A couple weeks ago I wrote a post concerning the Indiana seat belt laws, and why I disagreed with them. The discussion in the comments was insightful, and I appreciated the feedback.
One of my arguments against such seat belt laws was that they often give police a way of stopping a car that they would like to search, possibly on stereotypical reasons, such as a black driver in a white town. Yesterday, the Indiana Court of Appeals handed down a judgement to that fact. A man was pulled over for a seat belt violation, and in the course of the traffic stop, the officer told the man to get out of the car and be subjected to a pat-down. The man was carrying marijuana on his person, and methamphetamine in his vehicle. He was promptly arrested.
The Court of Appeals was kind enough to say that such a search and seizure is unconstitutional, and that the evidence could not be admitted. They also have a very nice summary of other traffic incidents in the decision.
While reading about the story in the Indianapolis Star, I decided to read the comments left by other readers. I'm sad to say that far too many were upset with the Court's ruling. My favorite comment, summarizing the views of the opposing (and very wrong) side was this:
"What a sad civilization we live in. Blatant criminal activity goes unpunished and we avoid helping this person recover from drug addiction. This is all simply because of a technicality. Wow America, way to help better our youth and clean up or country. Our legal system is severely screwed up."
My jaw just about fell off. The Fourth Amendment is not a "technicality". It's not a sign of a "screwed up" legal system. It's what keeps the government in check from becoming King George III, the Schutzstaffel, or Big Brother.
It's sad that so many people don't have an understanding of the basic purposes of the Constitution.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The rhetorical ramblings of a student at Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington.
2 comments:
That should be the first and last time you're surprised or shocked by anything in the comments to an Indy Star article. Two things: the rest of Indiana is a little different than Bloomington, and people in the comments to those articles are overwhelmingly negative. If there was an article about how every IU athlete donated a kidney, 90% of the responses would be negative. If it's not the Colts, someone is going to disagree with the article.
This isn't even the biggest 4th Amendment violation Indy had tried in the last 10 years or so. Check out City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, where Indy basically set up roadblocks to see what type of criminals they could catch.
I wonder what we'll see come from this:
Federal Agents Searching People at Indianapolis Bus Stops: Air Marshals Patting Civilians Down
Post a Comment