Posted on 04/30/2014 3:09:09 PM PDT by PaulCruz2016
Pennsylvania police officers no longer need a warrant to search a citizen’s vehicle, the state’s Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
Drivers in the state used to be able to refuse a warrantless search, but now their vehicles can be subject to search when a police officer determines there is “reasonable probable cause” to do so, the Intelligencer Journal reported.
The high court’s ruling, passed on a 4-2 vote, is being called a drastic change in citizens’ rights and police authority, the paper said.
“This is a significant change in long-standing Pennsylvania criminal law, and it is a good one,” said Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman. “This case gives the police simpler guidelines to follow and (it) finally and clearly renders our law consistent with established federal law.”
“It is a ruling that helps law enforcement as they continue to find people in possession of illegal drugs,” said New Holland police Lt. Jonathan Heisse.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
This is terrifying.
This had damn well better be a rocket to SCOTUS!
Actually this is in line with federal law according to the article.
“It is a ruling that helps law enforcement as they continue to find people in possession of illegal drugs,” said New Holland police Lt. Jonathan Heisse.
The so-called war on drugs has done more to undermine the Bill of Rights than any external threat. All a tyrant needs is a pervasive, insidious ‘enemy’ to justify any violation of liberty under the pretext of ‘security’.
Screw security. I can defend mine.
Radical Islamic threat? Let’s play cowboys and Muslims.
Drug threat? Let’s play cowboys and criminals.
But the first thing the tyrant wants to do is disarm the citizen - in the name of ‘security’.
Security for whom?
Well there you go, drug warriors. It's worth losing your 4th amendment rights when you leave your home, because they will be able to arrest more drug users. After all, you can trust the police to determine what is "reasonable cause". Why bother a judge?
Yep, every drug warrior (so called) is going to agree with this.
Count on it. /s
Not a chance. This is merely putting Pennsylvania law in line with (bad) federal law.
Way back in 1925, SCOTUS held that a search of an automobile stopped on a public highway (the case involved a search for bootleg liquor) requires probable cause, but does not require a warrant, on the theory that the car would be driven away and the evidence destroyed before a warrant could be obtained. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925).
The correct result would be to allow the police to stop the car, but not search it, while they get a warrant. But SCOTUS is unlikely to intervene here, given 89 years of bad federal law.
Well, I’m pretty much a drug warrior and I think this is awful. They have stripped a person of any privacy while in their car. It’s pretty frightening what is happening in the U.S. these days.
That’s kind of like Obama voters saying they disagree with his policies. One follows the other, and plenty of folks warned them.
So do I. Frankly it angers me considerably.
If there’s an avenue available for the search to take place, keep it in place.
Don’t make every citizen defenseless on any whim that comes along. This is draconian.
“Well, I’m pretty much a drug warrior and I think this is awful”
Why? You’ve gotten exactly what you asked for whether you knew you were asking for it or not. Now suck it up.
I no longer have any reason which would warrant me to visit or spend any money in PA.
This isn’t about drugs, it’s about gun confiscation. Didn’t they say they would confiscate all the guns, well, no warrant needed and God help them if they are moving and have to transport what they own.
Zero did drugs, and that is the last thing on his mind. However getting rid of the opposition, well that’s more likely. The liberals will do anything to get the advantage over patriotic Americans.
It’s kind of like there being a law on the books where a warrant can be requested, and a judge saying they no longer need one.
That’s what it is.
His ruling is wrong, and we should unite on this issue to oppose him.
Instead we get more division...
The answer is simple:
All persons who have their vehicles searched against their wishes by a law enforcement officer, or officers without a warrant, and said officer, or officers finds no evidence of a crime, Shall be Statutorily entitled to the Maximum allowable monetary award available in Civil Small Claims Court, payable by the officer, or officers personally, forthwith.
Failure of any person to pay damages in full immediately upon judgement, shall deem them a danger to themselves and the community, and they shall be Prohibited from Owning, using, or Possessing Any Firearm or Ammunition.
Problem Solved.
Get out!Lock the door and tell them to go FK themselves!Tape the whole thing and sue their azzes when they don’t find ab
anything!
Easily resolved with a change to PA law or Constitution. Problem is, toadies at the state level are unlikely to do much.
"Its for the children and for your safety," they pronounce.
NO thanks. I'll take my chances.
Ummm, locking the doors and telling the cops to go FK themselves would, in and of itself, doubtless constitute the reasonable probable cause to search the vehicle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.