Understand your point however -- Clatsop County Matters

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

04/18/26 12:51pm

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

Subject: Understand your point however

Author:
Grossman

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09/ 7/06 8:14pm
In reply to: Walter Richards 's message, "Partial correction ..." on 09/ 7/06 9:58am

Maybe it doesn't qualify as a search when they don't enter the vehicle. It is what lies in "plain sight" and then if it looks suspicious they have the right for further investigation. However, pulling you over, in the first place, wasn't random, it was because you were in violation of a law. While we have the U.S. Supreme Court ruling 5-4 in the Michigan v. Sitz case that allows stops without warrant or suspicion as "justified" because of the severity of the drunk driving problem it is known as "The DUI Exception to the Constitution," why isn't the boarding of the commercial fishing vessel by law enforcement agents w/o probable cause not known by any exception to the consitution?

In each circumstance of random searches of vehicles it is because of the safety of the public, health as well as acts of terrorism in the case of at the border. Drunk driving endangers everyone on the roads. The random searches of fishing boats? For what safety benefit is that? Endangered species? Then every single person coming out of any forest area should be able to be searched, as well as have to carry a camera into the wilderness with them since they, potentially, could be destroying habitation or endangered species themselves. No, random searches are, as the judges ruled in Michigan v. Sitz case, because of the severity of the problem. There has been little problem of commercial poaching occurring, absolutely not severe, neither documented nor undocumented.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Perhaps it's viewed differently, because ...	Walter Richards	09/ 8/06 7:07am