I don't see any way this could stand up to a constitutional challenge. It's almost as if the person who wrote the ruling was deliberately flaunting the Fourth Amendment.
Or perhaps they've just never read it. I like to post it frequently, in case they're reading my email. "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." On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When an agent of the government can search, seize, and detain without > provocation we've gone WAY WAY off track. > > And to think that the person responsible for leading us so far astray > hasn't done so in a zillion other areas and ways is self delusion. > > It's going to take the justice dept alone decades to recover. And > that assumes Obama gets elected. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:265165 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
