Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The 4th Amendment
Political Topics And Discussion > All Things Political > US Political Topics
KenRI
QUOTE
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.


Could someone please define "unreasonable". Thanks.
KenRI
Strange, no one attempted to define this, yet many say the Terror Surveillance Program is unconstitutional. Hmmm.
LooseCannon
Much of the constitution was intentionally left vague. A "definition" would involve researching many Supreme Court cases.
LooseCannon
QUOTE (KenRI @ Aug 24 2006, 03:57 AM) *
Strange, no one attempted to define this, yet many say the Terror Surveillance Program is unconstitutional. Hmmm.


The same amendment says that warrents can't be issued without probable cause. The implication is that a warrent, or at least probable cause since depending on the circumstance you don't always need a warrent is needed for a search otherwise, why mention warrents and probably cause in the amendment, or even have them at all?
MrRight
It would be nice if the constitution was very cut and dry, wouldn't it? It would be very easy to identify when something was unconstitutional. But, the founding fathers intentionally left things vague, leaving things open to interpretation. That in itself has a habit of gumming up the works, and leaves some to view the constitution as an "ever-changing set of rules".

I tend to think that if the founding fathers were around to see what a mess politics has made of the constitution today, that they would likely have written it differently.
dkward2
At the time it was written, the Constitution was not left vague. It applied to the time it was written. Intellectuals in that day had come to a consensus on what constituted unreasonable.

Furthermore, you don't need to use court cases to understand the Constitution, because those judges didn't write it. All you need are the Federalist Papers, and other writings of the framers themselves.

Similarly, the phrase well-regulated militia is vague to many today. However, at the time, well-regulated clearly meant accurate. When applied to a rifleman, it meant having good aim.

By the way Ken, you brought up an excellent point by mentioning "unreasonable." Thanks.
Poetic_Terrorist
QUOTE (KenRI @ Aug 23 2006, 04:59 AM) *
Could someone please define "unreasonable". Thanks.


Unreasonable.....


walking down the sidewalk during the day minding your business. forgetting to use your turn signal when making a legal turn. the police knocking on your front door for no apparent reason saying i need to search your residence because your neighbor let me search theirs.

those work for you?


but anyways a search can not be done except with a warrant and warrant will only be issue upon probable cause as stated in the 4th amendment. though one can give permission to the police (or whoever) to engage in the search voluntary of course, I wouldnt even if I had nothing to hide.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.