In America? I don't think so. It happens all the time though. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the ""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." The search and seizure provisions of the Fourth Amendment are all about privacy. Most people instinctively understand the concept of privacy. It is the freedom to decide which details of your life will be revealed to the public and which will be revealed only to those you care to share them with. To honor this freedom, the Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement authorities. I respect law enforcement, but I don't respect the games they play with law abiding citizens to get them to slip up and forfeit their rights. Even if the citizen knows their rights, and stand up for those rights not consenting to search or seizure of property, and the officer ignores that request, that my friend is known as oppression.
I want to look at something that happened to an acquaintance of mine. His name is Rich Banks. Rich is a member of the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association. He attended a PAFOA open carry dinner in Dickson City, PA. Most attendees of this event (other members of PAFOA) were legally open carrying pistols in plain sight which is perfectly legal in Pennsylvania without a license to carry firearms. You only need a LTCF when carrying concealed.
Well as the dinner progressed a “scared” patron called the police to report men with guns. The police showed up and arrested Rich for failure to identify himself with ID. When you are on foot, you are not required by law to produce ID, nor are you required to produce a license to carry firearms if you are open carrying (except for in a car or in Philadelphia). They arrested him for not consenting to search his person and for failure to produce ID. Many other members apparently were searched without consent or probable cause. After all was said and done, Rich was released when the police could not charge him with anything (he wasn’t doing anything wrong in the first place). The problem is when he denied search and seizure of his property and person, he was arrested. They tried to slap disorderly conduct on him for failing to produce ID, which is not required. And even if it was disorderly conduct is described in the Pennsylvania crime code:
§5503: A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
-engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
-makes unreasonable noise;
-uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
-Creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor”.
Not producing ID while on foot does not fall under the previous statutes. Since you don’t have to produce ID on foot, just a name if requested, he can’t get nailed for disorderly conduct. If he was not breaking a law in the first place he should have been left alone, plain and simple. The police should have come in and said, nothing illegal is taking place here and away they should have gone. Instead they harassed law abiding citizens for exercising their constitutional rights. Police oppression like this is NOT America. The police need to understand if there is NO probable cause, or no law that has, is or will be broken, a citizen standing up for his rights is NOT grounds for arrest. I for one will stand up in Rich’s legal defense. I am proud he took a bullet for the 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments of our Bill of Rights. It’s people like him that keep out Bill of Rights alive. Good job man, I would have been in the patrol car with you too.
Showing posts with label 4th Amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 4th Amendment. Show all posts
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Thursday, May 8, 2008
The Bill of Rights
I went ahead and added my thoughts on the Bill of Rights to give everyone an understanding how I view things in our nation today. In my last post I explained what I thought about our Republic and what it is. This post explains what I believe that Republic protects. I’ll get into each Amendment in greater detail as I post more. This will give you a general idea of what I think each Amendment means.
Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I take this as the Government cannot make any law preventing people or the media from speaking out against the government, nor can anyone be punished for doing so. The people are allowed to rally against the government without fear of arrest. And lastly the government cannot establish a church of the United States or religion (hence the word establishment). There is nothing about the separation of church and state. The founders didn't want a forced religion. Not a banned manger scene in some town square because its next to a courthouse.
Amendment 2: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
This simply states that the people can and have the right to rise up in arms against the government. The people are allowed to Para-military train and the PEOPLE that form these militias are allowed to own guns.
Amendment 3: No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
I really don't understand this one. I think it stems from when British soldiers were ransacking people’s homes during the war and demanding food and shelter from the owner. The founders didn't want this again... this could technically fall under the 4th.
Amendment 4: 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.
Basically the government cannot take property or services for no reason what so ever. The word "unreasonable" plays a key role here, and where I think the term probable cause comes from. They are synonymous. Just because a cop thinks you have weed doesn't mean he can just search you, that’s unreasonable. Yet it is reasonable if he sees a bag of pot sticking out of your pocket. Also people should be safe in their homes from the government, unless they are doing something really stupid, and even then the government can't just barge in without a good reason.
Amendment 5 pt. 1: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;
I'm going to break the 5th up into a few parts because each part has its own meaning. Personally I think it could be two separate amendments, but it can all be tied together as well. The first part means what it says. You don't have to answer any questions to the government. You have the right to remain silent and not agree to any accusations until you are in trial.
Amendment 5 pt. 2:...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;
You can't be found innocent, then tried again and found guilty.
Amendment 5 pt. 3: ...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
All this is why I believe property is a right, not a privilege. The government can't decide to take my house because I didn't pay a tax or because I am noisy. They can however take it after a fair trial. All this stuff you see on Cops when they impound cars, take someone’s gun etc... It’s all done as a violation of property and liberty. People are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
Amendment 5 pt. 4:
…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Gov't has to pay up if they want your land. Even then if you don't want to sell they can't take it per the previous sentence statute.
Amendment 6: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
This amendment guarantees the right to not sit in a prison cell for months on end without being accused of something. It guarantees that the accused will have a quick trial and be told what they are being charged for. It also allows for the accused to have an attorney present for legal assistance before answering any questions as protected by the 5th Amendment.
Amendment 7: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Your peers, not the government decide what your verdict is, or is not. This prevents government from just slapping a guilty verdict on everyone that walks thru the court room. The trial has to be fair.
Amendment 8: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
This means the days of torture are over. Punishment must be civil and humane.
Amendments 9 & 10: -
-The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
-The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The 9th and 10th amendments basically are there to cover the tracks of the first 8. The people have the right to have rights and that whatever the constitution doesn’t tell the government not to do is left to the states or to the people to decide.
Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I take this as the Government cannot make any law preventing people or the media from speaking out against the government, nor can anyone be punished for doing so. The people are allowed to rally against the government without fear of arrest. And lastly the government cannot establish a church of the United States or religion (hence the word establishment). There is nothing about the separation of church and state. The founders didn't want a forced religion. Not a banned manger scene in some town square because its next to a courthouse.
Amendment 2: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
This simply states that the people can and have the right to rise up in arms against the government. The people are allowed to Para-military train and the PEOPLE that form these militias are allowed to own guns.
Amendment 3: No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
I really don't understand this one. I think it stems from when British soldiers were ransacking people’s homes during the war and demanding food and shelter from the owner. The founders didn't want this again... this could technically fall under the 4th.
Amendment 4: 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.
Basically the government cannot take property or services for no reason what so ever. The word "unreasonable" plays a key role here, and where I think the term probable cause comes from. They are synonymous. Just because a cop thinks you have weed doesn't mean he can just search you, that’s unreasonable. Yet it is reasonable if he sees a bag of pot sticking out of your pocket. Also people should be safe in their homes from the government, unless they are doing something really stupid, and even then the government can't just barge in without a good reason.
Amendment 5 pt. 1: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;
I'm going to break the 5th up into a few parts because each part has its own meaning. Personally I think it could be two separate amendments, but it can all be tied together as well. The first part means what it says. You don't have to answer any questions to the government. You have the right to remain silent and not agree to any accusations until you are in trial.
Amendment 5 pt. 2:...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;
You can't be found innocent, then tried again and found guilty.
Amendment 5 pt. 3: ...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
All this is why I believe property is a right, not a privilege. The government can't decide to take my house because I didn't pay a tax or because I am noisy. They can however take it after a fair trial. All this stuff you see on Cops when they impound cars, take someone’s gun etc... It’s all done as a violation of property and liberty. People are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
Amendment 5 pt. 4:
…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Gov't has to pay up if they want your land. Even then if you don't want to sell they can't take it per the previous sentence statute.
Amendment 6: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
This amendment guarantees the right to not sit in a prison cell for months on end without being accused of something. It guarantees that the accused will have a quick trial and be told what they are being charged for. It also allows for the accused to have an attorney present for legal assistance before answering any questions as protected by the 5th Amendment.
Amendment 7: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Your peers, not the government decide what your verdict is, or is not. This prevents government from just slapping a guilty verdict on everyone that walks thru the court room. The trial has to be fair.
Amendment 8: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
This means the days of torture are over. Punishment must be civil and humane.
Amendments 9 & 10: -
-The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
-The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The 9th and 10th amendments basically are there to cover the tracks of the first 8. The people have the right to have rights and that whatever the constitution doesn’t tell the government not to do is left to the states or to the people to decide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
