SCOTUS rules: strip searches appropriate for ANY offense.
POSTED BY: HKCavalier
UPDATED: Saturday, April 7, 2012 03:31
VIEWED: 3359
PAGE 3 of 4
Shameful. The Supreme Court has become a joke.
*Note to everyone*: Anthony is spot-on. Pay no heed to Rappy's pleas for pity.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
The guidelines used by New Jersey that I just linked to said you need both the okay of the person in charge of the facility (which they probably had) and a warrant (which is questionable) to perform a cavity search.
It does appear that the department of corrections was going against the state's guideline, and perhaps state laws. That however was not addresses nor would be by the US Supreme Court. The lawsuit was based on the fourth amendment, which the court found the routine strip searches of individuals entering jails or prisons does not violate.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That appears to be the case. Good to know the SCOTUS supports arresting people off the street and tossing them in jail regardless of innocence or guilt, and then forcing degrading acts upon them. Makes you really feel like we live in an enlightened system. Maybe New Jersey could hire some of the guards from Abu Ghraib and Blackwater.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Simple - follow one or more of them black robed punks home, bust em when they almost inevitably commit some minor traffic violation, and then do this crap to THEM.
And hoo boy, watch how fast they change their minds, ehe ?
Or find a way to throw that treatment in the direction of some of these cops or corrections officials, in fact...
How about making it official policy to do so to said corrections officials at the beginning of every shift, while insinuating (probably accurately) that THEY are the ones most often responsible for contraband, hmm ?
As usual, as soon as the lords in black and blue have to face a level playing field, on noes, it's not "fair" anymore and they have a sudden change of heart, or wanna further manipulate the law to exclude themselves from it, and that right there is the root of corruption, no one in america should ever, ever, be allowed to write or enforce a law they themselves are not subject to the consequences of.
Case in point - wanting to ban recording them, but justify recording us, likely in response to us turning their surveillence society around on em and catching out the massive amounts of abusive conduct.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-police-eavesdropping-2
0120401,0,5025698.story
Funny thing about that, in a stand up case, a recording PROTECTS the officer, no matter the source, and thus the attempt to outlaw recording them is a backhanded admission of guilt.
Also, such searches are far more about bullying, harrassment and humilation than any supposed safety.
Case in point - The Milwaukee Police Dept make an unofficial policy of this type of intimidation, and only now is finally facing the music about it.
http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/144297755.html
Myself, I certainly try to avoid trouble if possible, since my response to being felt up or assaulted in that way is decking someone, and that comes with its own problems, sure - but frankly I believe that to be a wholly justified response if the search in question is just screwing with someone for the LuLz.
-Frem
"I do not serve The Blind God."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
That appears to be the case. Good to know the SCOTUS supports arresting people off the street and tossing them in jail regardless of innocence or guilt, and then forcing degrading acts upon them. Makes you really feel like we live in an enlightened system. Maybe New Jersey could hire some of the guards from Abu Ghraib and Blackwater.
The case before the court had nothing to do with the man being held for 6 days, or where he was held. It only had to do with the strip searches. If you get arrested and have to be held for some length of time before you go before a judge you will be put into a jail. It has been that way for awhile.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Simple - follow one or more of them black robed punks home, bust em when they almost inevitably commit some minor traffic violation, and then do this crap to THEM.
And hoo boy, watch how fast they change their minds, ehe ?
Or find a way to throw that treatment in the direction of some of these cops or corrections officials, in fact...
How about making it official policy to do so to said corrections officials at the beginning of every shift, while insinuating (probably accurately) that THEY are the ones most often responsible for contraband, hmm ?
As usual, as soon as the lords in black and blue have to face a level playing field, on noes, it's not "fair" anymore and they have a sudden change of heart, or wanna further manipulate the law to exclude themselves from it, and that right there is the root of corruption, no one in america should ever, ever, be allowed to write or enforce a law they themselves are not subject to the consequences of.
Case in point - wanting to ban recording them, but justify recording us, likely in response to us turning their surveillence society around on em and catching out the massive amounts of abusive conduct.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-police-eavesdropping-2
0120401,0,5025698.story
Funny thing about that, in a stand up case, a recording PROTECTS the officer, no matter the source, and thus the attempt to outlaw recording them is a backhanded admission of guilt.
Also, such searches are far more about bullying, harrassment and humilation than any supposed safety.
Case in point - The Milwaukee Police Dept make an unofficial policy of this type of intimidation, and only now is finally facing the music about it.
http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/144297755.html
Myself, I certainly try to avoid trouble if possible, since my response to being felt up or assaulted in that way is decking someone, and that comes with its own problems, sure - but frankly I believe that to be a wholly justified response if the search in question is just screwing with someone for the LuLz.
-Frem
"I do not serve The Blind God."
If a officer gets arrested and put in jail they will be searched as such, so they are subjected to that law, just the same as other people who are arrested. It is also interesting to note that the corrections officers are not the one setting policies.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
If a officer gets arrested and put in jail they will be searched as such, so they are subjected to that law, just the same as other people who are arrested. It is also interesting to note that the corrections officers are not the one setting policies.
Hello,
Possibly Frem believes that Officers of the Law are not as liable to be arrested for their petty offences. From my own observations, I think he is correct.
I think Frem is also quite correct that the watchmen are responsible for much of the contraband, either directly or indirectly through bribery to look the other way.
I understand where you're coming from Nick, but I think that even the accused deserve a fair shake at privacy when it can be afforded to them. My rule of thumb is thus: Dignity and respect always, even to criminals. As much as you can give them. Otherwise we're not running corrections facilities. We're running Pain and Shame centers.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196
Never forget what this man is. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.”
--Thomas S. Szasz
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:
I understand where you're coming from Nick, but I think that even the accused deserve a fair shake at privacy when it can be afforded to them. My rule of thumb is thus: Dignity and respect always, even to criminals. As much as you can give them. Otherwise we're not running corrections facilities. We're running Pain and Shame centers.
Yes they do, they also deserve to be safe within a jail. Which is more important, inmate safety or inmate dignity? I realize that it is not one or the other, but for me safety it priority one, for the inmates and the guards.
A person can recover better from some humiliation then they can from knife wounds or even violence related to other contraband.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The case before the court had nothing to do with the man being held for 6 days, or where he was held. It only had to do with the strip searches. If you get arrested and have to be held for some length of time before you go before a judge you will be put into a jail. It has been that way for awhile.
Understood, still don't like. Potential for abuse is too high. I don't like that people suspend all their rights the moment they're accused of a crime or even convicted.
The ones with the inclination will make or find shivs no matter what. Generally they're not hiding knives up their backsides though. It's damn uncomfortable. A simple cell search would probably be more successful in finding weapons, and when they're going in, you've think if they had weapons that weren't taken they'd have already tried to use them on the guards/police.
So if it's not really necessary, there really is only one reason they're doing that - psyching out detainees and starting the institutionalization process by denying basic humanity early on.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why should safety trump dignity? Really, why? To my mind, safety is a bug-a-boo, a nonsuch, a fiction, a distinctly relative term that has more to do with perception than reality. Meanwhile, dignity is pretty straight-forward (hint: nobody has to drop trow), an achievable goal. Why not ask the inmates which they'd rather be assured of by the powers that be? Something tells me they'd see things a little differently than you do. I highly doubt that inmate safety is really the concern here anyway. Sorry.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME