...took the weekend off to enjoy what is left of one of our vanishing Texas Lakes.gigag04 wrote:If PC exists, a car may be searched without warrant. The exigent circumstance is that it is moveable.steveincowtown wrote:I get the probale cause with the dog but what eminent threat exsist to BP agents away from the border that required the immediate execution of a warrantless search?gigag04 wrote:No - we cannot agree. Read up on the legal concepts of exigent circumstances and probable case to find why. The YouTube legal experts offer legal advice that is worth what it costs.steveincowtown wrote: Can we at least agree that as an American, I have the right to say no to a warrantless search of my home, car, etc?
Anyone who chooses to open up their car or home to search is welcome to do so. I will not.
If a SW is to be obtained for the residence, the (case) law permits a protective sweep to empty and secure the house, and everyone sits outside while an officer obtains the warrant. Evidence observed during the sweep is admissible into the SW and used to build PC.
Gigag04- Even though I don't agree 100%, that is a very concise explanation. Looking back at it, I guess the trouble I have is what right does a BP agent have to stop someone who is not at the border? I come through customs 10ish times per year, and I don't have any issues with what they do at our airports ad borders, I get that it is necessary there. However I do feel that if we do not restrict their authority to these defined areas, they will (like everything else in Government) continue to expand and grow unchecked.
Also, I notice many of the replies have reference SCOTUS says this, or SCOTUS says that. IMHO, We have a great constitution and a mediocre Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court rules that it turns out the 2nd Amendment doesn't really mean what is says (which is what I believe they have done to the 4th), will we just rely on their judgments then to?