Supreme Court Eliminates "No-Knock" Rule

[edjr 6,602]

if you have nothing to hide and have no reason to have a warrant to search your house. Why would you care?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Link to what? What specific point do you disagree with? Name one thing you contest.

 

How about any of your Turbinesque moonbat charges you made in this sentence:

 

"Our federal government has declared that they can indefinitely detain US citizens in foreign prisons and torture them, without ever charging them with a crime, "

 

Ya got anything that proves any of these?

[pingpong 0]

Thanks for proving my point AGAIN. You are afraid, pure and simple. Your fear makes you angry. Fear and anger makes you aggressive, and you prove it by responding with personal attacks.

 

As to conservatives basing their attitudes on fear and on anger fueled by fear? It's obvious:

• Faux-conservatives are for giving up civil liberties for security. Because they're afraid of terrorists and crime.
  
• Real-conservatives are for limiting government. Because they are afraid that government will try to control their lives.
  
• Real-conservatives are for tax cuts. Because they're afraid the government will take away their money. And they're pissed that someone else will benefit.
  
• Conservatives support free market economics and no government social programs. Because they are greedy SOBs who are afraid if the riff-raff gets social assistance, they will have enough money to buy a home in their neighborhood.
  
• Conservatives rail against illegal immigration, because they are afraid the illegals will overwhelm "their" America.
  
• Faux-Conservatives still support Bush. Because they're afraid of feeling like the idiots they really are if they admit to themselves they were 100% wrong about supporting W.
  

Every time you conservatives rant about something, you do so out of fear and anger. It's hard to pay attention to anyone whose "tries" to make points based on their fear.

This is a classic far left type response. It takes observations on beliefs, and then applies opinion, and treats it all like fact. It has the classic feel of...I'm smarter than you, and you are too dumb to know it.

[Sho Nuff 720]

This is a classic far left type response. It takes observations on beliefs, and then applies opinion, and treats it all like fact. It has the classic feel of...I'm smarter than you, and you are too dumb to know it.

 

Yeah...but I must be afraid when I at the crap he posts.

[parrot 789]

So now the government can collect your phone records, bust into your house without knocking, ship you off to a secret prison, torture you, and hold you indefinitely without ever charging you with a crime. :doubleclap:

All done in the name of Protecting Freedom!

[Jeff Garcia 8]

If they have a warrant, why should they have to knock?

[parrot 789]

if you have nothing to hide and have no reason to have a warrant to search your house. Why would you care?

Do you know how easy it is for police to get a warrant in these days of terrorism fears and meth hysteria? A strange odor or a single uncorroborated statement is enough to do it.

 

No-knock raids are one of the pet issues of Radley Balko at theagitator.com . He's all over this ruling.

[Apu Nahasapeemapetilon 0]

Thanks for proving my point AGAIN. You are afraid, pure and simple. Your fear makes you angry. Fear and anger makes you aggressive, and you prove it by responding with personal attacks.

 

As to conservatives basing their attitudes on fear and on anger fueled by fear? It's obvious:

• Faux-conservatives are for giving up civil liberties for security. Because they're afraid of terrorists and crime.
  
• Real-conservatives are for limiting government. Because they are afraid that government will try to control their lives.
  
• Real-conservatives are for tax cuts. Because they're afraid the government will take away their money. And they're pissed that someone else will benefit.
  
• Conservatives support free market economics and no government social programs. Because they are greedy SOBs who are afraid if the riff-raff gets social assistance, they will have enough money to buy a home in their neighborhood.
  
• Conservatives rail against illegal immigration, because they are afraid the illegals will overwhelm "their" America.
  
• Faux-Conservatives still support Bush. Because they're afraid of feeling like the idiots they really are if they admit to themselves they were 100% wrong about supporting W.
  

Every time you conservatives rant about something, you do so out of fear and anger. It's hard to pay attention to anyone whose "tries" to make points based on their fear.

 

 

OK, so I've read this post about 10 times now and it's gotta be the dumbest post I've read in the entire history of this board. You must be on a fishing trip or something. I'm guessing torrid is even busting out laughing at this post.

 

As a hater of the two-party system and both established pork barrell American parties, I'm begining to see why so many people side with the so-called "Republican right". Because nuts like yourself are on the other team.

[Bigtraine 30]

Those who would give up liberty for safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

This quote is getting very old. Just because Benjamin Franklin said it doesn't make it a fact.

 

Look, we've all given up liberties for security. Even Benjamin Franklin did. We have laws and police. Those inherently restrict liberties and provide security. Should we get rid of those? Live in a giant anarchist paradise? The truth is that there has to be a balance between security and civil liberties - you can't have 100% of one or the other.

 

Thanks for proving my point AGAIN. You are afraid, pure and simple. Your fear makes you angry. Fear and anger makes you aggressive, and you prove it by responding with personal attacks.

 

Fear leads to hate. Hate leads to anger. Anger leads to the dark side.

 

Thanks Yoda.

[Michael Sieger 0]

No-knock raids are one of the pet issues of Radley Balko at theagitator.com . He's all over this ruling.

 

Justice Breyer actually cited Balko's article on Slate [NO SWAT] in his dissent. [Hudson v Michigan]

 

I am 40 years old. A libertarian, I am disappointed that it seems I must increasingly look to the political left to find respect for constitutional rights the right once protected against liberal/progressive politics.

 

From the dissent, quoting a case decided by the SCOTUS in 1886:

"to all invasions on the part of the government and its employés of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life. It is not the breaking of his doors, and the rummaging of his drawers, that constitutes the essence of the offence; but it is the invasion of his indefeasible right of personal security, personal liberty and private property."

 

This decision standing alone is not extremely significant, but is part of a bigger picture that is extremely troubling in my opinion.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

"to all invasions on the part of the government and its employés of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life. It is not the breaking of his doors, and the rummaging of his drawers, that constitutes the essence of the offence; but it is the invasion of his indefeasible right of personal security, personal liberty and private property."

 

Since when did the SCOTUS give a ratsass about private property? They should have thought about that when they decided the Immanent Domain case.

[wiffleball 4,790]

Never saw this as a problem. - In fact, thought it was kind of stupid.

 

 

If you're going to issue a warrant to say, catch a killer, a drug dealer - Ken Lay - whatever, why would you want to give the guy time to pull out his gun, flush his drugs, shred his memos?

 

This always seemed a little quaint and unrealistic anyway.

[pingpong 0]

Yeah...but I must be afraid when I at the crap he posts.

Chicken.

[Helmet Head 0]

So now the government can collect your phone records, bust into your house without knocking, ship you off to a secret prison, torture you, and hold you indefinitely without ever charging you with a crime. :doubleclap:

 

 

Like it's been said, "If you have nothing to hide, don't worry about it."

 

Prior to this ruling, the police had to knock, wait for a response from inside, and if they did not hear one, bust down the door. Even if they did hear someone inside, but after a reasonable amount of time passed and still no response, the police could then get in.

 

This is a good ruling. Let the police, who the vast majority are good at what they do, do their jobs.

 

I would venture to say that the govenment has no interest in YOUR phone records. No offense, but unless you are a terrorsit, they have NO interest in what you are talking about or to whom you are talking to.

 

Secret prison? So what? The government cannot hold you indefinitely without charging you with a crime. For a felony, the police have 48 hours to file the case against you or release. There are a few exceptions such as weekends and holidays.

 

The people the government ARE holding, deserve to be held. Their cases are different becasue it involves enemy combatents against the United States. As far as I'm concerned, keep them as long as they deem fit.

 

Torture is a horrible thing I agree. We are a county that says we do NOT torture the enemy. Unfortunately, I think it does happen. However, I also think we need to allow them to do whatever it takes to keep our citizens and soldiers saft.

 

Just my two cents.

 

HH

[Recliner Pilot 61]

So now the government can collect your phone records, bust into your house without knocking, ship you off to a secret prison, torture you, and hold you indefinitely without ever charging you with a crime. :doubleclap:

 

Still can't come up with any evidence that any of your Turbinesque moonbat claims are true?

[Uh-huh 0]

OK, so I've read this post about 10 times now and it's gotta be the dumbest post I've read in the entire history of this board. You must be on a fishing trip or something. I'm guessing torrid is even busting out laughing at this post.

 

As a hater of the two-party system and both established pork barrell American parties, I'm begining to see why so many people side with the so-called "Republican right". Because nuts like yourself are on the other team.

How ironic -- you didn't even get the point, did you? Yet you still have an opinion. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Regardless of how naive it is.

 

I'll say it again -- conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear, and to a lesser extent by anger. You understand that, you can better appreciate the quality of right-wing posters we have around here.

 

Just listen to a right-winger open his mouth, and then think about what could be driving him/her to say what he's saying. Goodwill? Love of humankind? Regard for others? Ethics? None of the above. It's whatever's good for his/her own butt.

[Sho Nuff 720]

How ironic -- you didn't even get the point, did you? Yet you still have an opinion. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Regardless of how naive it is.

 

I'll say it again -- conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear, and to a lesser extent by anger. You understand that, you can better appreciate the quality of right-wing posters we have around here.

 

Just listen to a right-winger open his mouth, and then think about what could be driving him/her to say what he's saying. Goodwill? Love of humankind? Regard for others? Ethics? None of the above. It's whatever's good for his/her own butt.

 

And I will say it again, that is an overgeneralized bunch of BS that holds absolutely no water.

 

Your last line...is not just for the right wing...it is for anyone with a political agenda. Left, right, middle.....they all do what is good for themselves.

[pimptastic69 0]

How ironic -- you didn't even get the point, did you? Yet you still have an opinion. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Regardless of how naive it is.

 

I'll say it again -- conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear, and to a lesser extent by anger. You understand that, you can better appreciate the quality of right-wing posters we have around here.

 

Just listen to a right-winger open his mouth, and then think about what could be driving him/her to say what he's saying. Goodwill? Love of humankind? Regard for others? Ethics? None of the above. It's whatever's good for his/her own butt.

 

 

You really need to read the second half of 'Animal Farm'.

 

 

Spoiler Alert!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The pigs are not very nice.

[Ravens 03 0]

If they have a warrant, why should they have to knock?

 

Yup.

[edjr 6,602]

Do you know how easy it is for police to get a warrant in these days of terrorism fears and meth hysteria? A strange odor or a single uncorroborated statement is enough to do it.

 

No-knock raids are one of the pet issues of Radley Balko at theagitator.com . He's all over this ruling.

 

Wonderful. The cops can come in my house and catch me and my girlfriend watching tv or sleeping

 

OH NO!! NOT THAT!! WHAT WILL THEY FIND!!

 

What's the ONLY reason you'd want them to knock? So you can run or hide what they're looking for? Oh wait I know. You want to make the bed and not look like a slob.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Wonderful. The cops can come in my house and catch me and my girlfriend watching tv or sleeping

 

OH NO!! NOT THAT!! WHAT WILL THEY FIND!!

 

What's the ONLY reason you'd want them to knock? So you can run or hide what they're looking for? Oh wait I know. You want to make the bed and not look like a slob.

 

Pretty much.

 

What civil liberty have people lost in this? Do you have the liberty to go hide things before they come in?

 

What is the knock protecting? Absolutely nothing.

 

Whining about this one is quite funny.

[Mephisto 15]

Whining about this one is quite funny.

 

 

It's quite funny as a stand-alone. But add it to the pile of Patriot Actish, phone-record retention, warrantless wiretapping... and the ever increasing pile of intrusions... it becomes less funny to me.

 

I'm not the usual FFToday tinfoil hat wearing "the government is coming for me" bitchface.

 

But if you think it's funny that the US Government is creating one big potential reality show with all of the citizens, be careful not to choke on your tongue. And nothing is funnier than the I've got nothing to hide faction among us. They're the ones who will ultimately allow you to get pulled over for no reason except that we've allowed the police to do it because I've got nothing to hide and then we'll allow them to listen in on our conversations because I've got nothing to hide and we've already allowed them to put cameras up all over cities nationwide because I've got nothing to hide and the phone records...

 

I mean, here I am... I don't have a GODDAMNED THING to hide... and it's just as disconcerting as fock that another in a long line of personal intrusions has been allowed.

 

Tell ya what, I don't care if the meth lab guy flushes his sh!t in the 5-seconds he has after a knock-and-announce. If there is a lab there and the police show up... the lab is gone and the guy is still busted. You focking morons.

[nobody 2,687]

This quote is getting very old. Just because Benjamin Franklin said it doesn't make it a fact.

 

Look, we've all given up liberties for security. Even Benjamin Franklin did. We have laws and police. Those inherently restrict liberties and provide security. Should we get rid of those? Live in a giant anarchist paradise? The truth is that there has to be a balance between security and civil liberties - you can't have 100% of one or the other.

 

I'd have to look at each liberty Ben Franklin gave up on a case by case basis to decided if we should reverse them.

 

I have to be honest here, though. I really don't give a sh¡t about this law. By the time we get around to being forced to quarter troops in our houses, I'll be long dead, and I don't plan on having children since I think humanity is sh¡t, so you guys feel free to let the government walk all over us as much as you want.

[Sho Nuff 720]

It's quite funny as a stand-alone. But add it to the pile of Patriot Actish, phone-record retention, warrantless wiretapping... and the ever increasing pile of intrusions... it becomes less funny to me.

 

I'm not the usual FFToday tinfoil hat wearing "the government is coming for me" bitchface.

 

But if you think it's funny that the US Government is creating one big potential reality show with all of the citizens, be careful not to choke on your tongue. And nothing is funnier than the I've got nothing to hide faction among us. They're the ones who will ultimately allow you to get pulled over for no reason except that we've allowed the police to do it because I've got nothing to hide and then we'll allow them to listen in on our conversations because I've got nothing to hide and we've already allowed them to put cameras up all over cities nationwide because I've got nothing to hide and the phone records...

 

I mean, here I am... I don't have a GODDAMNED THING to hide... and it's just as disconcerting as fock that another in a long line of personal intrusions has been allowed.

 

Tell ya what, I don't care if the meth lab guy flushes his sh!t in the 5-seconds he has after a knock-and-announce. If there is a lab there and the police show up... the lab is gone and the guy is still busted. You focking morons.

 

I judge it as a stand alone because that is what it is. This is the Supreme Court....not the executive branch of the Government...not the legislative branch that passed the Patriot Act. You think they are the same...not so much.

 

And again...care to point out any civil liberty anyone lost on this one?

 

personal intrusion? they have a focking warrant. the only intrusion now is that they do not have to knock.

[Mephisto 15]

I judge it as a stand alone because that is what it is. This is the Supreme Court....not the executive branch of the Government...not the legislative branch that passed the Patriot Act. You think they are the same...not so much.

 

I don't recall anywhere where I said that they are the same. It's not a "stand-alone" because so much else has happened over the course of the last decade... it's just another small item on the ever-growing pile.

 

And again...care to point out any civil liberty anyone lost on this one?

 

personal intrusion? they have a focking warrant. the only intrusion now is that they do not have to knock.

 

No specific civil liberty per se... just another expansion of the powers of a government agency... one little bit at a time, but hey, "I have nothing to hide..." :oldschoolrolleyes:

[brinett9 0]

Police sometimes go to the wrong residence.

 

Now everyone, everywhere in the US has to live with the idea that their door mgiht be bashed down without warning at any second, regardless of whether they've committed a crime or not.

[Michael Sieger 0]

personal intrusion? they have a focking warrant. the only intrusion now is that they do not have to knock.

 

Police can and often do get "no-knock" warrants - typical in drug deals. They didn't in this case, most likely becuase the evidence they had in support of the warrant did not support it. Generally, if the police ask for a no-knock warrant they will get one.

 

Also, it is wrong to say the police "do not have to knock" as a result of this case. It is undisputed in the Hudson case that the cops violated the "knock-and-announce" rule and that issue was not before the Court at all as the State of Michigan admitted it was a violation (in this case, the cops did knock, and waited "3-5 seconds" before entering through an unlocked door, which everyone agreed was insufficient to satisfy the rule). The police still have to "knock and announce" when they have a normal warrant. What this case decided is that the evidence they find in a wrongful search - in this case a pile of drugs - is not automatically excluded from admission in a criminal trial due solely to the violation.

[parrot 789]

The police still have to "knock and announce" when they have a normal warrant. What this case decided is that the evidence they find in a wrongful search - in this case a pile of drugs - is not automatically excluded from admission in a criminal trial due solely to the violation.

If the evidence will still be allowed, there is no real repercussion from violating the rule, unless you buy Scalia's civil penalties crap. Exclusionary rules help motivate police to be sure they have the right residence before they kick down the door.

[Mephisto 15]

Drug War Police Tactics Endanger Innocent Citizens

 

Have a look at this map. It plots nearly 300 botched SWAT raids I've found over the course of about a year of research. It is by no means comprehensive. My guess is that it doesn't even begin to make a full accounting for how many times this has happened, both because police are reluctant to report their mistakes, and because the victims of botched raids are often too afraid or embarrassed to come forward.

 

As I've begun to write about this issue, many more victims of these raids have called or emailed to tell me their own stories - most of which never made it into the newspaper.

 

But even the documented cases should be cause for concern. They include the cases of Salvatore Culosi and Cory Maye, both of whom I've written about previously in this column. They include 40 cases in which a completely innocent person was killed. There are dozens more in which nonviolent offenders (recreational pot smokers, for example, or small-time gamblers like Culosi) or police officers were needlessly killed.

 

[gocolts 300]

How ironic -- you didn't even get the point, did you? Yet you still have an opinion. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Regardless of how naive it is.

 

I'll say it again -- conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear, and to a lesser extent by anger. You understand that, you can better appreciate the quality of right-wing posters we have around here.

 

Just listen to a right-winger open his mouth, and then think about what could be driving him/her to say what he's saying. Goodwill? Love of humankind? Regard for others? Ethics? None of the above. It's whatever's good for his/her own butt.

 

And some of you wonder why liberalism is a mental disorder

 

 

NOBODY is buying your "conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear" BS you keep speewing.

 

Are you trying to convince yourself??

 

 

 

 

 

Police sometimes go to the wrong residence.

 

Now everyone, everywhere in the US has to live with the idea that their door mgiht be bashed down without warning at any second, regardless of whether they've committed a crime or not.

 

Good point.

[joneo 556]

"No knocks" are for the officer's safety. As stated by someone earlier, if the police go through the hoops of getting a search warrant which is signed by the judge, this shouldn't be a problem.

The people could be dangerous.

 

"Knock Knock"

 

"Who's there motherfocker?"

 

"It's the police. We have a search warrant and"..BLAM BLAM BLAM

 

Dead police oifficer laying on the doorstep.

[torridjoe 48]

Never saw this as a problem. - In fact, thought it was kind of stupid.

If you're going to issue a warrant to say, catch a killer, a drug dealer - Ken Lay - whatever, why would you want to give the guy time to pull out his gun, flush his drugs, shred his memos?

 

This always seemed a little quaint and unrealistic anyway.

 

it's because you have no idea whether he's a killer or a drug dealer. That's why you have the warrant--to find out. What they are before you bust down the door is a citizen.

 

Uh's post is 100% valid. Fear has been the motivating factor for everything the Bush administration does. If you don't fear, you don't behave secretively.

 

Fear has been the way to pit people against each other for ages, since feudal times. It was the way American settlers were pitted against Indian "savages" despite many early successes working together, it was the way poor whites were pitted against free blacks post Civil War, and it's the way they're being pitted against undocumented aliens and gays now. The government is telling its people we need to fear them, regardless of the truth of the matter. We had (and still have) more to fear from a strong hurricane than all the terrorists on the planet, and yet there's a trillion for Iraq--not even INVOLVED in terror acts--and they can't even get the streets bulldozed in New Orleans a year after Katrina.

 

Read some Zinn, for God's sake.

[L5UT1ger 0]

To the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" crowd let me ask you this...

 

Would it be ok if you were subject to body cavity searches randomly from police? Thats cool with you right?

 

What if your neighbor was the drug lord and they made a mistake in reading the address on the warrant? Wouldnt it be nice to know that you can answer the door and say wtf?!? Thats next door man? Instead, what if they just barge in and your kid is playing with some plastic item shaped like a gun and some overzealous cops shoots your kid in all the excitement? Far fetched? Probably, but out of the realm of possibility? Not so much.

 

What if you and your significant other are engaging in oral sex, a crime in some states, while watching some porn, and they have the wrong house? That oughta be fun...

 

I stay away from this kinda crap on here, but like Meph, i dont like the slipping slope precedent this sets.

[joneo 556]

To the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" crowd let me ask you this...

 

Would it be ok if you were subject to body cavity searches randomly from police? Thats cool with you right?

 

 

 

I stay away from this kinda crap on here, but like Meph, i dont like the slipping slope precedent this sets.

 

 

Random cavity searches?? The topic is about having a warrant, which means it is signed BY A JUDGE saying the officers have PROBABLE CAUSE. From your last sentence, you should stay away from this crap. You know nothing about it. SNAP.

[gocolts 300]

To the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" crowd let me ask you this...

 

Would it be ok if you were subject to body cavity searches randomly from police? Thats cool with you right?

 

What if your neighbor was the drug lord and they made a mistake in reading the address on the warrant? Wouldnt it be nice to know that you can answer the door and say wtf?!? Thats next door man? Instead, what if they just barge in and your kid is playing with some plastic item shaped like a gun and some overzealous cops shoots your kid in all the excitement? Far fetched? Probably, but out of the realm of possibility? Not so much.

 

What if you and your significant other are engaging in oral sex, a crime in some states, while watching some porn, and they have the wrong house? That oughta be fun...

 

I stay away from this kinda crap on here, but like Meph, i dont like the slipping slope precedent this sets.

 

Plus,if the cops don't find what they want,they just plant it there.Not all,but some do it.

 

Now why don't address the problem many have brought up about the cops busting down the door of the wrong house,or is it just tuff sh!t if the police bust in the wrong house??

[Uh-huh 0]

And some of you wonder why liberalism is a mental disorder

NOBODY is buying your "conservatives' beliefs are primarily driven by fear" BS you keep speewing.

 

Are you trying to convince yourself??

Good point.

Considering all of your posts come from right-wing fear, you're one of the most egregious examples of the syndrome.

 

Poor little scared neocon. Trembling in fear, crying out for someone to protect you.

 

BTW, if you're going to keep on using that line about liberalism being a mental disorder, you might have the decency to give it proper attribution (i.e. to Michael Savage, in case you didn't know).

[L5UT1ger 0]

Random cavity searches?? The topic is about having a warrant, which means it is signed BY A JUDGE saying the officers have PROBABLE CAUSE. From your last sentence, you should stay away from this crap. You know nothing about it. SNAP.

 

I was not addressing the topic, i was addressing the argument in that sentence, ok?

 

The logic is the same...get it? If you have nothing to hide, then it doesnt matter. My point being, the argument that if you dont have anything to hide, then you shouldnt care has no merit...I am attacking the argument itself and how it has no place when discussing anything related to criminal law, its a simple argument for folks that never studied the law. It gets the masses all excited and noding their heads, but its just unintelligent and ignorant.

 

Oh and in fact, to do a pat down, no not a random cavity search as that was an extreme example, they dont need a warrant, hell they dont even need probable cause. They need reasonable suspicion. See Terry v. Ohio. Reasonable suspicion is really hard to get, the officer draws from his experience and observations to make a determination if that person is suspicious. So instead of a cavity search, lets just make it a pat down.

 

You are walking out of the grocery store and cops decide you look suspicious so you get patted down. Knowing you, you have a rubber wang in your pocket for later on that evening. They make you take it out in front of your kids, your neighbors and boyfriend. That cool with you? Hell thats ok now with the law the way it is. BUT, i mean, if you have nothing to hide right?

[zmanzzzz 1]

But hey... it's just another in a ever-increasing list of issues where "Hey, if you have nothing to hide, it's no big deal."

 

Enjoy your civil liberties while they last!

 

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/nationworld/16055.php

 

why does the title of this thread have the word 'eliminate' in it?

[joneo 556]

I was not addressing the topic, i was addressing the argument in that sentence, ok?

 

The logic is the same...get it? If you have nothing to hide, then it doesnt matter. My point being, the argument that if you dont have anything to hide, then you shouldnt care has no merit...I am attacking the argument itself and how it has no place when discussing anything related to criminal law, its a simple argument for folks that never studied the law. It gets the masses all excited and noding their heads, but its just unintelligent and ignorant.

 

Oh and in fact, to do a pat down, no not a random cavity search as that was an extreme example, they dont need a warrant, hell they dont even need probable cause. They need reasonable suspicion. See Terry v. Ohio. Reasonable suspicion is really hard to get, the officer draws from his experience and observations to make a determination if that person is suspicious. So instead of a cavity search, lets just make it a pat down.

 

You are walking out of the grocery store and cops decide you look suspicious so you get patted down. Knowing you, you have a rubber wang in your pocket for later on that evening. They make you take it out in front of your kids, your neighbors and boyfriend. That cool with you? Hell thats ok now with the law the way it is. BUT, i mean, if you have nothing to hide right?

 

 

That is some insane ass arguing there. You betcha.

[D_House 0]

That is some insane ass arguing there. You betcha.

you lost!