Government WILL Ban Guns Soon....

[iampolluted]

it's obvious you didn't read much of the link. there are 3 or 4 different forms of trespass. some illegal some not. it depends on the reason for the cops being there. to investigate a noise complaint. telling em to fuck will get you nowhere. telling them to leave will get you nowhere. if there is no just reason to be there then yeah you can tell em to leave, but that doesn't mean they aren't still doing their due diligence if a complaint was issued, so they may or may not leave, even on posted property.

.org or .gov makes no difference in this case. all of the cases in the link are case law precedent. besides, why the hell would a .gov site make it easy for lawyers to rebuke a case against them by putting all the precedent law in one place? they won't. most likely that link was written by a legal aide or lawyer to help a case they were working on.

again, your walkway IS an open invite to leo, the pizza guy, the mailman, ect... as long as they as they are doing their job. for example, say there is a noise complaint at your house. when leo shows up and there is a party, they have a right to knock on your door to investigate. if they show up and all is quiet, they don't. the justification for a knock while technically is still there, chances are they'd dismiss the noise claims and move on because the justification behind the noise complaint ceased. if a cdv is called in, you can bet they'll knock regardless of noise.

i'm just wanting people to know how the laws work. telling leo to get the fuck off your land only works if they have no legal reason to be there. but, how do you know if they do or not? 99% of the time, it's neighbors or workman who call leo, without you ever knowing. that's why they end up on your door when you don't call. someone complained about you which gives them carte blanche in most cases.

 

[StellarP]

.gov states actual laws, .org is opinion.....the person who wrote that link.....used precedent for reference but it is opinion on "search and seizure".

Speaking from personal experiences...not the inter webs........State law is not reflected , as a no trespassing sign negates the walkway as an "open invite". But what is being discussed is two separate issues......Leo in course of duty...and criminal trespassing....only the Judge can decide.

Back to the gun debate......

Cheers
StellarP

 

[dagnabit]

.gov states actual laws, .org is opinion.....the person who wrote that link.....used precedent for reference but it is opinion on "search and seizure".

Speaking from personal experiences...not the inter webs........State law is not reflected , as a no trespassing sign negates the walkway as an "open invite". But what is being discussed is two separate issues......Leo in course of duty...and criminal trespassing....only the Judge can decide.

Back to the gun debate......

Cheers
StellarP

no tresspassing signs do not apply to all civilian(non police)workers
utility workers,assayers,surveyors,assessors and many others may enter posted property without notification or permission of the owner.
some states allow for trespass in the pursuit of wounded game.

 

[GetUpStandUp]

Are you talking about law enforcement doing their "job" or criminal trespassing? Uniform or not...once again if posted....or verbally notified.....written is better, no grey area , you are criminally trespassing walkway from sidewalk or not. State statute does not lie, pretty straightforward. Ever told a cop "get the fuck off my property"! Feels good, because if they have no business they are breaking the law..........try to use .gov links for legal references as .org.........well.

cheers
Ste
Not the case in investigations, and will be a good way to get arrested, or shot, if they are indeed called, and have dispatch doing logistics, then you better hope you dont have this situation, if indeed you are set on your way to handle what you just said. Even if you think you had the right to be that way, if they were looking for said suspect, and you reacted that way, and hey, they all of a sudden think your the suspect, would hope you give up before S.W.A.T gets there, you can look up all the links you want on that issue, my point is if the cops have guns out, then you better hope he is bidding by the law, 9 times out of 10 the cop the court, and society will see you as an obstruction to justice period.

Did not say the cops can just walk in or enter your home, unless indeed they followed said suspect into the residence, or react as if said suspect will indeed harm. And yes cusing out the cops when they are on your property without reason is very awesome, so does pushing a camera in their face when they are in the wrong.

 

[iampolluted]

while .gov's state actual laws, this (.org) is a comprehensive list of those laws used in actual cases. the only opinions provided are those of the courts, not personal opinions of the cases. state laws differ, and i agree with that, but when your life is on the line, wouldn't you use supreme court precedent laws in hopes of saving your ass?

you're right on the criminal trespass and leo in the course of duty, but there are 2 different types of trespass. criminal and technical, and yes it is up to the judge, but they usually side with leo, more so than they do with regular people.

"The criminal variety is trespassing that is unlawful, such as occupying real property, or refusing to leave after being requested to do so by the owner.2 This is not the type of trespassing that officers are likely to do. Even when they refuse an owner’s request to leave, their continued presence is hardly ever a criminal trespass because it’s usually justified under some exception to the warrant requirement."

"On the other hand, officers routinely commit technical or “common law” trespassing, which is simply walking or driving onto private property without the owner’s permission.3 Although technical trespassing is not unlawful,4 it’s the type of trespassing that is most likely to constitute a “search.”"

"WHEN TRESPASSING IS A “SEARCH”
A trespass by officers is a “search” if it permitted them to see or hear something the
occupants reasonably believed would be private.6 As the U.S. Court of Appeals put it:
Whether a police officer has commenced a “search” turns not on his subjective
intent to conduct a search and seizure, but rather whether he has in fact invaded
an area which the defendant harbors a reasonable expectation of privacy.7
As we will now discuss, whether an expectation of privacy exists and is reasonable
depends largely on two things: (1) the nature of the property officers entered; and (2)
whether, or to what extent, the occupants took steps to prevent or discourage entry.
Front yards
The least private area surrounding most homes and other structures is almost always
the front. This is because it is usually visible to the public and it’s where visitors,
tradespeople, and others must walk to reach the front door. Consequently, in
determining whether an officer’s entry into the front yard constituted a search, the courts
focus mainly on the extent to which visitors and others might use it to contact the
occupants.
ACCESS ROUTES: There can be no reasonable expectation that officers and others
will not walk on walkways, pathways, porches, and other access routes to the front door.8
Accordingly, an officer’s presence on an access route is not a “search.”9 As the U.S. Court of Appeals put it, “[N]o Fourth Amendment search occurs when police officers who enter private property restrict their movements to those areas generally made accessible to visitors . . . .”10
In fact, the California Supreme Court has ruled that the occupants of a residence impliedly consent to entries on access routes. Said the court, “A sidewalk, pathway, common entrance or similar passageway offers an implied permission to the public to enter which necessarily negates any reasonable expectation of privacy in regard to
observations made there.”11"

while not exactly tied to the gun debate, the risks we take in regards to growing and arming ourselves as a means of protection, the different types of trespass apply. while being able to shoot trespassers on sight may be an option in some cases, it won't apply when the leo's come knocking. arming yourself to the teeth won't stop them from entering your home should they have probable cause to do so. this is where the gun debate comes in. yes cops can criminal trespass, but if you shoot, or even threaten said trespassers with a gun, you'll more than likely get life in prison, or shot.

basically what i'm trying to say is that no matter what they "catch" you with, you'd almost be better served by going through the court system. yell at em to get off your property all ya want, but if they have a reason to be there, they aren't going anywhere. brandish a gun in the process and it's a guarantee they aren't leaving. besides should you pull a gun you'd be risking your, and your families lives to keep a gun and a grow.

 

[GetUpStandUp]

while .gov's state actual laws, this (.org) is a comprehensive list of those laws used in actual cases. the only opinions provided are those of the courts, not personal opinions of the cases. state laws differ, and i agree with that, but when your life is on the line, wouldn't you use supreme court precedent laws in hopes of saving your ass?

you're right on the criminal trespass and leo in the course of duty, but there are 2 different types of trespass. criminal and technical, and yes it is up to the judge, but they usually side with leo, more so than they do with regular people.

"The criminal variety is trespassing that is unlawful, such as occupying real property, or refusing to leave after being requested to do so by the owner.2 This is not the type of trespassing that officers are likely to do. Even when they refuse an owner’s request to leave, their continued presence is hardly ever a criminal trespass because it’s usually justified under some exception to the warrant requirement."

"On the other hand, officers routinely commit technical or “common law” trespassing, which is simply walking or driving onto private property without the owner’s permission.3 Although technical trespassing is not unlawful,4 it’s the type of trespassing that is most likely to constitute a “search.”"

"WHEN TRESPASSING IS A “SEARCH”
A trespass by officers is a “search” if it permitted them to see or hear something the
occupants reasonably believed would be private.6 As the U.S. Court of Appeals put it:
Whether a police officer has commenced a “search” turns not on his subjective
intent to conduct a search and seizure, but rather whether he has in fact invaded
an area which the defendant harbors a reasonable expectation of privacy.7
As we will now discuss, whether an expectation of privacy exists and is reasonable
depends largely on two things: (1) the nature of the property officers entered; and (2)
whether, or to what extent, the occupants took steps to prevent or discourage entry.
Front yards
The least private area surrounding most homes and other structures is almost always
the front. This is because it is usually visible to the public and it’s where visitors,
tradespeople, and others must walk to reach the front door. Consequently, in
determining whether an officer’s entry into the front yard constituted a search, the courts
focus mainly on the extent to which visitors and others might use it to contact the
occupants.
ACCESS ROUTES: There can be no reasonable expectation that officers and others
will not walk on walkways, pathways, porches, and other access routes to the front door.8
Accordingly, an officer’s presence on an access route is not a “search.”9 As the U.S. Court of Appeals put it, “[N]o Fourth Amendment search occurs when police officers who enter private property restrict their movements to those areas generally made accessible to visitors . . . .”10
In fact, the California Supreme Court has ruled that the occupants of a residence impliedly consent to entries on access routes. Said the court, “A sidewalk, pathway, common entrance or similar passageway offers an implied permission to the public to enter which necessarily negates any reasonable expectation of privacy in regard to
observations made there.”11"

while not exactly tied to the gun debate, the risks we take in regards to growing and arming ourselves as a means of protection, the different types of trespass apply. while being able to shoot trespassers on sight may be an option in some cases, it won't apply when the leo's come knocking. arming yourself to the teeth won't stop them from entering your home should they have probable cause to do so. this is where the gun debate comes in. yes cops can criminal trespass, but if you shoot, or even threaten said trespassers with a gun, you'll more than likely get life in prison, or shot.

basically what i'm trying to say is that no matter what they "catch" you with, you'd almost be better served by going through the court system. yell at em to get off your property all ya want, but if they have a reason to be there, they aren't going anywhere. brandish a gun in the process and it's a guarantee they aren't leaving. besides should you pull a gun you'd be risking your, and your families lives to keep a gun and a grow.

Hate to say it, but the courts have every intention of bringing charges, its those charges are looked at by the courts to be able to stick, the whole Supream court thing never will come into affect unless the courts have already found you guilty, and the appeals process begins, and so so sad it takes like 3-5 years to even have your case heard by the Supream courts.

I am not arguing the law that is written, and the law that is over ridden by acts of the police, yes due process will have to be played out, but do you really think that the courts, the police statements will over ride their safety, exspecially today? The cops are the most insainly scared frickers on the face of the planet, and when they get rolling with a hard on to catch a perp, and he fleas a car and takes shelter in your yard, dude they are going for them, just watch cops, you will see it repeadedly, hell look at the last robbery in LA when they threw money out the car, and the cops still got their ass, what kind of headach will they have as far as paperwork, or how many violations did the cops do just to grab these guys?

They still got em, hell look at Waco, there is tons of cases that already stuck that contridict what your possing as fact. But Like I said I see where your coming from tho.

 

[GetUpStandUp]

http://news.yahoo.com/33-000-fleeing-guatemala-volcano-eruption-194115191.html

Another volcano erruption, when will the rest of the world see the problems with the number of volanos that errupted just this month and last month alone. Seems to me if they keep going, and popping up all over there will be no need for guns, just look at california, we have a trifecta that can be very possible. Earthquake, triggers volcano, trigger Tsunami, all very probable theories that seem to be getting closer to being a truth.

Very odd, and sucks not one thing spoke on the issue of unrest and society falling into panic over such events, if such a thing happens it will suck that ones with guns will be gunning for life, killing their neighbors.

 

[dagnabit]

where is the goddamn volcano control regulations?

if we could just outlaw super volcanoes.. i mean sure you can have your small bubbling volcanoes for making islands and tourists to look at but who really needs a super volcano?

 

[iampolluted]

i'm not debating anything like that. my assertion was that if they want you, they'll get you, or whoever it is they seek in the interest of justice. keeping fleeing suspects (and leo's) out of my house is why it's always locked. police cannot kick down your door without a warrant unless they see, or smell probable cause, in our cases.

i realize the courts are looking for an indictment. that's not the question here. nor is the time it takes for due process to occur. the point is, regardless of the crime, or circumstance, if you have a path to your front door, cops can use it legally even if you have a "no trespassing" sign, and so can a mailman, or pizza guy, or ups guys.

the point of all this is that should you be armed and waiting for their knock, the likelihood you'd be able to come away unharmed, be it to property, life, or freedom, is very small. if you're not armed, the outcome may fall in your favor given the case law precedents set forth in the link i provided.

 

[dizzze]

where is the goddamn volcano control regulations?

if we could just outlaw super volcanoes.. i mean sure you can have your small bubbling volcanoes for making islands and tourists to look at but who really needs a super volcano?

Yeah i agree we need more regulations on volcanos, this shit is out of controll. It will never happen beacuse the Dems and Republicans can never agree on anything even if it is for the common good. Mabey someone can sneak it into a child pornography bill or something, otherwise i see no chance of this passing.

 

[medmaker420]

volcano regulations?

now I see where the anti gunners come from

crazy town LOL

 

[woolybear]

The people posting the meme photos and cartoons are great. I get so many of those on the ol' social media, glad to see more examples here. Very clever.

if Obama winds in November your guns will be taken away and there's nothing you can do about it. Well, you can hope they don't come to your house and sit on you and take your stuff

 

[iampolluted]

The people posting the meme photos and cartoons are great. I get so many of those on the ol' social media, glad to see more examples here. Very clever.

if Obama winds in November your guns will be taken away and there's nothing you can do about it. Well, you can hope they don't come to your house and sit on you and take your stuff

keep the scare tactics coming....eventually if ya lie enough people will believe you. it worked incredibly well for the last administration.

 

[GetUpStandUp]

Maybe I am having a blonde moment, Volcano bills???
I said volcanos as to how can man stop this? They cant, the world is getting tierd of us fleas and is bout to do a dog shake to get rid of the problem parasites. We focus alot on the probable, but no one is taking the account of the many volcanos that errupted as of this month alone, its unheard of, and the fact california is sitting on a known time bomb, I am asking what will guns have to do with running for your life? Guatamala had 33,000 ppl running for their lives at an instant, who will take time to shot then?

The game I present to you all is the fact our govt is not saying a word, and you my friends should be worried, cuz that means they want you thinned out, let nature take its coarse. I highly doubt gun laws are on the govt minds right now, promise you that. Its way bigger than that, its very obvious this time round, even the election is weird, bringing tons of shit to the table to get us talking not focusing on the true events that will give them more power. It would be after such big events that guns will be taken!

 

[Hank Hemp]

Can't we all agree to disagree? Oh, if I were a thief I would steal from the house with guns when owner was away. What's easier to sell on the street than guns? Just asking. Just bring a 2 wheeler with you to haul away the gun safe. No problem. Wish I had a gun safe, got more firearms than I could ever use anymore.

 

[moodster]

obama will take your guns but let us have medical weed LOL i wud rather have medical weed

 

[Hydrosun]

obama will take your guns but let us have medical weed LOL i wud rather have medical weed

When it comes to natural rights NO ONE GIVES A SHIT what you would rather.

WE ARE ALL BORN wit FULL RIGHTS, not just those you would rather have and those you would chose to batter away.

Keep your guns and flowers, god knows we ALL have a natural right to both.

 

[Yes4Prop215]

if Obama winds in November your guns will be taken away and there's nothing you can do about it. Well, you can hope they don't come to your house and sit on you and take your stuff
]

Obama wont be "taking all guns".....the most obama can do is re-instate the assault weapons ban, which wouldnt affect us in CA since we already have the ban. it would affect most of the southern and "free" states and they wont be able to have cool things like automatics and 30 round magazines anymore...

handguns, shot guns, hunting rifles will not be touched, it was already ruled that "all common use guns are protected by the 2nd amendment"...


i doubt it will even pass though, the reds will control the house and senate and if he pokes the rest of america awake shit will go down.....even here in california there was large uproar over SB249 in the gun community...i cant imagine how bad it will be when the entire country is angry..the NRA is probably setting up new bank accounts to handle the flood of contributions...gun store owners and manufacturer probably cannot wait until the next gun scare because sales will go through the roof!

i better stock up on ammo before the election lol...

 

[dizzze]

.

 

[StellarP]

Once again your .org is a written opinion on SEARCH AND SEIZURE regarding police in the course of duty not criminal trespassing...........using case precedent to back your opinion is still........an opinion.

Civilian workers are given permission when you agree to services.....off the grid.....no reason to enter.........assessors will ask for permission.
You do realize every STATE HAS IT'S OWN BAR EXAM............because every state has it's own laws.
What if.........your residence does not have a walkway.....or driveway.......live on just a big piece of land.......then from your perspective private property does not exist.
Or.....I have business with the President......an elected official....taxes pay for the White House......walk up to the front door...ring the bell......YOU will be charged with trespassing....if not shot!

Back to the guns....tell me more(condescending Wonka) on how only certain people should own guns.
And how only certain weapons should be owned.
And last, what is the ONE golden rule of gun safety..........just curious since you mentioned everyone else should take safety courses(but not you).

Cheers
StellarP