Originally Posted by
saulblum
I am not a lawyer, but it seems to be that treating terrorism as more of a crime than the numerous other ways someone can be killed completely voids the Fourth Amendment.
As Amtrak's O'Connor puts it: "You never know where those search scenes are going to show up."
Since terrorist acts can theoretically occur anywhere at any time, one wonders how far this will be taken.
Can Americans expect these random teams to show up at the entrance (or exit) to shopping malls, schools, or public parks, to name just a few places? I for one don't want to live in that kind of climate of constant fear.
It's sad - pathetic - to read some of the statements in that piece.
For starters, there's this from a lawyer:
As an attorney for the EPA, Vetter is pretty familiar with his Fourth Amendment constitutional right protecting him from "unreasonable searches."
"At the airport, everybody now understands it's part of the process," he said. "You can either choose to deal with it or not. But in a surprise situation like that, I would not have been pleased."
And this, from a "wanna-ride-the-train-today?" official:
Few Amtrak passengers have ever refused to be searched, O'Connor said. "We've done thousands of them, and I would say less than a handful of people have chosen to seek other transportation."
He sees that as positive and I see it as terribly negative that so few people protest.
