Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (21319)	6/17/2006 12:07:38 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541674

Simply repeating your assertion that it's a sweeping change to the exclusionary rule without explaining why doesn't tell me anything useful. Best I can tell we are at a disagreement point rather than an explanation point. My argument is that if you drop the penalty for not knocking but keep the rule, you lay down a precedent for all uses of the exclusionary rule in the future. Your position is basically to take each moment separately. Understood. I see Scalia and crew as working a strategy; you apparently see them going on a case by case basis. Different reading of motives.