Where’s the 4th Amendment?

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants | Politics and Law – CNET News:

Domestic Drones | American Civil Liberties Union:

Drones In U.S.: More Unmanned Aircraft Will Be Flying In Domestic Airspace By 2015 (VIDEO):

Who Is Flying Drones Over America? – NYTimes.com:

  Drones in America: Where’s The Outrage?  : Information Clearing House:

As my title for this posts asks, “Where’s the 4th Amendment?” When did it become ok for the government on any level, from local to federal get to bypass the US Constitution? Unless I fall asleep and missed something, the 4th Amendment still states that no person or his effects be searched or seized without a warrant unless there is a probable cause.

Amendment IV: 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 know and yes I have heard the repeated comments, “Well if you haven’t broken any laws why worry about it…” Well maybe because I shouldn’t have to worry about a government spying on my everyday life. Honest citizen or not is not why the Founding Fathers created the 4th Amendment, it was the fact that they knew that if a government was allowed to search and seize a person or his effects that the government was starting to become a tyrannical over sized government. They knew from experience that a government that could seize your property was government that control your life.

If you read through my list of links, you can see that today the Senate is looking at passing a bill that would allow the government to simply issue a subpoena and then read your emails. Unlike a warrant like the Constitution states to be used with a judge’s signature, a subpoena doesn’t have a check and balance to prevent criminal mischief or tyranny, That means if an officer doesn’t like you, or maybe really likes you, he or she can simply get a subpoena  to read your email to get more information on you. No need for a check into what may or may not be a crime by a judge. I will say that at least this bill does require a subpoena…

Now with drones, that is an out right slap to the Constitution.  This is one of the times when I actually agree with the ACLU… How is to legal for a law enforcement agency to fly small remote controlled planes over your house, some possibly with x-rays, looking for a possible crime to be commented. No warrant or subpoena required even though the Constitution states that searches of a person, his house, papers, and effect require a warrant unless probably cause is there. I agree that drones can be useful to law enforcement in the case of tracking a car chase or a known criminal running from a crime scene or even a hostage situation it makes since.

I understand the many people want to ensure that criminals are brought to justice, that they want to see the honest person being able to live a full and happy life… But at what cost to your freedoms?

My Way News – Student files lawsuit over FBI’s GPS tracking

News Story: My Way News – Student files lawsuit over FBI’s GPS tracking.

What happened to the Forth Amendment?

Amendment IV

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.

Sure I understand watching and monitoring people that are possible suspects in crimes or terrorist plots. I understand that some people many fit a profile and prompts the FBI and DHS to feel the need to monitor them. No problem with that… The problem is that if we are to keep and maintain a Federal Republic that the Constitution created and the Founding Fathers promised, then the government must follow the laws that had been set forth over 200 years ago.

What does that mean? Simple… If there isn’t enough evidence for a search warrant, then do the old fashion foot work to obtain one. Do the tailing of the suspect. Do the monitoring of their trash on trash day. Those are things that don’t require a search warrant. Then when they find what they need for a judge to sign a warrant then place the bugs and etc.

So what is the problem if you have nothing to hide? I have heard this before and asked in return, “If it doesn’t matter why did the Founding Fathers believe it was needed in the Forth Amendment?” It is really a simple reason. Before the Revolutionary War the the British Army at anytime were allowed to enter any home without cause and search for whatever they wanted to. No reason needed. This in turn meant no freedom or security in your own home. So why would you want to now give you a large portion of that freedom in place of false security?

What will you have? Liberty or Saftey?

News Stories:
Sacramento-area pilot punished for YouTube video | News10.net | Sacramento, California | News:

Pilot Hasseled by TSA After Uncovering Security Breaches at Major Airport – ABC News:

Pilot punished for pointing out San Francisco International Airport security flaws with YouTube videos showing TSA shortcomings | Mail Online:

Woman arrested at ABIA after refusing enhanced pat down | kvue.com | Austin, Texas News | KVUE | Austin, TX | Breaking News:

Where are our right going? What happened to our freedoms under the Constitution? Today you can’t travel in a plane without losing your 4th Amendment rights. Those rights that protect your freedom from searches of your person, property, papers, effects of unreasonable searches and seizures. And they are doing this by scaring you into these searches by using terrorism as the reason. You are giving up liberties that when you come right down to it is creating and even bigger problem if a terrorist was to attack an airport. Think about it…

So what is the bigger problem? Well if you haven’t figured it out they are creating bottleneck of people that are waiting to fly on multiple planes. So in one place in the middle of an airport stands 3-5 planes worth of people… Yeah, so where does the terrorist need to go? No further than the middle of the crowd…. Not on the plane but the body scanners…

Now think about where the planes fly out of…. Big cities where a number of highways and interstates go right out under the flight patterns… Yeah, whats to stop some terrorist from shoot a plane filled with people and hundreds of fuel loaded…. But hey they need to scan you or pat you down to make sure you are safe…

What people need to do is to start and learn about the founding of this country and the founding fathers that created this country. They give us the rights that we are losing now. Just search for yourself and see that these stories posted are only the tip of the iceberg. The FCC creating regulations to take over the internet even thought the court system has overturned laws to protect you and the internet. The DHS running body scans and complete pat downs on citizens with no reasonable cause. Those same procedures are now slowly heading to the bus stations. They have recruited Wal-Mart to monitor you the citizen and have agreed to report suspicious activities… What exactly is suspicious activities at Wal-Mart?

Here is the 4th amendment:

Bill of Rights Transcript:

Amendment IV 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.

One last thing for you…
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Ben Franklin

Obama honors Nobel winner with statement about himself | Washington Examiner

News Story: Obama honors Nobel winner with statement about himself | Washington Examiner.

I got a lot out of this story… Most I already knew but it was great to read it from someone else.

1. Yep he does love to put himself in the middle of any topic he speaks about. Think about it… Almost all speeches he give there are many sentences where he references himself, himself and Michelle, or the first family. Doesn’t matter what the subject.
2. One thing in the story that really show where he wants to take the country is his comment about how “China’s extraordinary accomplishment in lifting millions out of poverty, and believe that human rights include dignity that comes with freedom from want.” I find these funny will China has one of the highest poverty rates in the G-8 and imprisons people that protest their lack of the simplest freedoms. Thus the reasons that the winner of this years Nobel not being present to the ceremony. Then as for the “freedom of want“, sorry but that is always going to be there. The difference is that BHO wants to remove the wants of people that don’t want to try to earn those wants though effort but by charity.
3. One more thing on the “freedom of want” and “advance of democracy“…. I want to be able to go to the airport and not be groped or scanned by x-rays but because of the BHO administration’s lack of advances in democracy, open society, and rule of Law (Constitutional Law) means I get groped. That doesn’t mean we don’t need some security but breaking my Constitutional rights is a big problem for me. Hence I believe they are breaking the 4th amendment.
   1. Amendment IVThe 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.

   So what is their probable cause for every single person to be searched? Sure to find the terrorist among us… BS! That is not a reasonable reason to search every person that flies. If that is the case then why don’t we just allow them to search our houses for explosives and terrorist propaganda…. Of course, who says that won’t come in time and those of you that keep giving up your liberties will allow it.

Bottomline is that BHO is very much about himself, his agenda, and nothing about the true American Dream.

What about the Constitution?

News Story: Cops jump on swine-flu power: Shots heard ’round the world:

So if this Massachusetts bill passes, forget that the Constitution as a number of amendments out of the first ten, yes the Bill of Rights, that says the federal and state governments can not hold people without Due Process of the law, arrest without cause, enter a person’s house without a warrant and so on.

Let break this down by amendments…

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

So in the first amendment this bill would break the free of religion as not every religion believes in medical treatment. So if you are one of the many that from a religious background do not believe in receiving advanced medical treatment or medical treatment in general, you going to be locked up and fined until you conform into a good child of the state.

Amendment IV

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.

So, under the forth amendment you are protected from forced entry by any governmental agent from searching, entering, or seizure of your house, person, papers, and effects. So how on earth do the great lawmaker figure they can create a law that allows forced quarantine and vaccination of any person in any state? Oh sure they will say they have probably cause due to the health of the community surrounding the person. But lets be honest here, when our Constitution was created the idea of a vaccination was not even invented yet and if it were they would have placed that in the amendment also.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Oh no not the Due Process Amendment!! Yep, the fifth amendment is the location of the strongest reasons for the bill to be ruled un-Constitutional. So are we going to start to see false grand juries opening up to indict people who refuse to the bill? That would be the only way for the bill to be enforced. Without a false or I will say un-American grand jury this bill would never legally be allowed to imprison or force quarantine or vaccinate any person in these United States.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

The sixth amendment is where they must provide for a speed and public trial. If I were one of those that were arrested and brought to trail I would bet your bottom dollar that I would have each and every lawmaker that created this bill be a witness. I would do this for two reasons… 1. They created the law and I would want to have them answer questions as to the medical knowledge that lead them to create the bill. 2. Ensure that if they refuse to be on the witness stand because they were that freaking afraid of the H1N1 virus that I would have to be let go do to an unfair trial that did not allow me to confront the witnesses that placed me in jail.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The eighth amendment is the last one that would be broken if this bill became law. I believe this to be true doe to the one fact that they would be allowed to hold a person in excess of bail and with excessive fines for their form of the pursuit of happiness.

So, who the hell are these Massachusetts’ law makers that think they should be allowed to break your Constitutional Rights and not even bat an eye?