Patriot's Day

DawnPatrol321 · Jan 18, 2017

This thread is getting long....

Barry Cuda · Jan 18, 2017

DawnPatrolSUP said: ↑

This thread is getting long....
Click to expand...

and boring....

archy 2.0 · Jan 18, 2017

kidde rocque said: ↑

Alright guys, I can't take this anymore.

For the record, the 4th Amendment is the article which is supposed to guard against "unreasonable search and seizure" of a person and his home, among other items. However, this law comes with some significant caveats which need to be considered.

The biggest one is "unreasonable", and what is considered "reasonable".

One example is the doctrine called "hot pursuit". In the case of hot pursuit, law enforcement need not present a search warrant if probable cause to arrest a subject already exists, and the subject is being chased "in hot pursuit" by officers. Additionally, these types of searches and seizures are considered reasonable if "exigent circumstances exist". In the case of having probable cause to arrest, hot pursuit of alleged perpetrators, and the violent ongoing mayhem during the pursuit, it would be prudent to say that "exigent circumstances" existed in this particular scenario. This particular case has been consistently deemed "reasonable" by courts under the 4th Amendment, and seems to be the most applicable doctrine in this particular case.

Additionally, the 4th Amendment is not a "be all, do all" law against illegal searches and seizures. Officers do not need warrants to search, seize or arrest if:

a) Probable Cause exists,
b) If the search is incident to a lawful arrest, or
c) The crime was committed in the presence of an officer.

There are many other citations involved with warrantless searches and seizures protected under the 4th Amendment. I have provided a basic primer for your information.

This information is enough in a court of law to nullify every one of your arguments, Archy.

One more thing: Read up on "Posse Comitatus". It is actually a law which allows local law enforcement to recruit ordinary citizens to perform the duties of a certified Law Enforcement Officer in the event of an emergency. That's it, that's all it is. Any other interpretation of it is just that, an interpretation which won't get a sniff in a court of law. The only people that tell you any different are your Ammon Bundy types, along with Montana survivalists and "constitutionalists".

Archy, you're a bright guy. Don't be "that" guy.
Click to expand...

So in this instance body searching teenage women is justified?
Gun fights in the street with threat of innocent human life by law enforcement is justified?
Posse Cometitus: The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States.
And the Bundys were cleared of all charges.

archy 2.0 · Jan 18, 2017

DawnPatrolSUP said: ↑

This thread is getting long....
Click to expand...

Too long.
Even members of Congress will argue with each other on the issues I have raised.
I'm done.

nynj · Jan 18, 2017

Well donne

DawnPatrol321 · Jan 18, 2017

And the crowd goes wild! HAHAHAHA

Barry Cuda · Jan 18, 2017

archy said: ↑

Too long.
Even members of Congress will argue with each other on the issues I have raised.
I'm done.
Click to expand...

Which means your thinking is as corrupt as theirs, asshole.

seldom seen · Jan 18, 2017

#micro*****

seldom seen · Jan 18, 2017

I mean, #microcock

archy 2.0 · Jan 18, 2017

[video=youtube;odQNIebIx14]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odQNIebIx14&index=5&list=WL[/video]

nynj · Jan 18, 2017

seldom seen said: ↑

I mean, #microcock
Click to expand...

Haha
#FlosTinyCock

Forums

Patriot's Day

DawnPatrol321 Well-Known Member

Barry Cuda Guest

archy 2.0 Well-Known Member

archy 2.0 Well-Known Member

nynj Well-Known Member

DawnPatrol321 Well-Known Member

Barry Cuda Guest

seldom seen Well-Known Member

seldom seen Well-Known Member

archy 2.0 Well-Known Member

nynj Well-Known Member