Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-04-2013, 06:41 PM
 
62,501 posts, read 28,720,972 times
Reputation: 18394

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by caughtinaweb View Post
It doesn't matter if it's a ghetto, or a cluster of multi million dollar mansions, it's still unconstitutional.



The problem is that it violates the 4th amendment. Unless they have probable cause and a warrant they have no right to be doing searches. Should the law abiding citizens be searched too? This is done at random, after all. Someone who is obeying the law and living their lives hurting nobody should never have a police officer and his dog inside their home searching through their things. Period.
Just what part of "probable cause" aren't you getting? You assume a lot and don't even know the details of this search. People like you are what gives LE nightmares and makes their jobs harder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-04-2013, 06:47 PM
 
Location: Johnson City, Tn
973 posts, read 1,447,848 times
Reputation: 788
Ok Oldglory... where is the probable cause in this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2013, 10:10 PM
 
179 posts, read 192,159 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
Just what part of "probable cause" aren't you getting? You assume a lot and don't even know the details of this search. People like you are what gives LE nightmares and makes their jobs harder.
Where is the probable cause in using a drug dog to search through people's homes that have nothing to do with the making and selling of drugs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:38 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,470,334 times
Reputation: 22471
I suspect the liberals would have no problem if the government looks for guns on government owned and controlled property (or privately owned and paid for property) but they want the welfare crowd's "rights" when it comes to drug trafficking and dealing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 02:28 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,442,461 times
Reputation: 3141
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
I suspect the liberals would have no problem if the government looks for guns on government owned and controlled property (or privately owned and paid for property) but they want the welfare crowd's "rights" when it comes to drug trafficking and dealing.
Yep. They want to do what they want to do. The constitution has meaning only insofar as it enables them to accomplish something they want to accomplish. Otherwise it is just an obstacle to be overcome.

What's amazing to me is how so many people have adopted this philosophy. The idea that taking the law into your hands is granting your opponents the same power doesn't seem to occur to some people. "I think Obama should do X" Well, he doesn't have the authority to do X, so why should he be able to do it irrespective of whether or not it's a good idea? What about if a Republican gets into office and he uses the same methods to do something you hate? Then it's your fault for letting Obama get away with it. I haven't seen even one single Democrat say Obama was wrong for appointing those people as recess appointments when the Senate wasn't in recess. Does that mean a Republican can start putting whoever he wants wherever he wants whenever he wants and the Democrat Senators get no oversight on that?

I want rule of law even when it disadvantages me, because the rule of law itself is valuable to me. Sure, if I don't like a particular law I'll try to change it. But I won't try to get around it, because the law itself needs to mean something.

I read a news story a while back about Obama administration officials discussing whether they should try to find a way to shut down Fox News. What??? The fact that they could even sit down and have such a conversation in America is just astounding to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 03:29 AM
 
Location: The Brat Stop
8,347 posts, read 7,210,850 times
Reputation: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
I suspect the liberals would have no problem if the government looks for guns on government owned and controlled property (or privately owned and paid for property) but they want the welfare crowd's "rights" when it comes to drug trafficking and dealing.
Wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top