That isn't true. It doesn't say a warrant is required, it states the conditions to issue a warrant. The protection is against the definition of "reasonable." A warrant is a tool that orders the action. A warrant isn't always required.According to the fourth amendmen they may not do this without a warrant.
Also according to the fourth the reasons they give are not justifications for issueing a warant.
Suspicion is not probable cause.It is illegal to treasure hunt indian artifacts and the fact that this guy has so many is suspicious. Years ago we were camping in an alcove in Utah which was very cool. It had petroglyph's on the back wall and it was a kick to spend a few nights in an ancient dwelling. While digging a fire pit I cut a small piece of what looked like fishing line that I assumed some other camper left there as trash at some point. Turns out it was an alarm to guard against artifact hunters and it wasn't long until a BLM cop showed up. I had some splainin to do.:lol:
That isn't true. It doesn't say a warrant is required, it states the conditions to issue a warrant. The protection is against the definition of "reasonable." A warrant is a tool that orders the action. A warrant isn't always required.
"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."
Now I do see this as unreasonable as unless there is proof he obtained these improperly, then they are his property.
If that's the case, every treasure hunter in the entire world has just been rendered unemployed, and a potential felon.
I don't consider it theft if the old guy has been walking around, picking up arrowheads off the ground for the last 80 years. If that's the case, every treasure hunter in the entire world has just been rendered unemployed, and a potential felon.
If i am 25% native american do 25% of the artifacts belong to me?
Suspicion is not probable cause.
Maybe he had an Indian friend he inherited them from. Unless you know the facts... speculation and suspicion is not probable cause.
You may not care, and you may do as you please.
But the way you're talking it sounds like you have a right, by law, to do those things.
And most likely, almost certainly, you don't.
[financial compensation] That's another matter entirely, and I don't entirely disagree with your sentiment.