User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Motorcycle on driveway can't be searched without a warrant, Supreme Court rules

  1. #11

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 46,882, Level: 52
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 45.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class1 year registered
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    164702
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    12,039
    Points
    46,882
    Level
    52
    Thanks Given
    4,499
    Thanked 9,964x in 5,749 Posts
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    Just for clarification what right is being protected?
    The 4th Amendment.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  2. #12
    Points: 93,585, Level: 74
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 1,165
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocialVeteran
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    282721
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Madison
    Posts
    45,562
    Points
    93,585
    Level
    74
    Thanks Given
    32,429
    Thanked 14,082x in 10,938 Posts
    Mentioned
    201 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DGUtley View Post
    The 4th Amendment.
    So not a right to privacy.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.

  3. #13
    Points: 22,442, Level: 36
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 708
    Overall activity: 36.0%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    spunkloaf's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    7996
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,436
    Points
    22,442
    Level
    36
    Thanks Given
    946
    Thanked 806x in 608 Posts
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    So not a right to privacy.
    Well, the right to privacy is implied.

    The right to breathe is something that is not a constitutionally protected right, either. But it is implied through common sense.
    Faith can move mountains, but don't forget to bring your shovel.

  4. #14

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 46,882, Level: 52
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 45.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class1 year registered
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    164702
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    12,039
    Points
    46,882
    Level
    52
    Thanks Given
    4,499
    Thanked 9,964x in 5,749 Posts
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    So not a right to privacy.
    "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."

    I think that the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure is a personal privacy right but your point is well taken. So, no, not a privacy right in the sense that most people think of it. I misspoke.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to DGUtley For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (06-07-2018)

  6. #15
    Points: 93,585, Level: 74
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 1,165
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocialVeteran
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    282721
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Madison
    Posts
    45,562
    Points
    93,585
    Level
    74
    Thanks Given
    32,429
    Thanked 14,082x in 10,938 Posts
    Mentioned
    201 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by spunkloaf View Post
    Well, the right to privacy is implied.

    The right to breathe is something that is not a constitutionally protected right, either. But it is implied through common sense.
    We have a right to be secure. We have a right to life and it cannot be taken from us by the state without due process.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.

  7. #16
    Points: 93,585, Level: 74
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 1,165
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocialVeteran
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    282721
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Madison
    Posts
    45,562
    Points
    93,585
    Level
    74
    Thanks Given
    32,429
    Thanked 14,082x in 10,938 Posts
    Mentioned
    201 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DGUtley View Post
    "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."

    I think that the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure is a personal privacy right but your point is well taken. So, no, not a privacy right in the sense that most people think of it. I misspoke.
    You did not misspeak. Safety did.

    We have a right to be secure. In my opinion the right to be secure is far more important than a right to privacy. When we so easily conflate the two I fear we may end up with the lesser right to privacy while losing the essential right to be secure.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to MisterVeritis For This Useful Post:

    DGUtley (06-07-2018)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Critical Acclaim
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO