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 theyre 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 shouldnt receive the same privacy as citizens.
A felon who served his or her sentence time wouldn’t be affected by the proposed law. OTOH it only takes a stroke of a pen to push things to that point. What do other states do in this vein and how much luck have they had in suppressing crime thereby?
Sanford just saved the state a lot of money with this veto. First person that would have been searched without a warrant would have won the lottery.
Remember, the cops ARE NOT your friends.
Of course I did. And I didn’t loooooooose any train of thought, even though I know how to spell “lose”.
Two of my pet peeves here: First, “unconstitutional” isn’t a synonym for “bad idea”. Second, “unreasonable search and seizure” means that a warrant is sufficient but not necessary.
A person on parole is a prisoner, given the privilege of serving part of his sentence outside of prison. Just like inmates, they should be subject to warrantless searches.
Sanford is an adulterer and a soft on crime RINO who cares more about thugs than their law abiding victims.
“Look folks do damnable things in their youth. Sometimes they commit felonies. That doesnât mean that they should be second class citizens for life.”
First of all the warrantless searches would not be for life, but for the term of the parole.
If a thug received a 10 year sentence for attempted murder, and was paroled in 6, he would be subject to warrantless searches for the remaining 4 years he was supposed to be incarcerated.
Parole is essentially house arrest or ultr-minimum security prison. If the thugs don’t like the warrantless searches, let them serve their entire sentences behind bars.
Also, felons are, to some extent, second class citizens for life. They generally cannot own guns, vote, or be CEO’s of public corporations.
“Sanford just saved the state a lot of money with this veto. First person that would have been searched without a warrant would have won the lottery.”
Totally incorrect. Warrantless searches for parolees are the law in many states and have been found to be constitutional. Parolees are prisoners given the gift of serving part of their sentence on the outside.
“Remember, the cops ARE NOT your friends.”
But the thugs they lock up and the liberal politicians who help the thugs rob, rape, and murder you and your family members are?
LOL.
Happy Easter. He has risen.
Awww...group hug?
Hug.
Now about the Bears. Will they make it to the Superbowl this year? /s (line from Planes, Trains and Automobiles)
LOL
Sounds like you have a loose caboose to me.
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.