Fourth Amendment Pros And Cons
As of today, the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment remains fair. The U.S, Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protects personal privacy and the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Full body scans at airports are reasonable because of what has happened with terrorism in the U.S. in the past. Failing to carry out a warrant correctly results in consequences.
The Fourth Amendment protects the people’s safety and rights. It protects people because if a person gets searched with probable cause, a warrant, etc. and the police finds a weapon the person was planning to use to hurt someone, the well-being of the people around has been protected. As long as there is probable cause or a warrant to search, physical apprehension is acceptable. …show more content…
“TSA says the scanners add another layer of security at checkpoints besides metal detectors, explosives-detection systems and bomb-sniffing dogs” (Jansen). What that is saying is that the scanners check for things that metal detectors, explosive-detection systems and bomb-sniffing dogs might not be able to find. “The threats the machines could have detected include the shoe bomb Richard Reid attempted to detonate, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s underwear bomb, and two non-metallic explosives in Yemen printer cartridges” (Jansen). Full body scans are just another way to ensure the safety of others.
Failing to carry out a search warrant properly can have harmful consequences to the case. “Failing to pay attention to the details of properly writing and executing a warrant can have devastating consequences for a case” (Henning). If a warrant is carried out incorrectly it can harm a case because the evidence found can potentially be unable to be used in the trial. “Failure to reference the suspected crimes would alone be enough to render the warrants insufficiently particularlized” (Henning). That means that the warrant would be lacking specificity if the suspected crimes were not
The Fourth Amendment protects the people’s safety and rights. It protects people because if a person gets searched with probable cause, a warrant, etc. and the police finds a weapon the person was planning to use to hurt someone, the well-being of the people around has been protected. As long as there is probable cause or a warrant to search, physical apprehension is acceptable. …show more content…
“TSA says the scanners add another layer of security at checkpoints besides metal detectors, explosives-detection systems and bomb-sniffing dogs” (Jansen). What that is saying is that the scanners check for things that metal detectors, explosive-detection systems and bomb-sniffing dogs might not be able to find. “The threats the machines could have detected include the shoe bomb Richard Reid attempted to detonate, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s underwear bomb, and two non-metallic explosives in Yemen printer cartridges” (Jansen). Full body scans are just another way to ensure the safety of others.
Failing to carry out a search warrant properly can have harmful consequences to the case. “Failing to pay attention to the details of properly writing and executing a warrant can have devastating consequences for a case” (Henning). If a warrant is carried out incorrectly it can harm a case because the evidence found can potentially be unable to be used in the trial. “Failure to reference the suspected crimes would alone be enough to render the warrants insufficiently particularlized” (Henning). That means that the warrant would be lacking specificity if the suspected crimes were not