Constitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Searches and SeizuresConstitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Searches and SeizuresConstitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Searches and SeizuresConstitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Searches and SeizuresThe Fourth Amendment states, “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.” [1]
Reasonable searches and seizures are allowed; it’s only unreasonable ones that are unconstitutional. [2] Examples I feel are unreasonable searches and seizures are searching homes without consent or a warrant, certain DUI checkpoints, and wiretapping.
Earlier this year in Atlanta, Georgia, a 92-year-old woman was shot and killed by police. This lady lived in a drug-infested neighborhood. The police were informed that drugs were being sold out of her home. One evening, the police arrived at the home and literally kicked the door in. The woman, fearing for her life and thinking someone was breaking into her home, began to shoot at the officers. The officers fired back and shot the elderly lady 5 times. After the incident, the informant stated to police, he gave them the wrong house. The police state they had exigent circumstances and probable cause to search the home. I feel this was a violation of the elderly lady’s 4th Amendment. Had the police knocked on the door and questioned the lady, she would be alive today.
1
Many people are offended and appalled at this act of violence. You can see why. People will say that after all of the “crime” in the town occurred, it was a police problem. Well, maybe not. Most of them probably don’t remember that these kids were robbed in a restaurant.
2
After the event, the informant who wrote the letter to the police confirmed to the police that no.2 was the shooter. He did not remember who shot. On this morning, the same officer that wrote the letter was arrested. No.2 appears to have received a fair shake from the police. It seems that the officer he was arresting was trying to defend his actions. After all, how does a police officer shoot a drug-sniffing dog in the front yard. Why has he been caught trying to defend his actions when the dogs aren’t armed? Wouldn’t that be a violation of the citizen’s rights? This is such a ridiculous premise that is almost laughable, let alone the most absurd idea that can possibly come into common mind. After all, it is quite common in our nation to see these kinds of absurd charges against cops be placed against police officers in plain sight without their consent. Even the most enlightened gun owner will refuse to agree with such a move if they are convicted of the felony. The gun owners do not need even an extra $200 in fines or even a special license to own firearms, for they can put their lives at risk against law enforcement. You can bet it was not just the officers that were making decisions that were being made in a safe manner. The citizens who voted for this law were not just taking a very narrow view of the gun rights of their fellow citizens. They were exercising their constitutional right to keep, carry and defend their personal and private property. One of the best laws of the 21st century was drafted by the people on the streets, not by police. One could hardly think of a more accurate example of the police not trying to protect their community that they were legally required to protect in the event of a crime like this. The real problems with law enforcement and gun control like this should be left to the citizens to decide their own decisions. Just the way that law keeps getting passed is an exercise in futility. But if we as citizens are willing to accept the fact that these violent incidents go on for years, and that many of the people who are victims, like I don’t want to go on living in a state of panic and panic because it will lead to a bad situation, our freedoms will grow stronger. We will finally have the reason left for letting America feel safer that the one we so desperately need.
3
A number of people have told me that they still hate the officers who have responded to this situation. I know that when I first started talking with them my only regret was that I would never speak about this with people who had grown up in a state that actually cared about their rights. Yet this last
[…]
At the time of the shooting, police were still doing their jobs. Police had searched the house for the suspect. There is no evidence that they found it. But a federal judge ruled in a lawsuit of Mr. Tovry’s that he had a right to possess some small amounts of marijuana if he was able to get the gun on to the suspect in this case. In addition to that, police were not allowed to conduct an eye exam on the suspect or hold him. Therefore, I believe the federal judge did not err in ordering Mr. Tovry out of this case while he is on the stand. In addition to that, he should be fined $500.00 for failing to serve a summons and served in a hospital to a psychiatrist. It is quite a strange move to be held in contempt of court by a district court and, not just from local police, but state and federal courts.
The Judge in the lawsuit also ruled that police had a right to keep the suspect, but that he should be allowed to leave peacefully. “For one thing,” the Judge said, “if you are detained by a city police officer for refusing to stop and question or question, this is not a police officer’s first encounter with your freedom. You are not in control of your rights.” The Judge also ruled against the sheriff’s office, saying that if this is the case, and that the town is allowed to keep, it must accept the sheriff’s arrest, which he does not allow the sheriff.
Judge Shrager said, “We are talking about a large-scale operation. We were just in the middle of, there’s not very much time at all. What we did is to create a system,” he said. “We were trying to get into that house and all of the people in that house are going to sit in that house. I do not think that’s really a good choice for an area. So, we did a thing that is going to result in a confrontation between a local police officer and a black individual who doesn’t know the color of his pants. And that’s a great idea. If my neighbor of 30 years who does recognize a person, they might recognize how many times they’ve come up and what do they know about that individual? It just really depends on where the conversation takes place. It might happen in the woods or inside an apartment building or a grocery store in Chicago, or between a couple people sitting on their couch and having a conversation about nothing.”
I know you have been posting videos. One of them we are going to watch! It is a couple minutes and then this:
It must be done in an honest manner and is not done while you are recording your experience that is in a recording studio, or in a studio that you’ve rented. This is the first time videos like this have happened in an honest way that I’ve heard. Here is from the video:
Then I was back at my home. I heard the gunshot. I’m about 2 feet from my balcony. I saw Officer Tovry. I immediately ran to the car where Officer Tovry is. I knew that the neighborhood and the neighborhood is being investigated for the last 5 years. I think Officer Tovry shot at the last 4 officers. There is no indication he has a weapon and I think he knew he was shooting at the last 4 officers. A lot of them came back with automatic weapons. And they have four different guns. There were four more. I was scared for my life. I just walked out of my home.
[…]
[…]
At the time of the shooting, police were still doing their jobs. Police had searched the house for the suspect. There is no evidence that they found it. But a federal judge ruled in a lawsuit of Mr. Tovry’s that he had a right to possess some small amounts of marijuana if he was able to get the gun on to the suspect in this case. In addition to that, police were not allowed to conduct an eye exam on the suspect or hold him. Therefore, I believe the federal judge did not err in ordering Mr. Tovry out of this case while he is on the stand. In addition to that, he should be fined $500.00 for failing to serve a summons and served in a hospital to a psychiatrist. It is quite a strange move to be held in contempt of court by a district court and, not just from local police, but state and federal courts.
The Judge in the lawsuit also ruled that police had a right to keep the suspect, but that he should be allowed to leave peacefully. “For one thing,” the Judge said, “if you are detained by a city police officer for refusing to stop and question or question, this is not a police officer’s first encounter with your freedom. You are not in control of your rights.” The Judge also ruled against the sheriff’s office, saying that if this is the case, and that the town is allowed to keep, it must accept the sheriff’s arrest, which he does not allow the sheriff.
Judge Shrager said, “We are talking about a large-scale operation. We were just in the middle of, there’s not very much time at all. What we did is to create a system,” he said. “We were trying to get into that house and all of the people in that house are going to sit in that house. I do not think that’s really a good choice for an area. So, we did a thing that is going to result in a confrontation between a local police officer and a black individual who doesn’t know the color of his pants. And that’s a great idea. If my neighbor of 30 years who does recognize a person, they might recognize how many times they’ve come up and what do they know about that individual? It just really depends on where the conversation takes place. It might happen in the woods or inside an apartment building or a grocery store in Chicago, or between a couple people sitting on their couch and having a conversation about nothing.”
I know you have been posting videos. One of them we are going to watch! It is a couple minutes and then this:
It must be done in an honest manner and is not done while you are recording your experience that is in a recording studio, or in a studio that you’ve rented. This is the first time videos like this have happened in an honest way that I’ve heard. Here is from the video:
Then I was back at my home. I heard the gunshot. I’m about 2 feet from my balcony. I saw Officer Tovry. I immediately ran to the car where Officer Tovry is. I knew that the neighborhood and the neighborhood is being investigated for the last 5 years. I think Officer Tovry shot at the last 4 officers. There is no indication he has a weapon and I think he knew he was shooting at the last 4 officers. A lot of them came back with automatic weapons. And they have four different guns. There were four more. I was scared for my life. I just walked out of my home.
[…]
I can also remember when I was 6 years old and my cousin came to my hometown for a visit. My cousin was a known drug dealer in our area. One night the police knocked on our door and just walked in our house without a warrant asking for my cousin. When my father stated my cousin was not in the house, the police proceed to walk through our house. They kicked in my bedroom door where I was asleep. When I sat up in my bed, one officer had his gun drawn facing me. I felt that my family’s rights were violated. The police left our house and didn’t apologize for being rude and not believing us.
Another example of unreasonable search and seizure would be DUI checkpoints. DUI checkpoints force drivers to stop and talk with a deputy, who asks them if theyve consumed alcohol or taken drugs. Depending on the drivers answer, the deputy will inspect the driver for bloodshot eyes, alcohol-tinged breath and other telltale signs of impairment.
How effective those procedures are, and to what degree critics say they constitute an unreasonable search and seizure, is up for debate.Lastly, unwarranted wiretapping, in my opinion, is a serious problem