Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fundamentally Fair

Second time, please cite them specifically.


211 posted on 04/09/2008 2:07:56 PM PDT by marajade (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies ]


To: marajade
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Emphasis mine.

Who swore the supporting oath or affirmation?

The description in the warrant of the person to be seized was wrong.

214 posted on 04/09/2008 2:11:17 PM PDT by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

To: marajade; 1035rep; Domandred
Second time, please cite them specifically.

Second time, read the thread. I was responding to a poster who was responding to post 8. It went like this:

Domandred: So it’s okay to throw out the 4th Amendment when children are being raped?

1035rep: God I hope so.

Me: What other amendments should we suspend then?

I never asserted that any amendment was violated. My comment was TO 1035rep and it was about his assertion that he hoped, to God no less, that the 4th would be suspended in the case of child rape.

Class dismissed.

244 posted on 04/09/2008 3:55:04 PM PDT by Fundamentally Fair (I wrote the original “That’s The Ticket” Skit for SNL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson