Replies

Amendment IV
"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."
*******************

To: exodus
Why do you think it is a 4th Amendment violation?
# 78 by JD86
************

The 4th Amendment, to me, enumerates our right to be left alone. Our private life is our own. If our neighbor asked us what we planned on doing, and why we were going to do it, we would be justified in telling him to mind his own business. If he saw us buy a car with cash, and demanded an accounting, we would be justified in telling him to mind his own business. Substitute "government" for "neighbor" and we still would be justified in saying "mind your own business."

The only legal exception would be in the investigation of wrong-doing, supported by the oath of an accuser. Even then, a limit would be set defining only investigation into relevant areas of the accused's life; wholesale interference with his privacy would not be allowed.

Contrast that with the pervasive scope of our government's surveillance today. ANY citizen can become the target of investigation, while doing nothing more than using cash to acquire property. With no oath from an accuser, without even a hint of wrong-doing, with no limit on the intenstiy of the violation of the citizen's privacy, a man has to justify every facet of his life to people who have no reason to be bothering him.

I see that as a clear violation of the restriction placed on government by the 4th Amendment.

Thank you for responding. I agree with your analysis of the 4th Amendment insofar as it goes enumerates our right to be left alone.

However, please allow me to try to make a distinction about invasion procedures and things readily available in public.
For example, you cannot be required to provide a blood sample without probable cause or a search warrant. However, when you walk down the street with your face uncovered for all to see you do not have an expectation of privacy and anyone may take your picture, including law enforcement officials. Now let me make the comparison to this law. No one can come into your house and demand an accounting of your cash without probable cause or a search warrant. However, when you walk into a public retail store and hand over $10,000 in cash you are affirmatively giving up privacy of that transaction. You may not agree with that last sentence but in this case I believe the public good of tracking and catching criminals and terrorists outweighs the private desire to pay in cash when other means are so readily available. Thank you for considering my position.