If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
People go overboard with this warrant part. I have to believe the don't understand the constitution.
Once there was a reason for the arrest, it isn't unreasonable.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.
There is always a tension between the needs of the state to gather evidence, and the individual's right to privacy (which, by the way, isn't explicitly protected by the Constitution).I don't see how people can see nothing wrong with the government tricking people into giving them their property. It's crazy to me.
A decision either way is going to run afoul of one of those two needs.
Meanwhile, there is a justifiable purpose for law enforcement to gather this evidence. It's unlikely that police are going to pop everyone for a violent felony just to get their DNA in a database.
Plus, police officers are allowed to use deception and "tricks" in an interrogation, and a defense attorney is entitled to explain to the jury that the defendant was coerced and deceived into confessing.