New York City to suspend the Fourth Amendment

What does being a liberal have to do with this? Way to spin shit in the light you want to. You say “where were the liberals when…” implying conservatives are behind this. So who’s responsible…liberals for allowing it to happen or conservative who pushed it to happen?

This is where conservatives’ knee-jerk law and order stance butts up against their professed adoration of the constitution. Should be interesting. Should you be allowed to clandestinely scan someone if he looks muslim?

Will the courts demand the police have ’cause’ to use the device?
or
Will the courts allow the ‘random’ use of the device?

You are walking down the street. In your jacket pocket, you have a cell phone, a lighter, and a keyring. They have shifted just right to look like a pistol. The police stop you, frisk you, and find that you had nothing dangerous. What would you do?

What if you had a knife in a sheath on your belt? The police find it and cuff you because you are carrying a deadly weapon. What now?

What happens when one too many blacks are arrested for this, will the courts declare that this item can’t be used on blacks? What about one too many illegal Hispanics? One too many Asians (Asian gangs are pretty big in New York)? After a while, the only people that this could be used on would be whites. So, again, who is being helped by this?

Having worked with some of these ‘scanners’ I believe there will be more women scanned than bad guys arrested.

I want to continue from #9 Flagwaver. ..
Carry something that DELIBERATELY looks like a gun – but isn’t. When you’re frisked, raise holy hell – publicly, loud, and often. Threaten a civil suit. Be an embarrassment.

I think the next time I go to NYC I’ll make a little aluminum foil “one finger salute” and wear it on my t-shirt under my shirt.

Hey, Mikey, I run tags on cars all the time, for all kinds of reasons. It’s 100% non-invasive, not a search, and I don’t need reasonable suspicion or probable cause to do it…although I generally have one or the other. Many of these cars are driven by people I know by sight, and I often run a warrant check or driver’s license check on them over the radio without making contact.

So explain to me how a cop checking someone’s tags, wanted status or DL status over the radio is a Fourth Amendment violation, please, and then explain how it relates to the topic at hand? Because I’m missing the connection.

I don’t give a rat’s fucking rip what letter a person has behind their name, if someone comes up to me and asks me to consent to a search without probable cause, they can go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

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.

I’m still wondering where “probable cause” arises to run a scan, search or whatever the fuck you want to call it.

Regarding both this scanner and airport backscatter machines:

“Those who would trade their essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither.” – Benjamin Franklin

Airport scanners, you can at least make the argument that consent is given with purchasing the plane ticket. These, no way. No way in Hell does this pass Constitutional muster, IMHO. I would support the ACLU going after Bloomberg, by name, for civil rights violations for each and every person “scanned”, whether anything was found or not.

Uh, Jack? Driving is a privilege, not a right. Read the Fourth Amendment which I posted above. How is a warrantless search without probable cause Constitutional in any way, shape, or fashion? Please don’t tell me walking down the street is now a privilege instead of a right.

I’ll do the little number thing to cut down on confusion.

Mikey #22: Okay, got ya, but one has nothing to do with the other. I think your example doesn’t hold water. And yeah, maybe these scans will be used without reasonable suspicion or probable cause, and if so, the question is still, is that unreasonable?

NHSparky #23: Fourth Amendment protection applies to individuals, be they walking, driving, or standing still. People exercising the privilege of driving are still covered. Look it up. Please don’t lecture me on the Fourth Amendment, friend. I have spent the better part of the last 30 years serving in positions that required me to take an oath to serve and protect the Constitution.

There is a very important word in the Fourth that a lot of folks seem to overlook, that word being “unreasonable.”

“How is a warrantless search without probable cause Constitutional in any way, shape, or fashion?” Where did I say it was? The question that will need to be answered, as I see it, is does the use of this scanner meet the legal definition of a search and is its use unreasonbale? I’m not sure, one way or the other. You seem to think it does, so maybe you can explain it to me.

AGEFMB #24: I had to look up motorcycle only checkpoints because I never heard of them. What does that have to do with what we are talking about here, please? I suppose you are for setting puppies on fire as well? I ask that because it makes as much sense as what you asked me. You have no clue what I am for, and I haven’t decided if I support the use of this scanner gizmo, which you would know I you did some reading. Stop throwing that strawman out there, please.

Yeah, Jack, sorry but I’ve run into too many overbearing thugs behind badges who have the attitude that they ARE the law, rather than enforcers of it, and that the Fourth Amendment means pretty much whatever the fuck they want it to mean for their convenience.

Please don’t get me wrong, I really don’t have an issue with law enforcement as a whole and they have a shitty job dealing with shitty people in shitty situations, but too many these days allow that to carry over. We really have gone from “to serve and protect” to “revenue generation and cool high-powered shit” in a very short period of time.

And just in case anyone was wondering:

“You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream–the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, ‘The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.'” -Ronaldus Maximus

And yeah, I get the feeling he’d be pissed if some police were simply scanning people randomly on the street for shits and giggles. We have the ability to do a lot of things, but just because we can doesn’t mean we should.

If you want to see what happens when police aren’t watched, just check out what has happened in Maricopa County, Az. Sheriff Joe was going to be tough on illegal immigration and he was until it started to become a witch hunt for anyone with a shiny brown face. A college class mate of mine, a Hispanic just like me, who has a tricked out ’64 Chevy pick-up was stopped and held for 45 minutes until the deputy was finally sure he was “legal”. Armando was born here in Phoenix and is an honorably discharged veteran of the United States Army! A federal judge has allowed a class action suit to proceed against the Maricopa County Sheriffs Dept for racial profiling, discrimination, etc. Yes, illegal immigration is a huge problem here in Arizona but when that pretext is used to trample the rights of American citizens, something much worse is happening.