View Poll Results: Should stopping and frisking be illegal?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • NO

    9 33.33%
  • YES

    17 62.96%
  • I DON'T KNOW

    1 3.70%
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 84 of 84

Thread: Stop and Frisk practices

  1. #81
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by FinnMacCool View Post
    Isn't there some kind of ammendment about unfair search without probable cause?

    I think it might have been the fourth.
    You are correct, it is the fourth. Improper search and seizure is banned.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  2. #82
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,090

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    random warrantless searches are by definition unconstitutional.

  3. #83
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,407

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    random warrantless searches are by definition unconstitutional.
    Yet courts... even the Supreme Court... will sometimes allow them. Under the guise of "compelling interest". To me, "compelling interest" is essentially the court saying, "Yeah, we know it's wrong and/or unconstitutional, but we're going to allow it anyway. Get over it.".

  4. #84
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Yet courts... even the Supreme Court... will sometimes allow them. Under the guise of "compelling interest". To me, "compelling interest" is essentially the court saying, "Yeah, we know it's wrong and/or unconstitutional, but we're going to allow it anyway. Get over it.".
    The problem with compelling interest is that enforcement agencies are taking it too far. The limited scope was to be used for very rare situations that arose in which a warrant would take more time than was available to stop an in-progress attack, crime, conspiracy, etc. The big problem is now it's being used to say..."oh well, if it takes one ________off the street what's the big deal?" Well the big deal is that I don't have to prove my innocence in America, especially when I am walking down the street/driving, and minding my own business not committing crimes. We live in a "must prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt" legal society, this includes proper due process.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •