Quote:
Originally Posted by gearmesh, inc.
2nd Amendment - This one is obvious
4th Amendment - Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
5th Amendment - He was deprived of his property without due process.
|
2nd wasn't infringed upon. They were going to secure his weapon while they talked to him and thats it. Common practice. You said yourself that you understood why they do that.
4th wasn't infringed upon. He was stopped and detained for investigation
because they were responding to a call. They didn't have to "search" for the rifle because it was in plain view and the pistol was found because he volunteered the information. Even if he hadn't volunteered the information they could have terry frisked him for weapons and they would have found it then. Most people don't truely understand their 4th amendment rights, especially when it comes to dealing with the police.
5th amendment doesn't apply because he was being detained for an investigation and his weapons were rightfully secured during that time.
You don't have all of your rights all of the time. And unfortunately you don't get to pick and chose what rules you play by.
The most important part of this entire equation is that the officers were there responding to a call. If there was no call, the rules are different.
I said in my very first post that everyone involved was an idiot. As unsual, I pick a side and let the debates begin! Since everyone on here hates cops, I always argue the other side. There's alot better arguement from ya'lls side but ya'll are too hung up on "I know my rights!"