pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
USSC finds in favor of privacy!
#1
check 
Quote:Supreme court limits police use of drug-sniffing dogs
By Jonathan Stempel

Washington, March 24, 2013. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Tuesday limited the ability of police to use a trained dog to sniff around the outside of a home for illegal drugs that might be inside.

By a 5-4 vote, the court said the use by law enforcement authorities of trained police dogs to investigate a home and its immediate surroundings was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, and required a warrant.

"A police officer not armed with a warrant may approach a home and knock, precisely because that is no more than any private citizen might do," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority.

"But introducing a trained police dog to explore the area around the home in hopes of discovering incriminating evidence is something else," he added. "There is no customary invitation to do that."

For purposes of the Fourth Amendment, Scalia said, "the home is first among equals."

The rest of the story is here and I am 100% certain that who sided with whom on this will really blow some minds.
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#2
Wonder what it means to flying around to find grow houses based on thermal readings.
Dave, proudly annoying members of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#3
Dave;91232 Wrote:Wonder what it means to flying around to find grow houses based on thermal readings.

I think that would be nullified based on the 2011 decision against being able to use thermal imaging. IANAL though.
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#4
Scary that the vote is only 5-4.
Everytime we look the other way when someone else loses rights we disagree with, we make it easier to lose the rights we support.

Reply
#5
Internet troll;91239 Wrote:Scary that the vote is only 5-4.

Better than 5-4 the other way. Wink
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#6
roberts is a turncoat.

i'm surprised to see sotomayer and kagan on the side of privacy, but i guess it DID involve marijuana. if it were anything else, i'm sure they ruling would have been very different.

i'll take what i can get though. i hope this applies to traffic stops and check points. i'm not a fan of drug dogs. they are unreliable and are generally used to circumvent due process.
Stirpot
Reply
#7
panopticonisi;91468 Wrote:roberts is a turncoat.

i'm surprised to see sotomayer and kagan on the side of privacy, but i guess it DID involve marijuana. if it were anything else, i'm sure they ruling would have been very different.

i'll take what i can get though. i hope this applies to traffic stops and check points. i'm not a fan of drug dogs. they are unreliable and are generally used to circumvent due process.

It doesn't. I'm too tired/lazy to look up the case, but the SCOTUS very recently upheld drug-dog sniffs of cars in a separate case (relating to reliability of dogs). Vehicles are not afforded the same level of privacy as the home, not by a long shot.
I am not a lawyer.
Reply
#8
twency;91474 Wrote:
panopticonisi;91468 Wrote:roberts is a turncoat.

i'm surprised to see sotomayer and kagan on the side of privacy, but i guess it DID involve marijuana. if it were anything else, i'm sure they ruling would have been very different.

i'll take what i can get though. i hope this applies to traffic stops and check points. i'm not a fan of drug dogs. they are unreliable and are generally used to circumvent due process.

It doesn't. I'm too tired/lazy to look up the case, but the SCOTUS very recently upheld drug-dog sniffs of cars in a separate case (relating to reliability of dogs). Vehicles are not afforded the same level of privacy as the home, not by a long shot.

thanks for clarifying. that's crappy.
Stirpot
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Iran "finds" a bunch of uranium suddenly RugerGirl 5 787 09-14-2015, 08:05 AM
Last Post: RugerGirl
  14 year old finds someone's "boating accident" bigdawgbeav 13 2,083 01-16-2015, 01:33 PM
Last Post: Rcpaul
  Marc Lamont Hill finds 'logic' in Ferguson looting Philadelphia Patriot 5 1,038 12-24-2014, 01:23 PM
Last Post: spblademaker
  Is a blimp watching you? New surveillance craft raises privacy questions Philadelphia Patriot 5 946 01-28-2014, 11:18 AM
Last Post: jaykwish
  McAfee Founder To Launch New “NSA Killer” Privacy Device nomad 0 458 10-04-2013, 04:03 PM
Last Post: nomad



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.