The Third Amendment Falls

[Alawen]

I don't usually buy into the United States crumbling thing, but... really?

Third Amendment Violation (http://usahitman.com/hpafrohl/)

[r00t]

welcome to stasi style police state

[r00t]

actually its far worse tyranny and spying than the stasi could have done now that we're in the technotronic era

“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. ” - Zbigniew Brzezinski, Obama Puppeteer

http://mprofaca.cro.net/brzezinski_bin_laden_aka_tim_osman.gif

[Frieza_Prexus]

The white whale of con law has been spotted...

[r00t]

Zbig pictured here

http://tariganter.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/barack-h-obama-the-unauthorized-biography.jpg?w=540

[AexDestroy]

Another report on it.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm

[Hasbinbad]

One branch of my Irish family was hunted out of Ireland for poisoning their own wells and livestock (killing many) when the English came to garrison on their land.

[Hasbinbad]

Stories like that are part of the reason we have the 3rd amendment.

[Barkingturtle]

3rd amendment not very sexy guys not sure anyone really cares.

[radditsu]

3rd amendment not very sexy guys not sure anyone really cares.

Isnt it the right to bear cheeseburgers?

[Reapin]

3rd amendment not very sexy guys not sure anyone really cares.

They don't care and they deserve what they get.

[Rhambuk]

They don't care and they deserve what they get.

they deserve to be arrested for not allowing cops to invade their house for who knows how long? is that what your saying?

Im a fairly reasonable guy and I would probably allow cops to use my house but its my house its my right they have absolutely no power over that. They can't even enter without my say unless they have a warrant with a valid reason.

waiting for the posts and links about how cops get away with whatever they want in 3, 2, 1....

[Reapin]

they deserve to be arrested for not allowing cops to invade their house for who knows how long? is that what your saying?

Im a fairly reasonable guy and I would probably allow cops to use my house but its my house its my right they have absolutely no power over that. They can't even enter without my say unless they have a warrant with a valid reason.

waiting for the posts and links about how cops get away with whatever they want in 3, 2, 1....

No, I am saying Americans deserve to live in a police state if they refuse to fight to stay free.

[Barkingturtle]

No, I am saying Americans deserve to live in a police state if they refuse to fight to stay free.

Guy from OP would be dead if he fought back. He was a pussy, though. Not a patriot like you.

[Kagatob]

Line up the entire precinct and shoot them all in the head.

[Cecily]

So do guys with guns count as soldiers?

[Barkingturtle]

So do guys with guns count as soldiers?

Depends. Have they sexually assaulted anyone recently?

[Reapin]

So do guys with guns count as soldiers?

Cops are armed just as well as a soldier.

[Rhambuk]

No, I am saying Americans deserve to live in a police state if they refuse to fight to stay free.

oh.

yeah ill agree with that.

[Bodeanicus]

So do guys with guns count as soldiers?

The American police certainly like to pretend they're soldiers with their SWAT gear and APC's. I think the 3rd certainly applies.

[Alawen]

I wish Xasten had commented on whether or not he thought the third applies to police.

I found this opinion from Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason:

"The most obvious obstacle to winning a Third Amendment claim here is that police arguably do not qualify as 'soldiers.' On the other hand, as Radley Balko describes in his excellent new book The Rise of the Warrior Cop, many police departments are increasingly using military-style tactics and equipment, often including the aggressive use of force against innocent people who get in the way of their plans. If the plaintiffs’ complaint is accurate, this appears to be an example of that trend. In jurisdictions where the police have become increasingly militarized, perhaps the courts should treat them as 'soldiers' for Third Amendment purposes.

"A second possible impediment to winning a Third Amendment claim in this case is that the Amendment is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights that the Supreme Court still has not 'incorporated' against state governments. For incorporation purposes, claims against local governments (like this one) are treated the same way as claims against states. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has never ruled that the Third Amendment does not apply to the states. If, as the Court has previously decided, virtually all the rest of the Bill of Rights applies to state governments, there is no good reason to exclude the Third Amendment. If the Third Amendment part of the case is not dismissed on other grounds, the federal district court may have to address the issue of incorporation."

[SyanideGas]

Lived in Henderson a majority of my life.
A majority of the police officers in that city are assholes. Just from personal experiences etc.
Good read.

[myriverse]

Cops are armed just as well as a soldier.
But cops do not follow the rules that soldiers do, and vice versa.

Actually, applying Third Amendment to this case would force the country to become a military/police state. Not the opposite.

[myriverse]

This is a stronger 4th Amendment case than a 3rd Amendment. That was certainly an illegal seizure.

[Alawen]

This is a stronger 4th Amendment case than a 3rd Amendment. That was certainly an illegal seizure.

The fourth and fourteenth amendments are also mentioned in the complaint.

[r00t]

updated

http://i.imgur.com/zwExqrD.png

[Frieza_Prexus]

I wish Xasten had commented on whether or not he thought the third applies to police.

I found this opinion from Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason:

"The most obvious obstacle to winning a Third Amendment claim here is that police arguably do not qualify as 'soldiers.' On the other hand, as Radley Balko describes in his excellent new book The Rise of the Warrior Cop, many police departments are increasingly using military-style tactics and equipment, often including the aggressive use of force against innocent people who get in the way of their plans. If the plaintiffs’ complaint is accurate, this appears to be an example of that trend. In jurisdictions where the police have become increasingly militarized, perhaps the courts should treat them as 'soldiers' for Third Amendment purposes.

"A second possible impediment to winning a Third Amendment claim in this case is that the Amendment is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights that the Supreme Court still has not 'incorporated' against state governments. For incorporation purposes, claims against local governments (like this one) are treated the same way as claims against states. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has never ruled that the Third Amendment does not apply to the states. If, as the Court has previously decided, virtually all the rest of the Bill of Rights applies to state governments, there is no good reason to exclude the Third Amendment. If the Third Amendment part of the case is not dismissed on other grounds, the federal district court may have to address the issue of incorporation."

For what it's worth, I think the 3rd was violated. The only case even close to being on point is Engblom v. Carey which went up to the 2nd circuit, but did not appeal to the Supreme Court. The 2nd circuit held that national guardsmen counted as soldiers, AND that the 3rd amendment WAS incorporated so that it applied against the states. At the very least this is a slightly informative precedent and the Supreme Court might be willing to let the incorporation angle apply here given that it's been incorporated in the 2nd circuit for 31 years without a problem.

Also, consider the purposes of the amendment when it was written. British soldiers were essentially a federal police force, and when that force is replaced with a state force with a similar purpose, it seems only fair that the original intent behind the amendment would apply to this situation.

Honestly, it's really a crap shoot the court will say, and if this actually gets to the Supreme Court on 3rd amendment grounds Con Law professors will be jizzing their pants, and attorneys will be falling all over themselves to Captain Ahab the hell out of Moby the 3rd amendment Dick.

This is a complete shot in the dark, but I'm calling 9-0 if this actually gets to the Supreme Court. The liberals will fall all over themselves to incorporate and hold police as soldiers, and at least one other justice should fall in line.

[Alawen]

I loled at the Moby porn metaphor.

It's almost as if peace officers have no knowledge of basic law whatsoever.

[Ephirith]

You have to understand police culture. Their recruitment draws heavily on military veterans even though 2/3 or more departments require a 2-4 year college degree now. In an applicant they look for extroversion, good interpersonal skills, a commanding personality, decisiveness, good judgment, etc. The academic and intellectual requirements are extremely lax for being such a complicated profession. There is a certain kind of person they are looking for, and somebody who knows or cares about the nuances of constitutional law is rarely that person.

[r00t]

I feel like rambling about this so let's take the definition

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

So as a police force, this does not seem to apply. One could make the argument, especially with the increasing militarization of police, that the war on terror makes them Soldiers, but ramble

[r00t]

Oh and also since the war on error is literally a forever-war with no real enemy (it's just a euphemism for tyranny you idiots), the 3rd amendment is clearly irrelevant with simple passage of law.

[Grahm]

wut if they found meth lab in his basement. could they have held him for that?

[Grahm]

sources tell me he had meth lab and why he said no u cant come in

[Ahldagor]

You have to understand police culture. Their recruitment draws heavily on military veterans even though 2/3 or more departments require a 2-4 year college degree now. In an applicant they look for extroversion, good interpersonal skills, a commanding personality, decisiveness, good judgment, etc. The academic and intellectual requirements are extremely lax for being such a complicated profession. There is a certain kind of person they are looking for, and somebody who knows or cares about the nuances of constitutional law is rarely that person.

i'd say that that's the biggest problem now in police officers and the military. smart folks are too smart to be cops. sad when you think about it.

[r00t]

thought about it, but get paid 5x more to reddit and not get shot at

[Malice_Mizer]

OBAMANATION AM I RITE GUYS

HE'S LIKE TAKING OUR FREEDOMS

DON'T TREAD ON ME BRO