Via David Codrea, I saw this amicus brief for TORCIVIA v. SUFFOLK COUNTY. It’s an interesting case, for the sheer police-state thuggery involved. The brief summarizes the circumstances.
Try to keep your blood pressure under control.
The defendant police officers testified that Petitioner would “‘yell and scream,’” “‘explode,’” “‘start ranting and raving and screaming….’” Id. at 349-50. That testimony was contradicted by the fact that the Petitioner’s wife remained asleep in the house during the entire encounter with the police. Id. at 349 n.4.
At some point, the police handcuffed Petitioner, and transported him to a hospital for an emergency mental health evaluation, which demonstrated that he was neither a suicide risk nor a risk to others, and recommended he be discharged. Pet. Cert. at 10. Nevertheless, while Petitioner was at the hospital, officers learned from a computer check that Petitioner possessed a New York State pistol license. Id. at 9-10. Although both Petitioner and his wife refused multiple requests for the combination of the firearms safe to facilitate their seizure, eventually Petitioner was coerced by the threat of continued confinement until he provided the combination for his firearms safe. Id. at 11. Officers returned to Petitioner’s home and seized his firearms without a warrant. Id.
I found this part very interesting, for reasons not specific to this case; it’s more of an extension of the amicus argument.
This case represents a growing trend in the lower courts to reduce Fourth Amendment protections when firearms are involved. There is no basis for courts to create various types of firearms exceptions to the Fourth Amendment. It is well established that the exercise of one constitutional right cannot be conditioned upon the forfeiture of another constitutional right.
“It is well established that the exercise of one constitutional right cannot be conditioned upon the forfeiture of another constitutional right.”
the Second Circuit may not use Torvicia’s exercise of that constitutional right to render him vulnerable to government searches and seizures of his firearms which violate Fourth Amendment protections
You can’t violate his privacy and property rights because he chose to exercise his Second Amendment protected right.
And yet, New York already had, even before this unlawful and unconstitutional firearm confiscation.
The state violated Torcivia’s Fourth Amendment rights when they required him to register himself and his pistol before allowing him the “privilege” of exercising the right to keep and bear that pistol. How secure are your “ persons, houses, papers, and effects” when you have to provide a list of them to the state in get permission to have them.
And this case shows exactly how dangerous forfeiting your privacy is: the state used that no longer private information to steal an innocent man’s property. Registering his exercise of the 2A did “render him vulnerable to government searches and seizures of his firearms.” Torcivia was not “secure” the instant he got a pistol license, and the state used that vulnerability against him.
Any one right does not exist in a vacuum. All constitutionally protected rights are fundamental and individual, and they interact. HELLER Established the the Second Amendment is an individual right. And from NYSRPA v. Bruen:
The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self defense is no different.
Second Amendment rights are no different than other rights… and Fourth Amendment rights are no different than the Second.
Licensing and registration force one to choose between giving up your constitutional Fourth Amendment right or surrendering your Second Amendment right. At your peril, either way.
Click here to donate via PayPal. (More Tip Jar Options) |
