Supreme Court Smacks Down
Gun-Grabbers' Confiscation Dreams

Recently, the Rhode Island Police Department was reminded that citizens have rights. In a court case called Caniglia v. Strom, The Supreme Court determined that the Fourth Amendment shall stand as our Founding Fathers intended it, regardless of the push for gun control from the Biden Administration and the Constitutionally-challenged, political left.

Previously, Rhode Island Police had been using a twisted, contrived version of the Fourth Amendment in their attempts to confiscate guns without a court hearing and/or due process. This fabricated policy was called "Community Caretaking" and it was borne out of a misguided notion that because police can enter a home without homeowner approval to administer emergency assistance, they can do the same to confiscate guns. The Supreme Court has since reminded them of the limits on their authority.

This court case came about as a result of an incident between a husband and wife. A dispute ensued, and as a result, Rhode Island Police decided they would use the "Community Caretaking" function as justification for confiscating the husband's firearms.

Using the Fourth Amendment, Justice Thomas determined that the confiscation was unconstitutional. The reasoning behind it was due to a comparison to a rule that applied to an impounded car.

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

"Decades ago, this Court held that a warrantless search of an impounded vehicle for an unsecured firearm did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U. S. 433 (1973). In reaching this conclusion, the Court observed that police officers who patrol the "public highways" are often called to discharge noncriminal "community caretaking functions," such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents. The question today is whether Cady's acknowledgment of these "caretaking" duties creates a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home. It does not."
.....