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

To: abundy

56 posted on 01/04/2002 12:36:31 PM PST by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: Jhoffa_
Inventive idea - I like it.

My humble suggestion would be to arrest the offender outside his residence and get a search warrant if he/she won't give consent. Suspect is secured at police HQ so the only reason the police would need to kick in the door is if the moron didn't hand over the keys.

Nice, tidy, and the Constitution is respected.

Will this work 100% of the time? No. But creative police work requires imagination.

Check the news wires today - SCOTUS has agreed to hear a case on whether police should notify people on public transportation what their rights are regarding searches and seizures....think about that issue. That means they haven't been. But more importantly; WHY IN GOD'S NAME IS ANYONE ASKING THAT QUESTION? How much more basic is it that agents of the State should be required to inform CITIZENS WHOM THEY SERVE that they have specific rights? I know the Roscoe's of the world can't get their pea-sized brains around this issue - but I can tell by your thread you are beginning to see the light.

For the State to be actually arguing against a requirement that police inform people of their rights should scare the hell out of everyone in this country. Because if the SCOTUS rules with the State on this issue it won't be used just in the WOD.

This is what I'm talking about - the WOD has perverted basic Constitutional issues to this extreme.

231 posted on 01/05/2002 3:42:07 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | 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