It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
After the unconstitutional Indiana Supreme Court ruling removing the protections of the 4th Amendment, the people of Indiana spontaneously organized in a trans-partisan alliance uniting for the Constitution at their state capitol.
Originally posted by here4awhile
good...it's clearly unconstitutional and a lead-in to the police state that the government and most state governments seem to want...the government has no idea how many toes they are beginning to step on...people are getting fed up
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
This is precisely the kind of response I was hoping for - the people of Indiana united and protesting loudly against unwarranted governmental intrusion in their homes and businesses. Bravo Hoosiers!
I heard they have started a movement to recall one of the judges who decided this case as well
Much better this than to have cops and citizens shooting it out over no -knock searches.
S&F for a VERY important issue.
the government has no idea how many toes they are beginning to step on...people are getting fed up
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.
Like many other areas of American law, the Fourth Amendment finds its roots in English legal doctrine. Sir Edward Coke, in Semayne's case (1604), famously stated: "The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose."[1] Semayne's Case acknowledged that the King did not have unbridled authority to intrude on his subjects' dwellings but recognized that government agents were permitted to conduct searches and seizures under certain conditions when their purpose was lawful and a warrant had been obtained.
Entick v Carrington [1765] EWHC KB J98 is a leading case in English law establishing the civil liberties of individuals and limiting the scope of executive power. The case has also been influential in other common law jurisdictions and was an important motivation for the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is famous for the dicta of Camden LJ: "If it is law, it will be found in our books. If it not to be found there, it is not law."
In Colonial America, legislation was explicitly written to enforce English revenue gathering policies on customs.[2] Until 1750, all handbooks for justices of the peace, the issuers of warrants, contained or described only general warrants.[2] William Cuddihy, Ph.D. in his dissertation entitled The Fourth Amendment: Origins and Original Meaning,[3] claims there existed a "colonial epidemic of general searches." According to him, until the 1760s, a "man's house was even less of a legal castle in America than in England" as the authorities possessed almost unlimited power and little oversight.
Originally posted by RUSSO
Originally posted by here4awhile
good...it's clearly unconstitutional and a lead-in to the police state that the government and most state governments seem to want...the government has no idea how many toes they are beginning to step on...people are getting fed up
Globalist architect Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted last year that “…For the first time in all of human history: mankind is political awakened…that’s a total new reality…total new reality.”
This is something they respect.
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I heard they have started a movement to recall one of the judges who decided this case as well
Originally posted by AgentSimms
reply to post by RUSSO
I agree that the solution should be a political one, unfortunately the government will see to it that that will not happen. They want Americans to swarm the streets in violent protest, this will give them a reason to bring on martial law, it's exactly what they plan on doing. They powers in charge don't want a peaceful exchange, that would come too close to trumping their iron fisted grip Just look at the current situation in air travel, Americans have been effectively limited to our "right to travel unimpeded by any means".
www.welcome.freeenterprisesociety.com...
Originally posted by boondock-saint
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I heard they have started a movement to recall one of the judges who decided this case as well
ONLY ONE ?????
I think 3 of them who voted for this chit
ought to be prosecuted as a traitor to
the US Constitution.
And if the police or the dept of justice
does not do it, then that responsibility
lies with it's people to carry out.
Tyranny will not be accepted by the population.
And let it be shouted from the roof tops,