Exclusionary Rule Evaluation Paper Brandy Alston University of Phoenix Criminal Procedure CJA/353 Professor Joseph Wade April 11, 2012 Exclusionary Rule Evaluation Paper Should the exclusionary rule be abolish this question is one not to simple to answer. Many individuals say no other say yes, and for those that do not know what the exclusionary rule is then they do not know their Forth Amendment Right. This makes answering this question harder, the Exclusionary Rule and Fourth Amendment works jointly for the United States and the citizens. The Fourth Amendment in the US Constitution limits the action of official law enforcement and helps keep the public rights from being violated for unreasonable searches or something close in that rang. This paper will define Exclusionary Rule, the rationale and purpose of the Exclusionary rule, the exceptions, cost and benefits and alternative remedies to the Exclusionary Rule and if we should keep or wipe out the Exclusionary Rule.
One of the major points against gun control is the violation of your second amendment rights, you have the right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. This paper will show there is no common sense in banning all firearms as a means gun control and it leaves law abiding citizens increasingly vulnerable to violent crimes. No Common Sense in Gun Control Over the past forty years, legislators have spent a lot of time, effort and revenue on legislation regarding gun control. Gun control advocates insist that increased gun control will lower the soaring crime rates of the early 70's. However, “recent research on the prevalence of defensive gun use has prompted growing concern that government efforts to regulate gun ownership and use may be counterproductive” (Ludwig, 2000, p. 363).
This means that any sober legally licensed driver over the age of eighteen can sign the offenders out. This has to stop; at what point and cost will the laws be changed. It is the proposal of the citizens of Brunswick County, and the surrounding counties to make the penalties for DUI harder, and compile ways to decrease occurrences. It is the hopes of these citizens to reduce the number of occurrences of these charges, and that is why this has been brought before the local legislation. Current law dictates first offense minimum of 24 hours (level 5 offenders) in jail, fines, and penalties up to $200 (level 5 offenders), license suspension 60 days to 1 year, and the ignition lock is not required.
However, the recent Supreme Court decision in Shelby County vs. Holder has deemed Section 5 unconstitutional. Through research, it is seen that citizens endure the costs of voting to reap the benefits. However, it can be argued that voter identification laws have the potential to suppress turnout. In contrast, it can also be argued that there are ways around the laws, and the laws have little to no overall effect on turnout. In order to understand the recent trends in voter identification laws, we must first look back at the civil rights movement in the South.
It protects the guilty rather than the victims. This rule basically states that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in a criminal trial. The basis of this rule is supposed to prevent the police and other sections of the government from illegally searching or violating our homes and our privacy. When all it really does is prevents the truth from surfacing and help criminals go free. After researching both sides of this issue, in no way am I stating that I don’t understand the determination of the opposing side to keep this rule.
One of the most common arguments deals with respecting the Constitution. Racial profiling should be eliminated in routine traffic stops because it leads to a violation of civil rights, poor relationships between police officers and citizens, and decreased urban safety. Racial profiling violates citizens’ rights in a few different ways. The fourth amendment reads, “The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated”, as recited by West Des Moines’ police captain, Scott Wiegert. A traffic stop on the basis of race violates the fourth amendment because the officer can make the victim feel violated instead of secure.
In early October of 2013 Florida was alongside the rest of the states that were prohibiting texting while driving. Apparently the law states that in order for the driver to be pulled over, the driver has to have two different offenses that he has committed. Many people in the state of Florida believe that this law doesn’t
Gun control ENG/102 8/11/10 Brian Kevin Gun control 1 Introduction: Gun control advocates have cried foul, because of the Supreme Court 2010 ruling they believe will damage the chances gun control laws to reduce crime. While many people consider gun control to be too restrictive, advocates are of the mind that we should remove all the guns, at all cost. The Supreme Court ruling has mandated that state and city governments have no choice but to respect the Second Amendment of their citizens. While the ruling does not completely abolish current gun restrictions, it does weaken the ability of the local government to
The Fifteenth Amendment: A Solution or a Stepping Stone? Written by: Anna Carlson 12 February 2012 The Fifteenth Amendment attempted to give all black U.S. Citizens the right to vote, but the outraged indignation of many white citizens prevented this reality from occurring. In the time between the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment and the proposal of the Twenty Fourth Amendment, almost a centuries worth of time, white supremacists used a variety of tactics to prevent the Blacks from voting, including literacy tests, poll taxes, and physical intimidation. With the ratification of the Twenty Fourth amendment, many of these dealings became illegal, and voter discrimination was thought to be eliminated, but was it truly gone? There are modern day tactics, such as the requirement of a valid I.D.
Due to the recent election issues in Florida, one very important main point in this issue becomes; do the number of election crises warrant elimination the Electoral College in favor of a popular vote. Carolyn Jefferson-Jenkins believes there have been far too many instances of these near disasters. The author states, “In the Twentieth century, we only narrowly avoided a series of constitutional crises in which the electoral college system—or the House of Representatives—could have overruled the popular vote” (Jefferson-Jenkins 173). She goes on to site 5 examples where a small shift in the popular vote of a few states could have changed the out come of the election. One such example, “in the 1916 presidential election, a shift of only 2,000 votes in California would have given Charles Evans Hughes the necessary electoral