Why the Fourth Amendment isn’t working

Every law passed by Congress, or by the legislature of any state, and every ordinance passed by a city council, municipal assembly, or county board, is passed to punish the male half of the population into compliance with it, to punish men and hold them accountable to the letter of the law, and to hold men to answer even to the last jot and tittle of whatever is passed as law.

I say men, and males, in a very gender-specific sense, when I talk about the present laws of our land. At the same time, it is not at all clear that women as a class benefit from the option and prerogative of selling their bodies to the cops in order to remain outside the jurisdiction of the law, rather than taking direct responsibility for their actions as men.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, …

The rights clause of the 4th Amendment

Our “persons” in this sense are our bodies. If a man were to rape a woman by physical force, he would be punished severely for it under the law. When a cop, by force, under color of law, places his hands on our body, and forces us violently into the back of a police car, without cause, he needs to be punished even more severely than a rapist who is not a cop: not only did he violate a human body, but he did so under color of law.

Burglary is usually a felony. When a cop commits a burglary for the purpose of gathering evidence to present in court as evidence against the owner or occupant of the house, it is not sufficient that the evidence be held inadmissible in court, pursuant to the doctrine of the fruit of the poisonous tree. The cops who violate a house or home or place of business without a warrant need to be punished even more severely than common burglar, because not only do they commit the burglary as common thieves, but they do so with malice, by force or deception, under color of law.

It is somewhat old-fashioned nowadays to talk about “papers and effects.” These include all identifying documents, cash, securities, titles, deeds, jewelry, small valuables, coins, cigarettes, lighters, personal grooming items, and of course such modern devices as cellular telephones and portable computers. In law, “papers and effects” include any and all “personal property” as distinct from “real property” and “movable property” such as furniture, such as our homes may be “furnished” when invaded by the cops. The cops need to be punished even more severely than common thieves when they take such items without probable cause. They cannot be allowed to simply pocket small items or take larger items of ours away for arbitrary disposal when they are held inadmissible as evidence in court.

It should be noted that “papers and effects” include “small arms” such as rifles, shotguns, and pistols, for which the Democrats’ requirements of registration are already in violation of the Fourth Amendment, let alone the Second.

… 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.

The administrative clause of the 4th Amendment

Here, the cops must explicitly and strictly be held accountable to the orders or warrants of a judge, with departmental procedures put in place to keep them from going above or beyond or outside the law in order to execute an arbitrary search, seizure of property, or arrest of person, without the due process of law.

A warrant issued by a judge is necessary, but even that is not sufficient. The probable cause, along with the sworn testimony of witnesses to the particulars of the matter, must be clearly stated in the warrant. The cops themselves are to be held accountable for violating the Fourth Amendment, even with a warrant from a judge in hand, if the warrant does not meet Constitutional requirements.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.