Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Um, in order for the government to even be required to need a search warrant to conduct a search, a person has to have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place to be searched. If we have no expectation of privacy, the government would never need a warrant. The 4th amendment does say anything about a lot of stuff. Like I said, the 4th amendment doesn't say anything about the government needing probable cause to make a warrantless arrest - but the USSC does require that. It doesn't say anything about the police needing probable cause for a warrantless search - but the USSC does require that (with exceptions, of course.
Wrong yet again, the Fourth Amendment does say that, specifically: "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..." Meaning, if probable cause exists, no warrant need be issued. If there is no probable cause, then a warrant is required.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rimmerama
So, perhaps you saw "expectation of privacy," and confused that with "right of privacy." Which we do now have, but that's sort of a penumbra type of deal.
No, I cited you verbatim, "Once upon a time, our right to privacy..." Apparently you are confused, because there is no constitutionally protected right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rimmerama
Further, even if the police have probable cause, often times they still need a warrant for search and seizure (not for arrests).
Per Wikipedia:
If they have probable cause, then law enforcement may search and/or seize evidence without a court-issued warrant. If law enforcement has neither probable cause nor a court-issued warrant, then nothing they search and/or seize may be used as evidence against you.
You might want to read the actual case instead of relying on Wikipedia.
Quote:
We decline to adopt this formulation of the issues. In the first place, the correct solution of Fourth Amendment problems is not necessarily promoted by incantation of the phrase "constitutionally protected area." Secondly, the Fourth Amendment cannot be translated into a general constitutional "right to privacy."
Source: Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
The article states that the usefulness of the radar technology at this point is about 100 meters under the best ideal conditions. These things fly at 8000 feet. And even if the radar worked at that distance, it could not "see" anything but heat spots indicating a human or animal was present. They cannot actually "see" anything. The only reason these things work at all in the wars we have now is due to the fact that it is desert and we do not have to deal with clouds, trees and all the other obstructions found elsewhere in the world. If these things we the end all of everything the military would not keep hitting a dozen or so civilians for every target they shoot at.
you may say, what does this have to do with drones - everything.
If they can make their own search warrants it makes their job easier, but at the price of our right to privacy and our freedoms.
The article states that the usefulness of the radar technology at this point is about 100 meters under the best ideal conditions. These things fly at 8000 feet. And even if the radar worked at that distance, it could not "see" anything but heat spots indicating a human or animal was present. They cannot actually "see" anything. .
You mustn't have been around before it was finally admitted Stealth aircraft existed....the planes had been flying for years.
Quote:
The only reason these things work at all in the wars we have now is due to the fact that it is desert and we do not have to deal with clouds, trees and all the other obstructions found elsewhere in the world
There are trees,clouds and other obstructions in those places.
I looked at a few links including your own, the all seem to be the same article regurgitated almost word for word...
I'll bet any amount of money some business overseas knows more about me and my habits then the US government ever will.
If the American government want to peer through my walls and watch me play WoW couldn't care less...
That's the problem with this generation, that take your liberties for granted, and remain complacent - until it's too late. You are willing to go to other countries to kill in the name of freedom, but not protect your own here at home.
Wrong yet again, the Fourth Amendment does say that, specifically: "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..." Meaning, if probable cause exists, no warrant need be issued. If there is no probable cause, then a warrant is required.
Excepting a few situations, probable cause alone is not sufficient to search, one must have probable cause and a warrant (exigence, consent, plain view, automobiles, and administrative searches are the exceptions).
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
It says it right in the text that a search warrant must be based on probable cause, and particularly describe the place to be searched and things to be seized.
Quote:
No, I cited you verbatim, "Once upon a time, our right to privacy..." Apparently you are confused, because there is no constitutionally protected right.
Well, this is a tangent, but we do have a right to privacy, what do you think the basis of Roe v. Wade was? But thank you for pointing out where I misspoke, I do believe I clarified that position.
Quote:
If they have probable cause, then law enforcement may search and/or seize evidence without a court-issued warrant. If law enforcement has neither probable cause nor a court-issued warrant, then nothing they search and/or seize may be used as evidence against you.
You might want to read the actual case instead of relying on Wikipedia.
Sorry, chief, but police can't just search based on probable cause alone. There are only a few situations where a search warrant is not required, and I've already gone over them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
