Register

US Supreme Court rules strip searches are OK

  1. 12voltman59
    12voltman59
    Leave it to a majority of our "non-judicial activist justices" on the US Supreme Court to rule that it is Okay-Dokey for police to strip search anyone who is arrested for any reason, no matter the charge or their prior record.

    As it did stand--many states and even many federal law enforcement agencies such as the US Marshals Service, which main function is to arrest absconding criminals, has a rule that prohibits strip searching prisoners who were arrested for "minor crimes" but when a power is given like allowing things like strip searches for any and all crimes---you can be sure that very quickly, many if not most of those states that to present had banned such searches--will now allow them and in fact, probably require that automatic strip searches becomes SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) and those federal agencies will follow suit as well if they feel it is worth their while to change the rules.

    I guess that some would say--"well--if you don't do anything wrong to get arrested for--then why worry about such a thing?" Well--the case that started this--police pulled over a car--the wife was driving the car but during the traffic stop, as is customary, the officer checked the IDs of both the driver and the passenger, which was the lady's husband---the records check came up that the man had a bench warrant issued many years back for a something like a Failure to Appear or pay a fine to a local court---he was arrested, taken to jail and held for an entire week in the local jail and when he was being processed---the police did not only a regular pat down of him--make him strip down and such---they did a complete strip search---the gist of this was----the man had paid off his fine SEVEN YEARS PRIOR but someone never removed the warrant from the system.

    Of course--with Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion supporting this ruling--he argued that it is merely a prudent thing for police to strip search anyone who is arrested for any reason and being put in jail for the safety of other inmates and jail staff----admittedly that sounds reasonable on its face---but when you put this in context of so many other ways that our rights and freedoms are being eroded--largely thanks to our conservative "judicial activist" Supreme Court---it is just one more little piece of our freedoms from going by the wayside thanks to an all intrusive government, being done not by evil, liberalistic, communistic/socialist types---but by the "we love, defend and protect freedom" conservative element.

    I don't really expect much to be said about this ruling on here--just noting it and posting it up as but one more lament about the erosion of fundamental rights here in the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave."
  2. æonpax
    `
    Unfortunately, criminals started using their body cavities so much to hide contraband, evidence and or weapons, a strip search is sometimes necessary. Having said that, I do not trust the police and since the internet has arrived, have seem many first hand examples to police brutality and abuse of authority. None the less, while some police are criminal in their tactics, most are not and would err on the side of allowing them to protect themselves by doing a strip search.

    I was arrested myself not to long ago performing an act of civil disobedience during a rally. During the arrest/booking phase, I was patted down by a female cop. I asked her if she was going to do a strip search and was looked at as if I was crazy. She just said no....I was out in a few hours anyways but the incident reminded me that such searches are at the discretion of the police. I guess I didn't look too suspicious or perhaps that there was a group of six of us arrested for the same thing and it would have looked bad.




  3. becketbicd
    becketbicd
    well all this started from 911 look it was the bush adminastration that put this ball in play by inacting the patriot act not the courts . Bush used the courts as if they were his to use like that look at his secound "election". if he thought he could get or force the courts to go in his favor he sent things there so they cound not be questioned. now every one is worried ???
Results 1 to 3 of 3
Back to Top