From: "Tom Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The law does not offer protection of peoples' privacy. There is no such right guaranteed in any government document. I would rather take responsponsibility for my own safety and live freely than live in a state where police are a bigger threat than the criminals.
In this country, the United States that is, the 4th Amendment to this Constitution states, "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." This is your basic right to privacy. Further, the government has only that power that is granted it by the country's Constitution. You therefore have further rights of privacy because the Constitution does not give power to the government to take them from you under any other circumstance. This is why the 9th Amendment, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and the 10th Amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people" exist. Most state constitutions contain similar wording as well.
Now this is not to say that no one's rights are ever violated by representatives of the government's power (i.e. police, etc.). Many police have been prosecuted over the years and their victims compensated. This is also not to say that on occasion, when one's rights are violated and the police lied, they never got away with it. Sad, but true. Even worse is that, on occasion, courts uphold law enforcement powers exercised in direct conflict with what appears to be the clear wording of the Constitution. This last sorry situation, however, is really partly our own fault. We've allowed our courts to extend the power of our government beyond the clear intent and wording of the Constitution because we wanted the "Law of the Land" to be a little different from what actually and honestly it is, and we knew we couldn't get our way using the proper Constitutional process, amendment via Article V. Since we have allowed this, in some instances even demanding judges who will rule according to our views on certain issues, we shouldn't be surprised when these judges, having no real tie to the actual words and intent of the Constitution invent powers for the government not explicitly granted.
Regards, Bob... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
