- Apr 19, 2005
- 7,461
- 500
- 126
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-scotus-lapd-search-20140226,0,3720623.story
Another nail in the coffin.
Another nail in the coffin.
Last edited by a moderator:
Still requires consent. Don't room with people you don't trust and this shouldn't apply to you. I can see where this would set a lot of people off, but it's not completely unreasonable.
Now take a shot, kick the dog, and snort a line, hit me with your best flames.
However, this bit by Alito is pretty
"Even with modern technological advances, the warrant procedure imposes burdens on the officers who wish to search [and] the magistrate who must review the warrant application."
He's basically saying that the existing system of warrants is fucked, so we're just gonna skirt it.
Cops can do whatever they want.
Don't do nothing wrong and you have nothing to worry about -- Obligatory!!http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-scotus-lapd-search-20140226,0,3720623.story
Another nail in the coffin.
Fuck the Netherlands. Americans could give a shit about your laws and practices.
The main thread of concern is what's going on here in the US. Fuck a lot of law enforcement and fed govt and whoever else thinks they have the right to search my property without my say so (or a search warrant). They better have a damn good reason to search my shit, other than some NSA bullshit spy-evidence or they will get an ass full of brass. That's my right as an American citizen.
Fuck the Netherlands. Americans could give a shit about your laws and practices.
The main thread of concern is what's going on here in the US. Fuck a lot of law enforcement and fed govt and whoever else thinks they have the right to search my property without my say so (or a search warrant). They better have a damn good reason to search my shit, other than some NSA bullshit spy-evidence or they will get an ass full of brass. That's my right as an American citizen.
I'm not seeing a great expansion here...can someone help me out?
This quote from Alito's opinion is rather scary:
"A warrantless consent search is reasonable and thus consistent with the 4th Amendment irrespective of the availability of a warrant," he said in Fernandez vs. California. "Even with modern technological advances, the warrant procedure imposes burdens on the officers who wish to search [and] the magistrate who must review the warrant application."
Apparently, we should throw out our 4th Amendment rights for the sake of convenience of the police.
So don't live with people you don't trust?
I didn't read it that way, I read it more like "even though the process is getting smoothing / quicker, there is still a burden associated with it no matter what". I don't think he was saying that because of that the search was reasonable, he was just saying that there is still a burden associated with it. Maybe I read it incorrectly though.
So every American will have too live alone just to be sure the police do not intimidate there way into your home.
It's not just "your" home. You share a residence why can't the other person allow people into their home.
Perhaps. The other side of the coin is that this ruling allows someone else to give away your Constitutional protection against unreasonable searches.