|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/8/2019)
|
I don't think judges exceed their authority in issuing confiscation orders per se, but they DO exceed their authority when doing so ex parte. It doesn't take a jury to decide, but it does require both sides being heard and presenting evidence.
Reasonable suspicion isn't probable cause, and that is the problem with these laws. The 4th Amendment mandates that arrest, search and seizure warrants may only issue upon probable cause of a crime, not of the possibility of a future crime, alleged without corroboration.
This isn't razor-edge parsing, either. There either IS probable cause, or there ISN'T.
And a mere allegation, ISN'T. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
