Who needs the 4th amendment?

Quote:

Supreme Court gives police leeway in home searches

Officers may break in if they hear sounds and suspect that evidence is being destroyed, the justices say in an 8-1 decision.

Just hearing sounds? Well, it's easy to say you heard something, people moving, perhaps to get dressed and answer the door even.

I kinda think the Supreme Court has gone completely off the rails on this.

I know Jim Morrison has posted how (and it's hardly an exaggeration either) the police in Vegas do seem to find justification to shoot a number of suspects. And they seem to win most of the hearings too. Combine that with making it easier to bust down the door.

The case it's based off of. (the person in the complex sent to prison wasn't even the one they were looking for, so this is a warrentless intrusion as well)

Quote:

The Kentucky case began when police in Lexington sought to arrest a man who had sold crack cocaine to an informer. They followed the man to an apartment building, but lost contact with him. They smelled marijuana coming from one apartment. Though it turned out not to be the apartment of their suspect, they pounded on the door, called, "Police," and heard people moving inside.

At this, the officers announced they were coming in and broke down the door. Instead of the original suspect, they found Hollis King smoking marijuana and arrested him. They also found powder cocaine. King was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 11 years in prison.

here


Am I being alarmist?

Quote:

Am I being alarmist?

No, not alarmist. Although for some reason the legal question was narrow, note the Court said "the Kentucky state court should consider again whether police had faced an emergency situation in this case" .

I get quite upset with people who don't mind this flaunting of the Bill of Rights because they don't think it affects law abiding citizens, as is going on with some of the issues surrounding Homeland Security. I've heard plenty of people say "I'm not doing anything illegal, so I don't care if they listen to my phone conversations."

Actually, you could go down the entire list of the Bill of Rights and say "I'm not doing anything illegal, so it doesnt matter if all these protections go out the window. Make me safe."

PS: Here is a little video about knowing your rights that is endorsed by the NAACP and frankly tailored towards the Af/A community, however, IMO absolutely everybody should know this stuff.

edit: I put in the thing on the 4th amendment. You should be able to see all 4 segments with some effort

Man, the only thing I'm thinking is that I don't know enough. There are some pretty level headed justices, and this went 8-1, so there has to be more compelling reasoning going on here.

In the process of applying for a pistol permit, the police need to interview you. A County Sheriff came to my house for the interview; my wife was in the bathroom bathing our young son, I was working grave shift and therefore asleep. I woke to my wife shouting because the Sheriff 'knocked on the door and found it unlocked, so he came in 'thinking something was wrong''. She only heard someone walking through the house and almost to where she and our son were. What if she struck out in fear, or I came charging out of my bed with gun in hand fearing an intruder? This law is bad news.

I read that brief this morning as well. Smelling pot outside a door seems like well beyond the level of probable cause to me.

Edit: The issue on trial was really one of exigent circumstances -- whether smelling pot outside the door trumps the normal requirement of a warrant to enter a property. Here's what the ABA Journal had to say.

You can beat a radar speed ticket if he radar gun has not been properly calibrated within a specified time period.
When did the pigs last have their snouts calibrated ??

Quote: buzzpaff

When did the pigs last have their snouts calibrated ??

Remember to never call upon these people you hold in such distain for any help or protection for you or your family.

Quote: MathExtremist

Edit: The issue on trial was really one of exigent circumstances -- whether smelling pot outside the door trumps the normal requirement of a warrant to enter a property. Here's what the ABA Journal had to say.

Much like committing a very minor traffic violation, which gives police much latitude to go about stopping and investigating for discovery of some greater offense, this also makes it easier for police to end up in someone's home, poking around for some greater offense.

I sure don't favor the court going in that direction. Who do they think they're looking out for here?

Look up sarcasm in the dictionary. 4 policeman in my immediate family. Just did not
think this unreasonable search and seizure passed the smell test !~!!

Look up sarcasm in the dictionary. 4 policeman in my immediate family. Just did not
think this unreasonable search and seizure passed the smell test !~!!

Look up sarcasm in the dictionary. 4 policeman in my immediate family. Just did not
think this unreasonable search and seizure passed the smell test !~!!

Sorry if I took you out of context. I had just finished watching a dash cam murder of two police officers by two "sovereign" nutcases and the father of one of the officers (the local police Chief) arriving to find his son in a pool of blood in the street. I was not in the mood to hear anyone call these men pigs, whether in sarcasm or not.

Was my poor taste especially with the smell warrant. These were not police dogs.

Quote: buzzpaff

Look up sarcasm in the dictionary.

Emoticons are silly but they can be your friend in these matters.

Quote: MathExtremist

The issue on trial was really one of exigent circumstances -- whether smelling pot outside the door trumps the normal requirement of a warrant to enter a property. Here's what the ABA Journal had to say.

Quote: from article

Alito said the occupants of the apartment could have refused to open the door or to speak with the officers. Or they could have talked to police, but refused to allow them inside.

This seems a bit of an odd thing to say since the door was kicked in.

Quote: odiousgambit

This seems a bit of an odd thing to say since the door was kicked in.

Yes. And another thing about this, is the justices don't seem to take into account, whether it's an apartment, or motel room, that doors can be adjacent, or inside hallways cramped, and the "smelling pot" from one door or another may not be a clear cut action. But of course, suspicious noise may cause them to act on unsuspecting persons inside.