Posted on 04/03/2010 1:23:29 PM PDT by smokingfrog
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford has vetoed a bill allowing officers to search people released on probation or parole without a warrant.
The Republican governor said he sees no evidence that giving law enforcement the additional authority would decrease crime or reduce recidivism. He said the protection from unreasonable searches is an essential safeguard of liberty in America.
The measure allows officers to bypass going to a judge for a warrant before searching people on probation or parole. Inmates must agree to the searches before they’re released. They can search the person, the vehicle the person owns or is driving, and any possessions.
House Speaker Bobby Harrell has said probationers or parolees are still being punished and shouldn’t receive the same privacy as citizens.
We are on a very steep, very slippery slope now. I don't want any more loopholes for you-know-who's thugs to invade my privacy.
It’s a slippery slope, I’m glad Sanford did this.
In many states an excon does not regain his 2nd Amendment rights.
Not only do I have no constitutional problem with warrantless searches for parolees, I encourage them.
No.
Look folks do damnable things in their youth. Sometimes they commit felonies. That doesn’t mean that they should be second class citizens for life.
If they get out of prison and clean up their act, that’s all we should ask of them.
This is more about expanding the ability of the police to enter people’s homes on a whim, than it is real public safety issue. If there is reasonable cause, these departments can get a warrant easy enough.
Once one group can be targeted for warrantless searches, the easier it is to expand the people eligible for this sort of thing. For instance, how would you like it if contributors to this and other public forums were included into that group?
Don’t sign off on this. It’s a ruse at your expense.
In NC, if you are on probation or parole, your PO can search any time, any where without a warrant. It’s a condition of probation/parole. I have no problem with it.
Uh, it is not only a convenience to the state.
First, it costs a tremendous amount of money to house individuals. That is your tax dollars.
Second, it offers a citizen a pathway back to society and becoming a good citizen.
Third, parole serves as a cost effective means of supervising a parolee to ensure they are taking their medications, getting the psychological help they need or taking behavior modification classes.
Fourth, the parolee can re-engage in work and prove they are worthy to be released from the supervision of the government.
And finally, a parolee is a citizen of the USA and has constitutinal rights, just as you and I do.
If the state or any other jurisdiction has not evidence or probable cause that a citizen is violating the law or endangering others, then NO ONE has the right to violate your rights.
Can they come into the house you are paroled in? Sure.
Can they search your house or car or property for no apparent reason? Absolutely not.
Can they require urine or drug test. You bet.
Which part of the constitution does a citizen give up in your utopian world where Precog supercedes the right of the individual?
On the 2nd amendment, no one should deprived of their right otherwise they have lost all other rights under the Constitution.
Of course, some who engages in a violent crime, with the use of a firearm should be excluded but I can think of no other category where a person should be deprived their rights.
Nope I don’t think so. Parolee’s are still under the control of the State correctional department.
They just get to go home because they aren’t considered dangerous enough to keep in prison, but they still have not completed their debt to society.
Now I don’t think the police can go ransack their house looking for something, but I think they can stop by and take a visual look at any time.
Once probation/parole is over though I think they should have the same rights, including the unwritten right to privacy.
A random drug test would be a warrantless search, would it not? Even more so than having your person or vehicle searched.
Indeed, in many states even after the sentence is complete, felons do not retain the right to vote or carry firearms.
Parolees have significant restrictions on their freedom, including having to report periodically to a parole officer. In fact, I am very surprised that in SC they do not have to submit to anything the police ask. At the very least, the parole officer should be able to order it.
Sorry, they are deprived of liberty by due process of law. As long as they are a parolee, they are still serving their sentence. It is a reward for good behavior given at the discretion of the people.
If a parolee doesn’t like the conditions, then he can simply not apply for parole and sweat the rest of the sentence out in jail.
There is no right to parole.
Exactly! Those who protest too much need to be checked...they usually have a personal interest in the outcome.
Searching them for no reason at all or insufficient reason for a warrant is harassment plain and simple.
Like it or not, felons are still citizens.
Not yet.
I have no personal gain for advocating the decriminalization or legalization of marijuana. None.
I have no personal gain for advocating that convicts get full voting and 2A rights restored as soon as their sentences are completed.
Wait, I lied. I feel that the more I advocate maximum rights and liberties for citizens then the greater my individual freedoms will be and the more I advocate restricting others’ them the more restrictions I will eventually face.
Either one advocates maximum freedom or one doesn’t....and not just when it is personally convenient.
The major problem with this bill is that it did not distinguish between searching the parolees property and the property of the one the parolee lives with. If you let a parolee live with you, they would be free to search your home with no warrant.
Not sure why they left it that way because the bill did distinguish between the parolees vehicle and a vehicle that the parolee only borrowed or rode in.
The Governor was right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.