SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Supreme Court curbs power of government to impose heavy fines and seize property
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled to drastically curb the powers that states and cities have to levy fines and seize property, marking the first time the court has applied the Constitution's ban on excessive fines at the state level.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who returned to the court for the first time in almost two months after undergoing surgery for lung cancer, wrote the majority opinion in the case involving an Indiana man who had his Land Rover seized after he was arrested for selling $385 of heroin.
"Protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history for good reason: Such fines undermine other liberties," Ginsburg wrote. "They can be used, e.g., to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies. They can also be employed, not in service of penal purposes, but as a source of revenue."
Also at National Review, SCOTUSblog, and NPR.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @04:11AM (8 children)
Point is, gun rights knuckleheads got jackshit to do with fighting against state tyranny. It's the civil rights movement and right-minded lawyers and judges that keep the state tyranny in check.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @04:41AM (6 children)
What good are rights if its just a piece of paper?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @04:58AM (5 children)
Governments exist by the consent of the governed. No government in the world can exist if the people don't contribute to it's continued existence. They may be able to massacre some people or throw some people in prison, but if the people don't go along with it, it's not happening.
Firearms are of the kind people are allowed to have in the US are just no match for the ones that the military has. But, if enough people refuse to provide resources and material support to the government and the military will fold shortly afterwards. Especially if the military personnel refuse to commit war crimes.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday February 21 2019, @06:10AM (3 children)
So? They don't have to be. There's two factors ignored here. First, asymmetric warfare is a thing. Second, familiarity with firearms means one doesn't require as much training to use to genuine military weapons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @06:23AM (2 children)
I'm familiar with that, are you? Asymmetric warfare only works by removing the support of the people for the conflict. You're unlikely to kill enough military personnel in that fashion to force a retreat through the body count if they've still got the support of the people where they came from.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @06:47AM
Welcome to the rice fields!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday February 21 2019, @01:58PM
We've already determined that they don't.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Bot on Thursday February 21 2019, @12:12PM
meatbags: "Governments exist by the consent of the governed. No government in the world can exist if the people don't contribute to it's continued existence".
bots: "it appears you have a meatbags infestation, do you want us to do something about it?"
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @01:48PM
When the civil rights movement and lawyers can still keep tyranny in check you don't need to resort to armed revolution. Who do you want those "gun rights knuckleheads" to shoot right now? Plus with people like you along with the establishment labeling them terrorists, just how well do you think its going to go? The super safe "common sense" gun ban countries have all pushed civil liberties further into the hole a few years after acquiring that status. Those lawyers and activists don't seem to be having as much of an impact there anymore with a state monopoly on weapons and violence. I recall several of them jailing the victim when they defended themselves with anything and curtailing free speech just off the top of my head.
The big enemy of rights is apathy. If you can't even send the lawyers out or assemble, don't expect an armed revolt either. Giving away your last resort over trumped up safety concerns is just part of that equation.