SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
James Seagrove
one_less
To: Lane3 who wrote (3303)12/23/2016 12:21:39 PM
From: i-node2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 357776
 
Several amendments have been weakened over time by the Courts. Particularly, Search & Seizure, over time, offers little protection to a person who is "suspected" of marijuana possession. If one does not acquiesce to a warrantless search, a dog will be brought in to deliver almost immediate "suspicion" followed by a full on search. It is coercion to allow a search, IMO.

Only a couple years ago the Court decided to allow strip-searches of persons who aren't even suspected of carrying contraband, regardless of crime, if they are going into a jail for unrelated reasons. Now, you and I can see times where you would want to do that. So, the Court just took away the right. Not how this is supposed to work.

I'm sure the Congress does it, too -- but I feel the Court has gone just too far on some essential liberties. That is not to say a left-leaning court would have done better; it probably would just tinker with other parts of it.

It is what they do.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext