In this case, I believe the government took it too far because there was no warrant allowing officers to scan DLK’s home, there was no danger of losing evidence, and DLK’s fourth amendment rights were violated. First of all, using the thermal scanner in this case is considered a legal search and the officers that used it were not given a warrant. On a warrant, there are three major parts; who is being searched, where they are searching, and what is being searched for. Since officers knew who and what exactly they were searching for at DLK’s home, a warrant should have been provided. Obviously, heat radiation cannot be seen without some type of tool.
There are no rights in the Constitution that protect us from incriminating ourselves by giving voluntary statements prior to the beginning of a custodial interrogation. However, before the police begin their accusatory interrogation, or questioning John about the crime, they must Mirandize the accused to inform him of his rights.
This requires that the defendant knowingly and intentionally posses the controlled substance, and that the defendant intend to distribute it. (MBAH 22) HOLDING: No REASONING: These facts alone are not enough to establish constructive possession. These were the only facts relevant to Clive’s case, and thus the evidence presented at trial, without anything more, is not sufficient to warrant his conviction. There was other evidence pertaining to Gary, however, which was sufficient to establish constructive possession. Gary had marijuana paraphernalia in what was presumably his bedroom.
It not only eerily resembles Orwell’s creation of “Big Brother”, but it also happens to be a massive waste of government resources and has shown very limited upside. For the good of the general public, the National Security Agency should not have access to domestic metadata on the grounds that it has acted unconstitutionally, unethically, and ineffectively. The NSA has secretly, yet deliberately, overstepped its constitutional boundaries. Under the Patriot Act and FISA warrants, the NSA has received judicial permission to pursue metadata avenues in hopes of foiling domestic terrorist attacks. Each time the agency desires to track an individual, it needs to file a request with FISA and a warrant can only be granted if there is reasonable suspicion.
The sixth amendment also forbids the prosecutor from verbal evidence. The evidence obtained needs scrutiny in front of the jury to determine its validity. This amendment is not applicable if the prosecutor does not know the witness. The defender has the right to a lawyer. Failure to obtain one because of minimal financial resources or ignorance, the state obtains one for the defender (Henham,
NSA Spying should not be allowed because we as Americans have the right to privacy. The NSA should not spy on people, even if the people have nothing to hide. This topic is important because we should be able to keep our information to ourselves and not stalked upon. This is important because you should regard the fact that the NSA could have been going through your cellphone while you read this essay. Works Cited "NSA Spying: Overview."
According to FCPA, it is illegal in the United States to bribe or accept a bribe in return for favors, and most statewide business will abide by these laws. However, when they relocate a division to another country, the company may overlook these laws in order to set up business sooner. This practice is unethical and the company and the employees involved can get into a lot of trouble. According to Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a company cannot keep separate books in order to hide bribe money. Avery Dennison, UTStarcom and Siemens are just a few companies that
There is one question to ask those people. What are they going to do if someone breaks into their home or tries to rob them on the street and they have no defense for it? This country needs to take a stand and let the government know that citizens need weapons so that innocent people do not become the next victim. It is a constitutional right, and it is something that should never be taken
One positive way is that national security was mandated to protect the people and their civil liberties. National security is protecting the right to be free of will. One of the negative aspects of civil liberty and national security crossing paths is that the privacy level that was guaranteed by the government may be disbanded. Privacy is a right and a privilege. As long as there are threats in the world against the American people, privacy will be limited.
Some people believe that if no one had guns there would be no crime however, criminals will still find ways to get guns and this will leave everyone else unarmed and vulnerable. The complete banning of guns would not solve the issue of violent crimes it would only remove guns from the hands of individuals who need them for protection. I believe we do need gun control laws in America but not to the extent of banning guns altogether. America needs to concentrate more on ways to keep guns out of the hands of criminals instead of taking them away from the ones that need