The reason this case won't fly is the same reason you won't lose a 2nd amendment case because the person is not using a musket. They will not define the constitution differently.
The reason this case won't fly is the same reason you won't lose a 2nd amendment case because the person is not using a musket. They will not define the constitution differently.
I think it's reasonable to argue that as armed public agents who ensure the peace of the nation, police are "soldiers" when applying the 3rd amendment.
Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.
Just, be kind.
As usual, The Onion was ahead of the pack on this.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/thi...other-su,2296/
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
I agree 100%.
Military and police should not be mixed, the line is almost non existent.
Our police cars are starting to look like military vehicles and police are starting to look like troops.
- - - Updated - - -
Under the law selective fire is considered an automatic weapon.
Let me just say this is real problem here in Henderson Nevada. The cops are ready to kill anybody. They shot and killed a woman that had a kitchen knife cause she came within 13feet of one of them. Not even in an aggressive manner. They have killed over 20 people in the last few years (metro area included) and not one cop has been charged with wrong doing. Another one they served a warrant on a man and killed him as he exited his shower, officer said he thought he had a gun. Of course no gun was found and the reason they broke his door down and raided his house, he sold a $40 marijuana sac to an undercover. Another one they shot and killed a man that had a stick in his hand, another one they shot a teenager that had mental problems cause he had a knife and was acting crazy threatening his mother. Another one the guy had a concealed weapons permit and told the officers about the gun and was taking it out of his belt still in its holster and they killed him. Just a bunch of killings and the people in this area know not to f around with henderson or metro.
- - - Updated - - -
Silly laws do not change physics.
Whether or not they're breaking the 3rd amendment, good thing they royally fucked up their job enough to get sued for a myriad of other reasons. I'm surprised nobody is talking about police brutality in this instance.
The military designation of the M4 rifle is a burst fire and/or fully automatic.
There are commercial models of the AR15 style gun also designated as an M4 which are semi-automatic only.
The M9 is actually the more inaccurate of his example. The common designation of the 92fs differs slightly from the M9 and the designation M9 is only used on a few Beretta's that are commercially available and doubtful that any LE agencies use them.
Not that it has any bearing on the topic at hand, but meh.
On topic, I'd be more than happy to provide information to aid a police investigation, but I would not let them use my house for surveillance, that's just odd to me.
No. No, it really isn't.
The police is a force of city guard. It is their duty to monitor and moderate the populace, and deal with civilian threats.
A soldier is an official, paid warrior. It is their duty to fight invading forces, and be part of invading forces when that benefits their own country.
In this particular case, the people wanted to refuse the police the use of their home for purposes of investigation (a stake-out). That means that the family who refused are willingly hindering the police's duty to protect civilians from other civilians.
The Third Amendment is important for another reason. Soldiers, as much as it's hard to admit, have a reputation for looting and pillaging. The third amendment exists in order to protect US citizens from looting and pillaging during a period of inter-state warfare.
(Edit: It also pays to note that, when the amendment was written, soldiers made poor wages, soldy often came late (if at all), and young men were expected to take up a rifle for the love of their country alone, and be executed when they decided that poor military life might not be the life for them. Things like that made looting and pillaging pretty much baseline.)
Last edited by Stir; 2013-07-05 at 01:41 AM.
It doesn't matter. In one of only 3 precedents citing the 3rd Amendment, Griswold v Connecticut held that a person's home has a right to be free of agents of the state. A police officer is most certainly an agent of the state.
- - - Updated - - -
A "soldier" has been held to mean "any agent of the state".
Relevant citation.
Last edited by Laize; 2013-07-05 at 01:44 AM.
Police violated constitutional rights or broke the law, what else is new? I'm surprised they didn't also kill the family dog, their favorite pastime.
The night is dark and full of terrors...
That is a gross oversight, that may have severe implications. A teacher of a public school is an agent of the state. Can we simply put a weapon in their hands and kick them to Backwaterton to fight the Others? No. That teacher is NOT a soldier. However, using this interpretations, that teacher IS a soldier, and therefore, they can be sent to war.
No, it's not. But if you carried an M-16 then you know that a receiver capable of 3-round burst is NECESSARILY capable of full-auto. You are talking with someone who understands guns here. I suggest you stop blowing smoke out your ass.
Thus any weapon capable of 3-round burst IS a fully automatic weapon.
But yes... Yes, it does. 'A soldier is any agent of the state,' means that 'soldier' is.. Well, any agent of the state...
Basically, it makes 'Soldier' and 'Agent of the state' synonymous. It means that while all soldiers are not public school teachers, all public school teachers are soldiers.