July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
Court takes away rights
Letters to the Editor
To the editor:
As Indiana bid adieu to the Fourth Amendment rights of its citizens, there has been a widespread fear that this will give law enforcement another step toward ultimate control of its citizenry. I, for one, tend to agree with this thinking.
The case that initiated the Supreme Court decision bore no relevance to the decision that was reached. The police were called to the scene of a domestic dispute and encountered one of the alleged participants outside the residence. This person retreated to the residence and attempted to deny officers entry. I do believe common sense dictates the officers were within their rights to enter the residence based upon the fact they received a 911 call about the incident.
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken this case to an entirely different level and given law enforcement the right to enter any residence or establishment at their discretion because there might be cause for suspicion. We stop individuals on the streets, in vehicles and in other suspicious activities.
We do not, and should not, enter residences and establishments because we suspect illegal activities or property. We have tried to control the manufacture and distribution of drugs for countless years, and have only managed to curtail a small amount with respect to the overall picture.
In spite of drug task force activities, we have not been able to successfully control the widespread use of marijuana. We now have 16 states and the District of Columbia that have or are trying to legalize it for medical purposes.
This will certainly increase its use and not curtail it. One might ask how this pertains to the subject at hand. The answer being that we have already stripped the motoring public of their right to resist search and seizure and still have not effectively accomplished the objective. What do we hope to accomplish with this latest ruling? Possibly another legal step toward control without resistance.
One might ask these questions: Does the Indiana Supreme Court have its own agenda wherein it feels elevated to Godly status in its decisions? Do the members truly have the intellect, compassion, wisdom, sense of duty and ability to make these decisions, even in the presence of political undertow?
Only they have the answers to these questions.
James Coleman
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
As Indiana bid adieu to the Fourth Amendment rights of its citizens, there has been a widespread fear that this will give law enforcement another step toward ultimate control of its citizenry. I, for one, tend to agree with this thinking.
The case that initiated the Supreme Court decision bore no relevance to the decision that was reached. The police were called to the scene of a domestic dispute and encountered one of the alleged participants outside the residence. This person retreated to the residence and attempted to deny officers entry. I do believe common sense dictates the officers were within their rights to enter the residence based upon the fact they received a 911 call about the incident.
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken this case to an entirely different level and given law enforcement the right to enter any residence or establishment at their discretion because there might be cause for suspicion. We stop individuals on the streets, in vehicles and in other suspicious activities.
We do not, and should not, enter residences and establishments because we suspect illegal activities or property. We have tried to control the manufacture and distribution of drugs for countless years, and have only managed to curtail a small amount with respect to the overall picture.
In spite of drug task force activities, we have not been able to successfully control the widespread use of marijuana. We now have 16 states and the District of Columbia that have or are trying to legalize it for medical purposes.
This will certainly increase its use and not curtail it. One might ask how this pertains to the subject at hand. The answer being that we have already stripped the motoring public of their right to resist search and seizure and still have not effectively accomplished the objective. What do we hope to accomplish with this latest ruling? Possibly another legal step toward control without resistance.
One might ask these questions: Does the Indiana Supreme Court have its own agenda wherein it feels elevated to Godly status in its decisions? Do the members truly have the intellect, compassion, wisdom, sense of duty and ability to make these decisions, even in the presence of political undertow?
Only they have the answers to these questions.
James Coleman
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD