The slippery slope of good intentions strikes again. This is a BAD LAW. There are still things called search warrants folks.
I have to agree with the majority here. I do not like this at all. The Constitution is still the law of the land and ALL of the amendments are relevant. Limiting 4th amendment rights is just as bad as limiting 2nd amendment rights or any other right granted by the Constitution.
I'm not arguing that. I was stating many personal moral barometer. I agree that the Constitution protects everyone.
No worries dude. I understand your points too, since you're an attorney and privy to info of police corruption. I get it, and I do think power corrupts. It happens in corporate world, social circles, and in governing. I know good feds and bad feds, and even the good feds abuse their power to smaller scale, like when someone tells me they ran the record of a mutual a friend, and the dirt that comes up. It's benign, but I know it's technically wrong. I don't 100% buy the slippery slope theory, and we are talking about balancing the obligations of government so there is legitimate reason to have those powers. Since it's already happening, I'm just more concerned with the real world impact...or rather, I'm curious about that. I definitely agree that there is an erosion of our Constitutional Rights under Obama and Bush before that, but I just personally don't see it as thaaat terrible if the right people can check themselves and be 100% responsible and professional feds. I'm telling you man, for me more than most, I really despise hardcore criminals and the detriment to society that they do.
25 and naive. Most people in the government are only concerned about keeping their job or keeping their elected position. There are a small minority who work hard to grab as much power as possible, allowing the ambivalent to abuse these powers to keep their positions. The government isn't full of corrupt individuals for the most part. W/out the checks and balances, it certainly will become that way.
yeah, there's no room for people who want to make a difference. because, you know, public service pays that well. 25% of Yale Law School grads work in public service after graduation. The median starting salary for public service is something like $60,000 for Yale grads. Private BigLaw firms? $160,000 at least. Of course, that 25% just needs to have that "education commissioner" title to validate their lives. It's easy to be a cynic.
I myself hate limitation being placed on the Constitution---and this itself coupled with Thomas Andrews Drake's case and TrailBlazer points to an Obama Administration that simply has sacrificed principles for "security", a process started by Bush, but finished by Obama. But there's no point being a cynic who makes general assertions about everyone in government--- you want to get at the real bad apples. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer#ixzz2KXamQqCo
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin.
That's the second time it's been quoted itt, and both times without any warrant or discussion about the validness or applicability of the quote. Is this electronic search zone considered essential liberty? Is acting on valid intel temporary safety? Why wouldn't anyone "deserve" both? That's stupid. Even the stupid deserve protections. I hate quotes, even back in hs LD debating days...such a distraction. And I'm not even strongly on one side of this issue. I want to see studies on it in action. I want to know if these feds are just going fishing with these rules or are there indicators or is there legit intel? If this is the new america (which has been since 9/11), then I want to see studies documenting the actions and results.
I would think that, if there were valid intel, that intel could easily rise to the level of probable cause. If there is credible intel, the case law surrounding the Fourth Amendment allows for a warrantless search. In that instance, no exception is needed. That is what makes this topic so alarming. The valid uses of that power have long been provided for by the courts.
Good law does good things GREAT LAW PREVENTS BAD THINGS This law opens up all sorts of bad from abuse standpoint You are expecting 100% responsibility and professionalism??? Rocket River
Yes, exactly. These aren't programmed robots enforcing these laws. These are everyday folks, like the rest of us, who susceptible to any number of things that might encourage them to abuse their abilities.
When does someone not abuse their power? Every single profession has people who abuse their power, that's just part of human nature. To act surprised that a few will abuse this power is dishonest.
I'm being hopeful more than expectant. Let's be clear, it is an erosion of people's rights in the borderlands, but hopefully some good intel and convictions of scum can come out of this. This is interesting. I'm going to bring this up the next time I talk to a border agent or cop friend. I like real-world examples...helps me understand better.
When those in power decide that constitutional protections against authoritarian abuses are getting in the way of "getting the job done" and no one can stop them from putting loopholes in place, you have to be concerned about the direction in which we are heading.
Some data for thought: Although the supreme court has not yet weighed in (that I can remember or verify via google)...at the moment you cannot be compelled to provide a password in court (5th amendment).
No I don't live down there. I used to hangout down there and have friends down there. If you read my two tl;dr posts itt, then I don't think they come off as cavalier? What does that mean? I'm a simpleton. I'm just a pessimist, I guess, where I rarely think the little guy is going to win. In this case, I'm sort of accepting the erosion of rights on the borderlands as inevitable if the US gov't wants to do that, and I'm just trying to analyze the real-world impact. I mean, other than someone who actually lives down there, I think I've spent more time there than every other person itt, particularly Eagle Pass. So I'm just trying to process how my life and the life of my friends would be different. And I have friends on both sides of the border and both sides of the law. I do not associate with scum though, which I have defined as hardcore criminals who use intimidation and violence to get whatever they want without regard to the well being of anyone who gets in their way. And the silver lining to me is that I hope these new powers are used by the good feds focusing only on scum.
