|
|
| Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! (521740) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Fri Nov 23 12:22:58 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Nov 23 11:58:50 2007. But that subway bag search is a search you consent to. I'd think all searches you give your consent to are legal (unless maybe you were tricked into giving your consent).The appeals court in that case took consent into account, even though it curiously cited one of its own cases about the early magnetometer searches at airports from the 1970s, a time of hijackings, in which the judge, the late James Oakes, speculated that hijackings were such a threat because the plane could be turned into a "weapon of mass destruction" against buildings and people on the ground. (Such that I laughed heartily when Condi Rice as NSA head said that the 9/11 hijackings couldn't possibly have been foreseen, when a judge - let alone the national intelligence apparatuses! - foresaw it a generation before). In the magnetometer case, consent did not enter into the equation at all, and the court there noted that if in order to have phone service one had to give consent to have the wires tapped at anytime, that's not legal, even though one doesn't actually need phone service to live. The magnetometer searches were upheld, but for the very good reason that they worked, I think. Anyway, the consent is not critical, since to uphold a special needs search, you don't need to have consent. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|