this charge under these guidelines ,they take your legal guns to jail too , you have to post bail hire a lawyer ,miss work ,and during the mean time you cannot purchase a firearm ,posses a firearm ,your home is now unsecure , your name is in the paper ,then you go to court it gets dismissed ,you get your guns back to find they are sratched to hell , and you have spent five grand on a lawyer , but that can’t happen can it

A friend of mine was carrying six thousand dollars cash ,to buy antiques for his antique store at a estate sale ,got pulled over they confiscated his cash because a law says that much cash must be drug money , cost him two thousand in lawyers fee’s , he lived 120 miles away ,had to drive up for each court date ,but he got his money back 30 days after it was dismissed , and it tied up his cash flow for six months

Some police abuse ,lie cheat and steal ,do drugs and commit murder, they have the highest rate of alcoholism ,suicide and divorce than any other profession ,so to me it is not a good ideal to give such a unstable person more power in my life ,I have met about a dozen in my lifetime I could even carry a conversation with ,they are better than me and you ,and feel they are superior human beings

i live in a town that police abuse has become a way of life ,but the streets are safe right?

45Smashemflat · 04-01-2004, 05:01 PM

The "I've done nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide" argument wears thin after a while. The ability to make pre-emptive searches will get carried away.

"Sir, please step over there behind the screen for a full cavity search before boarding the plane..."

Along with the meth lab scenario given above, consider that rulings are out there that if you have a muffler pipe and an how-to-manual for a STEN you "have a Class III weapon."

Bottom line, given enough rope, an unscrupulous cop, DA, or other government official can make a case out of anything. It doesn't have to stick to be a real hassle and a wallet drain.

Its actually no different than the "american right to sue" over anything if you can get a lawyer to present the case.

For those willing to live that way, may the chains of oppression weigh lightly on your back, may your knees last in servitude, go elsewhere as we do not need your counsel or support. (Not quite the exact quote - but close.)

03-31-2004, 07:42 PM	#1
Brob73 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 162	what's your thoughts about this!!?? Hhmmm...wonder what's in here!? Maybe I'll just look around!! -->

03-31-2004, 09:31 PM	#3
SouthernMoss Admin Tech Staff Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: SW MS Contributor Posts: 10,651	I don't like it. Too much chance for abuse. __________________ My Second protects your First "I declare to you that woman must not depend upon the protection of man, but must be taught to protect herself, and there I take my stand." - Susan B Anthony

03-31-2004, 10:22 PM	#5
Marlin TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: At SouthernMoss' side forever! Contributor Posts: 13,853	There was a time when I would have said the Supremes would correct that. Not so sure with the present court. Definitely NOT pursuant to the Constitution in any way. __________________ *The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing.* *The only criminal class native to the United States is Congress.*

03-31-2004, 11:36 PM	#6
rosierita Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 5,218	i dont like it either! __________________

03-31-2004, 11:53 PM	#7
rnshooter V.I.P. Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Orleans Posts: 79	yeah, i saw that on the news the other night...that's just another reason why i'm ashamed to call this city home. __________________ rnshooter

03-31-2004, 09:31 PM	#2
Remington597 Former Guest Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,201	I thought this was always the case in Lousiana since they replaced the 4th ammendment with The Napoleonic Civil Code of Justice.

03-31-2004, 09:43 PM	#4
Brob73 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 162	what's next!!?? Are they gonna start arresting ppl for no apparent reason!!?? Nevermind...they already do that!

04-01-2004, 07:51 AM	#8
corpis66 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: central MS Posts: 259	i don't like it much either BUT, ::thinking here we go...:: i think it will be a very useful tool in the search and seizure of illegal guns and narcotics. if the LEO do not have to wait for a search warrent they can just 'go in' search for whatever and leave if nothing is found...but those of us who have nothing to hide will feel very much so violated, but think of the good...? i know i would rather have the cops be able to bust into joe smoes house without a warrent today, than to have given him time to move his drugs or whatnot. at least now, the bad guys can't as easily slip away. i am half and half with it...yanoe there are just some crooked cops out there...but there are good ones that are out to get the crooked people...i hope, very very much so it will not be abuse as we all expect it. another bad part...how many of us have guns not registered to themselves...? gift from dying family members, or bought from a friend, no records...? damn thats alot of trouble alot of people will go through, just for protecting thier 2nd...it's worth it , yes.

04-01-2004, 08:15 AM	#9
SouthernMoss Admin Tech Staff Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: SW MS Contributor Posts: 10,651	Gotta disagree with you, Corpis66. Ben Franklin said, "Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I'd rather live in a world that's a tad bit less safe than to allow anyone to take my Constitutional rights away from me. __________________ My Second protects your First "I declare to you that woman must not depend upon the protection of man, but must be taught to protect herself, and there I take my stand." - Susan B Anthony

04-01-2004, 08:49 AM	#11
1952Sniper Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 5,138	Maybe one of you smart fellers can 'splain this to me.... From what I can tell, the officers asked to enter the house, and were given permission. Then, after finding Gould, they asked if they could search the house. When a cop asks you if he can search, even if he has no warrant, you have just relinquished your rights by agreeing to it. This precedent has been set for years now, in searches of automobiles during traffic stops. Did I miss something in this article that gives cops the right to search your house without a warrant or without asking?

04-01-2004, 08:58 AM	#12
SouthernMoss Admin Tech Staff Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: SW MS Contributor Posts: 10,651	Sniper, the first paragraph of the article says: Police officers in Louisiana no longer need a search or arrest warrant to conduct a brief search of your home or business. I admit I haven't read the case to see exactly what the facts are; I was basing my comments on that sentence. But they did "search" the house and found the weapons before they asked permission. Would they have asked permission to search if they had not already seen the weapons in the closet? __________________ My Second protects your First "I declare to you that woman must not depend upon the protection of man, but must be taught to protect herself, and there I take my stand." - Susan B Anthony

04-01-2004, 09:19 AM	#13
mameral V.I.P. Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Northern California Posts: 152	I would have to read the entire case also. There seems to be some missing info, such as who consented to allow them to search. The other thing is, if they were allowed by someone who had the right, I would believe that they were justified in looking in the closets as a closet is large enough for a human to hide in. It would be different if they searched his dresser drawers or searched for anything smaller than a human at that point. I just think that there are to many unanswered questions to form a judgement. The judges probably had 500 pages of deposition to mull over.

04-01-2004, 03:31 PM	#17
corpis66 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: central MS Posts: 259	well i'll put it this way, i have nothing to hide. they can search my house all day long and will only find registered guns, legally prescribed drugs. and other crap that will be useless to them. i dont live in N.O. but near...and i have no problem with this. if i have bitchy neighbors that want to 'rain on my parade' so be it, i've got nothing to hide and theres nothing here for them to legally take.

04-01-2004, 04:01 PM	#19
corpis66 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: central MS Posts: 259	true, and thats always a thought that has crossed me, but, i feel if i told them 'no...you cant search my place', then i will bet they will find something illegal, all it takes is one bad cop. but if i let them search it, it'll prove i do have some guns, all legal and nothing to hide. there are alot in america i dont like, but alot i love. in some respect - seeing the crime first hand, i would feel safer knowing cops dont have to wait a couple of hours to get a search warrent for that bums house...and when they get there.. all the illegal stuff is gone. get it while you can, without a warrent...i am for it, becuase it may (and yes i believe it will) cut down on alot of crime, or catch/find the problem in the house without the court restrictions. i maybe niaeve (sp?) but i am sick and tired of seeing crap around here getting worse. if i could i would shoot the mofo's on the street if it were legal. just to prove they did something wrong. the world is getting so bad, and unreal i hate it. when we can afford it, we'll be moving to the country, so i wont have to worry as much about my childs saftey in the yard, i am pissed because criminals have WAY more rights than a homeowner. you all are looking at it as...infringement on rights, i see it as getting one step closer to the bad guys stash of whatever. whoops..i think i went a lil nuts for a sec. sorry about that.

04-01-2004, 04:21 PM	#21
gpostal Former Guest Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 4,552	How dare anyone suggest that police officers would exploit and abuse an unconstitutional law Alright you guys are going to get me started again, here we go this is another chip away at our rights as citizens ,just like the war on drugs and the homeland security act , people will justify it because they have nothing to hide , well I do ,its called the united states constitution ,and it is coming to a point that if we want to keep it safe we have to hide it Remember some places you can be charged with having a meth lab if you possess ,three of the following ,coffee filters ,drain cleaner ,starting fluid ,a hot plate ,sinus medication that contains ephedrine {name one that don’t}, you only have to have three of them in any combination Ok now that this is understood , what if you where to be arrested for this charge under these guidelines ,they take your legal guns to jail too , you have to post bail hire a lawyer ,miss work ,and during the mean time you cannot purchase a firearm ,posses a firearm ,your home is now unsecure , your name is in the paper ,then you go to court it gets dismissed ,you get your guns back to find they are sratched to hell , and you have spent five grand on a lawyer , but that can’t happen can it A friend of mine was carrying six thousand dollars cash ,to buy antiques for his antique store at a estate sale ,got pulled over they confiscated his cash because a law says that much cash must be drug money , cost him two thousand in lawyers fee’s , he lived 120 miles away ,had to drive up for each court date ,but he got his money back 30 days after it was dismissed , and it tied up his cash flow for six months Some police abuse ,lie cheat and steal ,do drugs and commit murder, they have the highest rate of alcoholism ,suicide and divorce than any other profession ,so to me it is not a good ideal to give such a unstable person more power in my life ,I have met about a dozen in my lifetime I could even carry a conversation with ,they are better than me and you ,and feel they are superior human beings i live in a town that police abuse has become a way of life ,but the streets are safe right?

04-01-2004, 05:01 PM	#22
45Smashemflat Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,494	The "I've done nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide" argument wears thin after a while. The ability to make pre-emptive searches will get carried away. "Sir, please step over there behind the screen for a full cavity search before boarding the plane..." Along with the meth lab scenario given above, consider that rulings are out there that if you have a muffler pipe and an how-to-manual for a STEN you "have a Class III weapon." Bottom line, given enough rope, an unscrupulous cop, DA, or other government official can make a case out of anything. It doesn't have to stick to be a real hassle and a wallet drain. Its actually no different than the "american right to sue" over anything if you can get a lawyer to present the case. For those willing to live that way, may the chains of oppression weigh lightly on your back, may your knees last in servitude, go elsewhere as we do not need your counsel or support. (Not quite the exact quote - but close.)