July
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Who's Online Now
5 members (sxsman1, Drew Hause, Flintfan, Thaine, Chad Linder), 116 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics35,912
Posts504,819
Members14,052
Most Online462
Aug 5th, 2016
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 195
Likes: 12
Sidelock
OP Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 195
Likes: 12
I see that the case of Rhode Island citizen Edward Caniglia who had his home searched in 2015 without a warrant and his two lawfully owned firearms confiscated has reached the Supreme Court. I found the details of the case in the Rhode Island ACLU’s “friend of the court” brief (aclu.org) that they filed in support of Mr. Caniglia. What I am shocked about is that apparently the Biden Administration has also filed a brief but in support of the warrantless search and seizure and is asking the court to make this a precedent so that any American home can be entered, searched and lawfully owned firearms taken.

I know that we have attorneys who are members of this forum. I wonder if they could tell us if this is correct regarding the administration’s intentions?

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,501
Likes: 18
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,501
Likes: 18
I'm not a lawyer anymore, retired five years ago, but my experience is the law is pretty much what the elected government says it is. Lord help us!...Geo

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 560
Likes: 7
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 560
Likes: 7
Originally Posted by FallCreekFan
I see that the case of Rhode Island citizen Edward Caniglia who had his home searched in 2015 without a warrant and his two lawfully owned firearms confiscated has reached the Supreme Court. I found the details of the case in the Rhode Island ACLU’s “friend of the court” brief (aclu.org) that they filed in support of Mr. Caniglia. What I am shocked about is that apparently the Biden Administration has also filed a brief but in support of the warrantless search and seizure and is asking the court to make this a precedent so that any American home can be entered, searched and lawfully owned firearms taken.

I know that we have attorneys who are members of this forum. I wonder if they could tell us if this is correct regarding the administration’s intentions?

Seems to me that this is a case about when can police enter a home without a warrant. The weapon could have just as easily been a butcher knife. Here is an account of it from the press---

"Just what sort of emergency allows police to enter your home without a warrant? That was the question before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday. The court's imagination seemed endless, as the justices presented hypotheticals that involved rescuing everything from screaming babies to cats in a tree to a water-logged Van Gogh painting.

The actual case before the court involved a heated argument between a long-married couple, Edward and Kim Caniglia. He brought out a gun and told her to shoot him to put him out of his "misery." Then after he left the house in a huff, she hid the gun, and spent the night in a motel. The next morning, unable to reach her husband, she asked police to escort her home because was afraid he might have harmed himself.

Police found the husband on the front porch, and sent him for a psychological evaluation. Later that day, doctors concluded he was not a threat to himself or others and released him. In the meantime, police had confiscated his guns and ammunition. So he sued, alleging an illegal seizure and search of his home."

Last edited by bushveld; 03/27/21 04:03 PM.
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 512
Likes: 7
Sidelock
Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 512
Likes: 7
Would have to read both sides' briefs. The ACLU takes some pretty wonky positions. They were defending the KKK down here regarding sponsoring a segment of a highway. That case was mooted out, I believe, when the Georgia Dept of Transportation cancelled the program. You have to bear in mind a brief is just an argument, sometimes they are well supported, but many times they are pretty flimsy. Pretty hard to tell without a deep legal dive though including reading all of the underlying cases and statutes.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,420
Likes: 18
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,420
Likes: 18
Right or wrong, in a domestic dispute situation, HE WILL LOSE.

Sorry to pop any bubbles.

Best,
Ted

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 2
Sidelock
*
Offline
Sidelock
*

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 2
Ted is right on that. "Domestic Violence" is the greater vehicle ever to disabuse your all your possessions. And it doesn't have to be criminal in nature. Protective orders come down on the thinnest of evidence, since it is by a civil standard, and then lifetime loss of 2nd amendment rights. It is not right, but there is a problem with DV.


Forum: a medium of discussion/expression of ideas. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forum
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,794
Likes: 15
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,794
Likes: 15
I think the case should hinge on whether there was a bona fide immediate danger life or limb, which, in his absence doesn't seem to be. The police's duty to return the guns is a different question and the Doctor's statement seems to be against them. If the wife took out an "Order of Protection", under "Lautenberg", he wouldn't pass a background check. I didn't see that in the case. I am not a Lawyer and never played one on TV.
Mike

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,562
Likes: 28
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,562
Likes: 28
I am not a lawyer, but you do not have to be a lawyer to know that the Biden administration brief in support of warrantless searches and unlawful seizures of legally held firearms is wrong and Unconstitutional.

It also comes as no surprise. Joe Biden is a devout life-long anti-gun Democrat. He has more respect for illegal immigrants than he does for legal citizens who own firearms. It will be interesting to see which SCOTUS Justices rule against the Constitution.

There are a lot of unanswered questions here though. Did the wife, as co-owner of the house, give the police permission to search and remove the guns? If not, at very least, they should not have entered and removed property without prior notice from the doctor that he was a danger to himself or others. And even that scenario is problematic, because there are anti-gun doctors who believe that anyone with a gun is a danger to society. That is always funny since there are far more people killed by medical mistakes than firearms.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 206
Likes: 4
Sidelock
Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 206
Likes: 4
I'm not an attorney

Having said that, the initial seizure of the firearms was probably legal under exigent circumstances, especially since the plaintiff was taken to the hospital for the psych evaluation to determine if he was a threat to himself or others. However once he was deemed not be a threat, the police, IN THEORY, were required to return the firearms. Whether the police continued to hold the firearms while they considered filing criminal charges is not mentioned and I don't know if that would be legal or how long the police could hold the firearms under those conditions.

In my cynical opinion, don't hold much hope for some huge pro-gun decision. The Supreme Court will almost certainly tailor their decision on the most narrow interpretation possible, not because it is a 2nd or 4th Amendment issue, but because the Supreme Court dislikes making decisions that have a sweeping effect on U.S. law.

On edit: There is at least once news story that states the wife consented to the search of the house and the seizure of the firearms. Given the poor state of reporting in general, combined with a reporter who probably unfamiliar with the details of the law, I suspect this case is much more complicated than it is being portrayed as in the press.

Last edited by Chantry; 03/28/21 10:47 AM.

I have become addicted to English hammered shotguns to the detriment of my wallet.
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,059
Likes: 14
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,059
Likes: 14
Originally Posted by nca225
Ted is right on that. "Domestic Violence" is the greater vehicle ever to disabuse your all your possessions. And it doesn't have to be criminal in nature. Protective orders come down on the thinnest of evidence, since it is by a civil standard, and then lifetime loss of 2nd amendment rights. It is not right, but there is a problem with DV.
Hmmm, a voice of reason, common ground, my heart could follow this lead anywhere. Thrifty likey!

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2021 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u9 Page Time: 0.059s Queries: 35 (0.021s) Memory: 0.8536 MB (Peak: 1.8990 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2021-07-30 20:38:45 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS