vision2020
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

People's Republic of Idaho?



>If I understand the attorney general's argument, the advantage of the
>dog sniffing is that it doesn't constitute a search.

That's a very interesting argument that I hadn't heard before, can we get Bill
Clinton's opinion on it?  It makes me rethink my position, but only for a
moment.  Is the AG's argument available on the Internet anywhere or was this a
TV interview?

>If incriminating smells can't be used against me then why shouldn't we 
>also exclude incriminating sights or sounds that extend beyond the bounds 
>of my property?

As Hoffman indicates, what about infrared sensors and such.  I've heard rumors
of detectors that will scan pedestrians for concealed weapons.  A large number
of people carry concealed legally, and they shouldn't be subject to even
temporary arrest and search just because it is known that some criminals carry
concealed.  What about the proposed heat sensors that law enforcement will use
to scan your home?  I see a direct analogy between heat patterns and smells.
If random, non-probable cause smell searches are permitted then why not allow
the officers driving around in vehicles to scan homes . . .  There isn't much
difference.  (A very brief research into automobile searching revealed that
much of it turns on the fact that the search is internal.  An external search
which reveals things internal presents a problem, and saying it isn't a search
isn't very credible.  Seems almost like saying that pushing someone off a
cliff doesn't kill them.  It's the landing that causes problems . . .)

To me, the difference is when law enforcement begins targetting normal people
for searches.  Probable cause at least requires an individual to do something
that removes him from "normal" and makes him appear suspicious.  Normal,
lawful citizens should not be subject to any of these searches.

>However, if they want to use remote sensing devices (dogs, metal
>detectors, whatever) in public areas, that don't require any sort of
>participation on my part, then I couldn't care less.

You don't have some reservations and suspicions about your government
subjecting you to this?

E. O'Daniel




Back to TOC