Author Topic: **Agenda of US Supreme Court's new ruling about no warrant searches: Civil War!  (Read 26864 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stangrof

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,402
    • http://www.ipernity.com/home/stangrof
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone elses opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.
Oscar Wild
twitter :https://twitter.com/stangrof

Offline psy0ps

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Groom of the Stool
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2011, 12:10:39 pm »
By Dan Carden [email protected], (317) 637-9078 | Posted: Thursday, May 12, 2011 3:36 pm | Loading…
http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_ec169697-a19e-525f-a532-81b3df229697.html

INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.

The court's decision stems from a Vanderburgh County case in which police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment.

When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him.

Professor Ivan Bodensteiner, of Valparaiso University School of Law, said the court's decision is consistent with the idea of preventing violence.

"It's not surprising that they would say there's no right to beat the hell out of the officer," Bodensteiner said. "(The court is saying) we would rather opt on the side of saying if the police act wrongfully in entering your house your remedy is under law, to bring a civil action against the officer."

Justice Robert Rucker, a Gary native, and Justice Brent Dickson, a Hobart native, dissented from the ruling, saying the court's decision runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally -- that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances," Rucker said. "I disagree."

Rucker and Dickson suggested if the court had limited its permission for police entry to domestic violence situations they would have supported the ruling.

But Dickson said, "The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad."

This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.

Copyright 2011 nwitimes.com.
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face -- forever."

Offline Suriel

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,679
  • The comfort you've demanded is now mandatory.
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2011, 04:11:12 pm »
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
By Dan Carden [email protected], (317) 637-9078 nwitimes.com | Posted: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm

INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

Continued Here
"We have reached a stage at which we have surrounded ourselves with more things, but have less joy." - The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky translated by Ignat Avsey

Offline Dok

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,269
    • end times and current events
Indiana Supreme Court: Fourth Amendment no longer EXISTS!!!!!
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2011, 04:24:28 pm »
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.

The court's decision stems from a Vanderburgh County case in which police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment.

When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him.

Professor Ivan Bodensteiner, of Valparaiso University School of Law, said the court's decision is consistent with the idea of preventing violence.

"It's not surprising that they would say there's no right to beat the hell out of the officer," Bodensteiner said. "(The court is saying) we would rather opt on the side of saying if the police act wrongfully in entering your house your remedy is under law, to bring a civil action against the officer."

Justice Robert Rucker, a Gary native, and Justice Brent Dickson, a Hobart native, dissented from the ruling, saying the court's decision runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally -- that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances," Rucker said. "I disagree."

Rucker and Dickson suggested if the court had limited its permission for police entry to domestic violence situations they would have supported the ruling.

But Dickson said, "The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad."

This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_ec169697-a19e-525f-a532-81b3df229697.html
HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship ;)

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Indiana Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2011, 05:01:15 pm »
Justice Steven H. David
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/supreme/bios/david.html

Judge David has built a multi-faceted career of private practice, corporate counsel experience, and stellar service as a military lawyer, in addition to his superb work as a trial judge.  

He graduated magna cum laude from Murray State University and earned his law degree from Indiana University School of Law at Indianapolis.  He thereafter served in the United States Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and he has continued to serve in the Army Reserves ever since, earning the rank of Colonel and holding top secret security clearance since 1982.  As a military officer, he has made significant contributions to military rules, protocols, and investigative reports and held multiple legal posts, including that of Chief Defense Counsel for detainees subject to the Military Commission’s proceedings at Guantanamo Bay.  His dedication to the military, pro bono services, and the rule of law earned him a number of military and citizen awards, including the Defense Superior Service Award, which is the nation’s third highest non-combat medal, and the Frederick Douglas Human Rights Award.  

Steve David practiced in law firms in Columbus, where he focused on personal injury, family law, and civil litigation, and he later became in-house counsel for Mayflower Transit, Inc.  

Since becoming a judge in 1994, he has tried or presided over at least 60 jury trials in civil, criminal, and military proceedings.  He has testified before the Indiana General Assembly and the United States Congress on juvenile law and national security issues, respectively, and he has collaborated extensively with other agencies on juvenile law issues.  His efforts to improve the availability of mental health services for children led to his recognition by the Indiana chapter of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill.  Judge David is a frequent speaker and writer on various legal topics, and he is an adjunct professor at the University of Indianapolis.

Justice David is married to Catheryne Pully.  She is a Vanderbilt University Law School graduate and served in the U.S. Navy on active duty, including service in Iraq.  She is employed by the Indiana State Bar Association.


He was general council for Mayflower which is now part of Globalist corp called Unigroup (partner of the corporation called "PODS" you cannot make it up). Unigroup loves them some disaster planning:
http://www.promover.org/PR_NewsRoom/Direction/Aug%2006/8-06Kilcarr%20Disaster.pdf


Top Secret Security Clearance? Does he know something we do not know?

General Council to detainees at Gitmo? How has that worked out?

Frederick Douglass [sic above] Human Rights Award? Are you fricking shitting me?
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Indiana Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2011, 05:15:53 pm »
Hey Justice David...W T F ? Have you even read Frederick Douglass?



"Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation,
are people who want crops without ploughing the ground;
they want rain without thunder and lightning;
they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters.
The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both.
But it must be a struggle.
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."
~
"Where justice is denied,
where poverty is enforced,
where ignorance prevails,
and where any one class is made to feel that society is in an organized conspiracy
to oppress, rob, and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe."
~
"Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found
out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon
them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words
or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the
endurance of those whom they oppress."

— Patriot Extraordinaire and Founding Father of the ongoing American Revolution, Frederick Douglass
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Indiana Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2011, 05:25:42 pm »
Justice David in 2008:
Chief Council Steven David regarding Gitmo Trial: TIME TO SCRAP THIS MESS
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article4488826.ece
August 9, 2008

The Pentagon and US military prosecutors were quick to hail the verdict on Salim Hamdan, the first Guantanamo detainee to be tried by the special military tribunal. They insisted that his acquittal on conspiracy charges and the light sentence passed on him for supporting terrorism in his role as Osama bin Laden's driver showed that “as a whole the process worked”.

Few others would agree. The outcome is an extraordinary rebuff for the Bush Administration, which saw this as a test case and had asked for a 30-year prison term. The verdict by a jury of six military officers, chosen by the Pentagon, does nothing to settle doubts about the legiti- macy of the tribunals themselves, set up as an alternative to a federal court or the regular military justice system. Nor does it ensure that the other 19 detainees due to be prosecuted will have their rights protected. As Colonel Steven David, Hamdan's defence counsel, said afterwards, the trial was marked by the acceptance of hearsay evidence and secret testimony, restrictions on media coverage and allegations of abusive interrogations. It was time, he said, to scrap this “mess”.


He stayed on for two more years. Did the Pentagon use Psyops on him like with US Senators?
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Amos

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,262
Re: Indiana Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2011, 05:27:23 pm »
Time for a removal from office, impeach now.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Indiana Supreme Court: Fourth Amendment no longer EXISTS!!!!!
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2011, 05:36:29 pm »
"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

There are a few survivors from Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany who likely will disagree with this programmed MK Ultra script verdict concocted in some Tavistock play room!

This verdict might as well say: "There is no right to resist putting you on a train and sending you to gas chambers and crematoriums."

WTF?
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

charrington

  • Guest
Farewell, Fourth Amendment: Lew Rockwell
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2011, 12:02:46 am »
Where consent isn’t freely given, forcible rape is lawful. Such is the logic — if that word can be tortured into applying here — behind the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Kentucky v. King, in which the Regime’s judicial branch destroys whatever remained of the illusive Fourth Amendment protection against warrantless searches.

As with most rulings of this kind, the case was a byproduct of the Regime’s ongoing Narcotics Price Support Program. Narcotics officers in Lexington, Kentucky went trolling for patsies in a poor neighborhood that is most likely a preferred fishing hole for such activities. Using an undercover informant, the narcs set up a “controlled buy” of crack cocaine. Once the transaction was through, the merchant headed back to his apartment, which was one of two that were found at the end of a breezeway. The suspect was seen entering the apartment on the right, but the uniformed officers who arrived at the scene weren’t aware of this fact.

After discerning the aroma of marijuana emanating from the door on the left, the officers banged on it insistently and demanded to be let in. They later said that they “could hear people inside moving,” and what were taken to be the sounds of “things being moved inside the apartment.” Fearful that evidence would be destroyed, the officers kicked in the door, finding three terrified people inside. A “protective sweep” — “officer safety” über alles, you know — revealed a small amount of crack cocaine and marijuana.

A Kentucky Circuit Court ruled that the evidence seized in this warrantless search was admissible because it “consensual entry” was denied, and waiting to obtain a warrant would permit the destruction of evidence. The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed that ruling, pointing out that audible noises behind a closed door did not constitute reliable evidence “that evidence was being destroyed.” The state Court noted as well that it is impermissible for police deliberately to create “the exigent circumstances with the bad faith intent to avoid the warrant requirement” found in the Fourth Amendment.

Writing on behalf of the Supreme Court’s dominant Authoritarian Right faction, Justice Samuel Alito insisted that the fault resided entirely with defendant Hollis King, who supposedly could have refused to respond to the police (presumably by remaining perfectly silent), or could have come to the door and demanded that the police return with a warrant. “Occupants who choose not to stand on their constitutional rights but instead elect to attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame,” sniffed Alito.

“How `secure’ do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and, on hearing sounds indicative of things moving, forcibly enter and search for evidence of unlawful activity?” replied Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. “The court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement in drug cases. In lieu of presenting their evidence to a neutral magistrate, police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, nevermind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant.”

For several years, Punitive Populists have insisted that the Regime should be permitted to torture people identified as “terrorists,” since such people aren’t entitled to the protection of legal guarantees such as those found in the Eighth Amendment and the Geneva Conventions. After all, we already know that they’re terrorists, and so they shouldn’t be permitted to withhold evidence. After all, the Constitution “isn’t a suicide pact.” Obviously, the same reasoning (once again, assuming that this is the appropriate word) applies to the Fourth Amendment’s purported guarantees against warrantless searches.

There is a sense, I suppose, in which the Constitution is a suicide pact: It has been used to seduce people into thinking that parchment can serve as an effective impediment to power.

Continued...

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Now Kentucky Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2011, 11:45:52 am »
Police Can Now Knock On Your Door, Listen for Sounds Suggesting Evidence Is Being Destroyed (Whatever That Means), and Then Break In—No Warrant Necessary
http://cryptogon.com/?p=22378
May 17th, 2011

Game over.

Via: Los Angeles Times:

The Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision in a Kentucky case, says police officers who loudly knock on a door in search of illegal drugs and then hear sounds suggesting evidence is being destroyed may break down the door and enter without a search warrant.

The Supreme Court on Monday gave police more leeway to break into residences in search of illegal drugs.

The justices in an 8-1 decision said officers who loudly knock on a door and then hear sounds suggesting evidence is being destroyed may break down the door and enter without a search warrant.

Residents who “attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame” when police burst in, said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.

In a lone dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she feared the ruling in a Kentucky case will give police an easy way to ignore the 4th Amendment. “Police officers may not knock, listen and then break the door down,” she said, without violating the 4th Amendment.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: IN/KY Supreme Courts are in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2011, 11:57:03 am »
First Indiana burns the 4th Amendment, now it is Kentucky. >:(

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Dok

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,269
    • end times and current events
Re: IN/KY Supreme Courts are in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2011, 12:00:06 pm »
First Indiana burns the 4th Amendment, now it is Kentucky. >:(



Lets not forget the Supreme Court of the United States.

Supreme Court Upholds Warrantless Search of Apartment
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=208506.msg1247632#msg1247632

In an 8-1 decision [PDF], the nation's highest court said the warrantless search of an apartment in Lexington, Kentucky was legal because of "exigent circumstances," which permits law enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless search if there is a strong likelihood of destruction of evidence.

HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship ;)

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: US Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2011, 12:03:00 pm »
First Indiana burns the 4th Amendment, now it is Kentucky. >:(


Oh, wait a minute, this is not the KY supreme court ruling! It's the US supreme court that made the ruling! >:(
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Supreme Court Spits on the 4th Amendment – Warrantless Searches Now Legal
http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/supreme-court-spits-on-the-4th-amendment-%E2%80%93-warrantless-searches-now-legal/4110
Posted on May 17, 2011 by Mark Schumacher

The fourth Amendment was put into place to guarantee unwarranted search and seizures. To protect our homes, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Looks like that all just got thrown out the window as Justice Alito incredibly remarked, “attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame” something that will turn American into a unrecognizable banana republic.

In the Incredible 8-1 ruling handed down on 5/16/2011, the United States Supreme Court basically changed the course of how police will now do business. All they need is a strange sound before tearing apart somebody freedoms. Nobody here is condoning illegal drug use, but there is this 800 pound gorilla called the Constitution, something that when torn in half and thrown away, should send chills down the backs of millions of Americans.

The only dissenting Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote:

    “The court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement in drug cases,” Ginsburg wrote. “In lieu of presenting their evidence to a neutral magistrate, police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, never mind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant.”

    She said the Fourth Amendment’s “core requirement” is that officers have probable cause and a search warrant before they break into a house.

    “How ‘secure’ do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and … forcibly enter?”

Where will this insanity stop America? Is this still the country that our forefathers gave to us some 265 years ago? Is this what they had in mind when they wrote the United States Constitution? Have Supreme court justices lost their minds? This is what happens when you have presidents in office who stack the deck, appointing these constitution benders.

If we keep re-writing the Constitution of the United States of America, what are we going to turn into? Now all the police have to hear is a strange noise inside of the house, and tear the damn door down! Something that is going to create havoc around our nation.

The Supreme Court decision arose from a case from Lexington, Kentucky, where police were banging on a door because they smelled marijuana. After identifying themselves, the police heard movement inside thinking that evidence was being destroyed. So they kicked the door down. There they found Hollis Deshaun King, smoking marijuana. They also found cocaine.

The problem was it was not the suspect they were looking for, still charging him with multiple counts, eventually giving him 11 years behind bars. The Kentucky Supreme Court heard the case and ruled that the drugs could not be used as evidence, obviously f no search warrant.

The case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court. There, 8 out 9 justices disagreed with the state court and decided to tear apart the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, bringing America closer than ever to a police state.

Reference
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: US & IN Supreme Courts are in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2011, 12:19:43 pm »
While You Were Sleeping, They Abolished the Fourth Amendment
http://www.infowars.com/while-you-were-sleeping-they-abolished-the-fourth-amendment/

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 17, 2011
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline 37

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,362
  • "The President of what?"
Re: Farewell, Fourth Amendment: Lew Rockwell
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2011, 02:15:08 pm »
Supreme Court OKs warrantless searches
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015072154_scotus17.html

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday gave police more leeway to break into homes or apartments in search of illegal drugs when they suspect the evidence might be destroyed.

The justices said officers who smell marijuana and loudly knock on the door may break in if they hear sounds that suggest the residents are scurrying to hide the drugs.

Residents who "attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame" when police burst in, Justice Samuel Alito said for an 8-1 majority.

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that she feared the ruling in a Kentucky case had handed the police an important new tool.

"The court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement in drug cases," Ginsburg wrote. "In lieu of presenting their evidence to a neutral magistrate, police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, never mind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant."

She said the Fourth Amendment's "core requirement" is that officers have probable cause and a search warrant before they break into a house.

"How 'secure' do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and ... forcibly enter?" Ginsburg asked.

An expert on criminal searches agreed, saying the decision would encourage police to undertake "knock and talk" raids.

"I'm surprised the Supreme Court would condone this, that if the police hear suspicious noises inside, they can break in," said John Wesley Hall, a criminal-defense lawyer in Little Rock, Ark. "I'm even more surprised that nearly all of them went along."

(Cont)

"Whatever it is, I am against it."  -Groucho Marx

Channel 37
http://www.youtube.com/user/jmortimer37

Offline 37

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,362
  • "The President of what?"
Re: Farewell, Fourth Amendment: Lew Rockwell
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2011, 02:22:39 pm »

THIS IS BIG!!
"Whatever it is, I am against it."  -Groucho Marx

Channel 37
http://www.youtube.com/user/jmortimer37

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
1st amendment and 2nd amendment are not being targeted as much as the 4th and 5th amendments.

They are coming after the 4th amendment hot and heavey. 8-1 ruling for such a clear violation of the 4th amendment means 2 things...they want the states and the media to back the f**k off the war on marijuana and they want to give police powers for major, major, major dragnets and herding of citizens into various detention centers.

There is no other reason for such a broad violation to the 4th amendment if they did not wish to open up a new level of tyranny. Both new SCOTUS picks by Obama and all picks by Bush voted in favor of declaring the US Constitution null and void. They have just declared themselves null and void.

The SCOTUS has been compromised heavily since they got involved with the 2000 election, but this shit is 100% batshit crazy.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: Farewell, Fourth Amendment: Lew Rockwell
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2011, 06:18:29 am »
THIS IS BIG!!

That I think should be classfied as a understatement.

They've been building up a series of "laws", and rulings by the courts that's allows them to put in place measures they claim are legal. And now they have the Supreme Court loaded with cohorts to the crime backing them up. Clearly there is treason afoot.
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
This is specifically to create a civil war between police and the people. This scenario is in the Illuminati cards, in the Denver Airport murals. They want a civil war between legitimate police and the people. Police should be warned of what they have planned. They are going to create smart mobs in the US like they did in North Africa. In Egypt, every police station was burned to the ground and police are targeted by the gangs who are funded by Rothschild. This is the scenario Rockefeller wrote about in his Foundation report for 2012.

The Supreme Court decision in opposition to the US constitution is purposefully done to destabilize America. Police need to know this and need to refuse to utilize the decision for unconstitutional searches.

Constitutional searches are what gives trust in the communities, without it, the trust between police and people is diminished. The only ones this serves is the New World Order psychotic banksters. They want brother fighting against brother. Eventually, all cops will be replaced by autonomous IBM virtual police anyway. If Police continue to defend the constitution (it is written at an eigth grade level) no matter what the compromised Supreme Court says, the New World Order will never defeat America! The same has already been proven with the US military who now can fully see how they have been used against the interests of the United States and the US Constitution!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341


  They have made Gestapo tactics legal in America.  What a bunch of jerks!
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated

  They have made Gestapo tactics legal in America.  What a bunch of jerks!

And the end result of such tactics is always...DRESDEN!

They want America turned into a Dresden fire pit of hell!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
The cops know what is going on! They are using the BS war on drugs to justify the Nazification of the US. The war on drugs is not controlled by the cops, it is controlled by the offshorre banksters and it has led to more innocent cops being slaughtered than any other Bilderberg plot! Bilderberg is killing cops with their insanity, and now they are trying to provoke the cops for more blowback via this Bilderberg owned US Sup Ct decision. We do not need a SCOTUS decision to know what the 4th amendment is! It was written at an 8th grade level ON PURPOSE in case SCOTUS ever acted in such a violation of it!

Former narcotics officer: Legalize drugs to prevent police deaths
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/former-narcotics-officer-legalize-drugs-to-prevent-police-deaths/
Posted on 05.17.11
By Eric W. Dolan

Appearing on Fox News’ Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano Monday, former Maryland narcotics police officer Neill Franklin compared the U.S. war on drugs to alcohol prohibition in the 1920′s, saying both were a “complete failure.”

Franklin added that ending the “senseless” war on drugs would prevent many police officers from being killed in the line of duty.

Watch video, courtesy of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, below:
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline DireWolf

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,122
  • Freedom, Liberty & death to the NWO
A whole lot of bad is going to happen because of this ruling.

 Ive said it before, if the Constitution and Bill of Rights is no longer the Law of the Land then we have no law and I do not recognize any authority other than that of God.

  The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition Section 256 spells it out plainly, end of discussion, where I'm concerned.

Always be armed against tyranny with both knowledge and the means to physically resist, the life you save may be your own.

 These bastards think they can do as they please and we are nothing but as bunch of mindless, gutless, lemmings. Other governments throughout history have tried this and have learned a painful costly lesson. It takes but a few to rally the masses and instill the spirit of Freedom and resistance and allow us to throw off the shackles of tyranny and those who would rule as kings.

They will not prevail, but it will be very costly on both sides. Such is the price of True Freedom.
Freedom and Liberty, or slavery and death, your choice, choose wisely.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
A whole lot of bad is going to happen because of this ruling.

 Ive said it before, if the Constitution and Bill of Rights is no longer the Law of the Land then we have no law and I do not recognize any authority other than that of God.

  The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition Section 256 spells it out plainly, end of discussion, where I'm concerned.

Always be armed against tyranny with both knowledge and the means to physically resist, the life you save may be your own.

 These bastards think they can do as they please and we are nothing but as bunch of mindless, gutless, lemmings. Other governments throughout history have tried this and have learned a painful costly lesson. It takes but a few to rally the masses and instill the spirit of Freedom and resistance and allow us to throw off the shackles of tyranny and those who would rule as kings.

They will not prevail, but it will be very costly on both sides. Such is the price of True Freedom.

The only thing that makes the constitution the law of the land is consent to it and non-cooperation to anything outside of it. We need to reach all of those targeted by Rothschild's civil war plans. It is 300 million v. 10,000 "Smart Mob" remote control psychopaths. It ain't even a fair contest!

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,817
A whole lot of bad is going to happen because of this ruling.
 Ive said it before, if the Constitution and Bill of Rights is no longer the Law of the Land then we have no law and I do not recognize any authority other than that of God.
  The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition Section 256 spells it out plainly, end of discussion, where I'm concerned.
Always be armed against tyranny with both knowledge and the means to physically resist, the life you save may be your own.
 These bastards think they can do as they please and we are nothing but as bunch of mindless, gutless, lemmings. Other governments throughout history have tried this and have learned a painful costly lesson. It takes but a few to rally the masses and instill the spirit of Freedom and resistance and allow us to throw off the shackles of tyranny and those who would rule as kings.
They will not prevail, but it will be very costly on both sides. Such is the price of True Freedom.
Wolf, damn that is one fine post, hats off.

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341
1st amendment and 2nd amendment are not being targeted as much as the 4th and 5th amendments.




  The most important amendment.  If we lose the 2nd, it's game over.

  The Founding Fathers were genius level-people.  Not many geniuses to be found in DC today.
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,817
 The most important amendment.  If we lose the 2nd, it's game over.

  The Founding Fathers were genius level-people.  Not many geniuses to be found in DC today.
       Larson, if our founding fathers were to be resurected as a peonic citizen, one of us, and were to go rebel on the Ol Gov, they would most likely be imprisoned.
       The Brits didn't play games with these rebels, the loyalists rated out the rebs, they burned their houses to the ground among other goodys.That is Before the revolution actualy began, this band of freedom fighters were being targeted. Same shiit, different century.
           

Offline Overcast

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,133
 The most important amendment.  If we lose the 2nd, it's game over.

  The Founding Fathers were genius level-people.  Not many geniuses to be found in DC today.

Only in Arlington National Cemetery, and maybe one or two others working in convenience stores.

But NONE here:



This law is 100% complete BS.

I wonder if the Judge there would agree if an officer just walked into his house? Anyone know any cops in Indiana? lol
And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!

Offline Overcast

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,133
      Larson, if our founding fathers were to be resurected as a peonic citizen, one of us, and were to go rebel on the Ol Gov, they would most likely be imprisoned.
       The Brits didn't play games with these rebels, the loyalists rated out the rebs, they burned their houses to the ground among other goodys.That is Before the revolution actualy began, this band of freedom fighters were being targeted. Same shiit, different century.
          

You are 100% dead-on right.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!

Offline Rebelitarian

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,991
Probably accepted a Globalist grant at some point in the past.

What an ignorant judge.   >:(

Offline endof

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,709
Re: Indiana Supreme Court is in 100% violation of the US Constitution
« Reply #32 on: May 31, 2011, 05:31:22 pm »


Frederick Douglass [sic above] Human Rights Award? Are you fricking shitting me?


douglass is rolling in his f**king grave...

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,817
GWB, " when reminded of constitutional legalities, Bush said:
                     "The constitution is just a peice of GD paper"