Your Insurance Won't Cover the SWAT Team Response

[Ben]

This is a homeowner's policy exclusion I was unaware of. If the government destroys your home, it's not covered by insurance.

In this case, I understand that the SWAT team had to get this guy out, but gov destruction of your house isn't an act of God. There should be some avenue for compensation for a completely innocent homeowner.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-police-destroyed-cancer-survivors-house-new-legal-maneuver-force-city-pay

[MillCreek]

This actually happens not infrequently.  Exclusions for damages caused by government actions are a standard policy clause in the homeowner's policy, and the government claims qualified immunity.  Often, the government agency will agree to fix the place, but if not, your only recourse is to sue, which often is not successful due to the qualified immunity.

[Brad Johnson]

Steve Lehto covered it. Court ruled city has to pay up, but under a different statute than simple property destruction. Her attorney deserves a pat on the back for a genius legal move.

https://youtu.be/FSXAggq5ozo

Brad

[MechAg94]

Yes, they argued the city should compensate her as if they seized the property.  That argument avoided the qualified immunity argument. 

I think they should pay.  Why did the SWAT team have to use the tactics they did?  To avoid overtime waiting the guy out?  We saw that other story where they threw a robot into the house.  Saying the SWAT team has unlimited right to destroy private property is nuts.  I am almost surprised they don't have nitrous grenades instead of tear gas.  Make everyone inside a bit loopy before entering.

[Kingcreek]

What good is it having all those cool toys if they can’t play with them?

[Boomhauer]

There’s always the hoist the black flag approach…in Minecraft of course

[RoadKingLarry]

The main thing that tells me that we are a passive, "civilized" society is that when this sort of thing happens we don't see more Marvin Heemyers.

[230RN]

That damned Constitution keeps getting in the way of government doing whatever it wants and thumbing its nose at us.

This is absolutely an infringement on government's powers.  Damn!

Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now dammit, why'd the inventors of our country have to throw that in?  Stupid old white guys.

Terry, 230RN

P.S. One problem bothers me, and that's that the victim in this case is pretty old.  I wonder what happens if she is no longer available in person to carry the case to SCOTUS, given the timings involved.  Can her estate be a complainant?  Or others who have been similarly injured?  As Lehto alluded, there must be hundreds, if not thousands, of people who are or have been in similar situations.

Tragically amusing, but diluted by time, I keep thinking of the Waco unpleasantness.  (It's in my mind because it pretty much ended on this day in 1993)

[Boomhauer]

Lol like the government gives a *expletive deleted*it about the constitution

[230RN]

Disdain for that obsolete old document is rampant among our lawmakers.

"It's just a piece of paper."

"Spare me the Constitutional bull *expletive deleted*it."

"They made their ruling, now let them enforce it."

All quotes from lawmakers.

I say again, we must institute methods to punish lawmakers who make or endorse laws which turn out to be unconstitutional.  (It's too late for the scoundrels who voted for NFA 34.)

And despite the fact that the Constitution must be interpreted by the Supreme Court, there should be some kind of authoritative pre-examination of proposed laws.  One would think the Judiciary Committee would do this, but they don't.

Also, every judge, justice, and magistrate in the land should be provided with a dictionary with the pages defining "right," "keep," "bear," "arms," "shall," "not," and "infringed" flagged with a sticky note. 

As well as each word in "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Terry, 230RN

[HeroHog]

Also, every judge, justice, and magistrate in the land should be provided with a dictionary with the pages defining "right," "keep," "bear," "arms," "shall," "not," and "infringed" flagged with a sticky note. 

As well as each word in "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Terry, 230RN

AND "Regulated", all as defined at the time of the writing of the BOR!

[230RN]

^
Yeah, I forgot about that one.  "Well-regulated," as in well-trained, well-equipped, ready to go, as in "regular Army.  Not "well-trammeled," "well-restricted."

I find it absolutely stupid for moderners to miss the idiocy when they interpret it as "well-restricted" in the first clause of 2a, and then it says "no restrictions at all" in the second clause of 2a.  The second clause would be totally contrary to the first in that sense of "regulated."

Duh.  Dummies !  Yet, I have heard that one many times in the past.

I first thought of this when I saw the term "regulated" in the area of adjusting watches and clocks.  If you look at fine watches, you will notice the balance wheel has little screws all over it to regulate its timing period in all positions of your wrist and most temperature changes.  That, friends, is "regulated" and is a fine art for real watchmakers.

Fit for duty.

And remember the term "Regular Army," where "RA" prefixed every army soldier's serial number?  (Now they just use the "soash," I am told.)

Well, there's the bell. Homework is to read the Preamble to the Bill Of Rights. Class dismissed.

Terry, 230RN