It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Absurd Fourth Circuit ruling embodies everything that’s wrong with drug raids

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 04:28 PM
Greetings- A couple of things.. You forgot Uruguay as a Country that has gone as far as selling cannabis themselves.

As far as the 4th Amendment issue. They'd still need a Search Warrant for the residence(s). Because it is a duplex and the garbage becomes "co-mingled" a "reasonable person" would think that a plastic baggie, commonly used to package cannabis for sale, containing a green leafy substance could come from any of the dwellings and/or a "concerned citizen" filed the refuse. Then each separate dwelling would need paper.

To quote a teacher from the police academy when I went through 25 yrs ago as it relates to the 4th Amendment "You can't look for an elephant in a shoe box"

Any open space/open to the public area takes 'surveillance' in order to build Your Probable Cause Affidavit in order to secure a Search Warrant...

It reads like one "Dime Bag dealer" dropped a dime on another dime bagger, way toooooo much paper for grass


Proud Member of LEAP™

Edit: That suspected green leafy substance will also need to be verified via a certified criminal justice lab as being "cannabis" There are 'field kits' that could be verified on the street. I didn't read where this was done either.. It might also be a small town where young, badge heavy turds want to clear up that vendetta from high school when they used to get teased/bullied.. "The abused becomes the abuser"
edit on 10/13/2014 by JimNasium because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 29 2015 @ 09:39 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I expect there is a very long list of injuries and killings when it does come to making arrests and conducting searches. Over time it is part of the reason now for such a large use of force now. Perhaps a better motivation for moving towards a more reasonable application of force is money.

What is the financial cost of breaking up homes and lives compared to providing the medical assistance someone needs? I know the police and courts are generally more concerned about their own financial accounts rather than the overall social cost. Have there been any studies into this aspect of police policy?

posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 06:42 AM

originally posted by: 3n19m470
Great thread krazyshot. I don't have much more to add except to say I agree that there is an easy way to end most of the gang violence and cripple the cartels as well. The solution is painfully obvious. But people have been conditioned to accept that drugs are basically the devil and must be combated at all costs and its worth it to give up everything, even if you don't end up putting a dent in "the devil" after all is said and done. Drug use has not gone down due to prohibition. Therefore it stands to reason that it will not go up upon the repeal of prohibition. It should actually go down, for various reasons. There is nothing to fear, but fear itself.

Actually, i think the answer is even simpler. People can stop using drugs. And people who are addicted can get the treatment they need to break their addictions. Cartels, gangs, and other dealers can't make a profit if no one buys their products.

But let's face it, people here love drugs. Everyone knows the typical American college is an amusement park for drugs, underage drinking, and orgies. And our tv, music, & movies are full of references to drugs. Even the last 3 US Presidents have openly admitted to illegal drug use. And let's not forget that Hilary was a hippie with Bill, and Jeb has many stories about his drug accolades. So the hypocrisy of having a "War on Drugs" is astounding when even our own leaders are guilty.

They either need to 1) replace the War on Drugs with something more in line with American reality, or 2) get serious about the War on Drugs by going after politicians, judges, police, lobbyists, and other powerful parts of the system. They can start with random but rigorous drug tests on them and extreme penalties if found guilty. After all, they're the ones ruining the lives of American citizens caught growing plants. And if those people are as anti-drug as they say they are, they should prove it by being examples.

Besides, I think it's better to drug test those people anyway. Do you really want our politicians to be hallucinating on "stuff" while writing a war bill? Or police who are strung on "something" & need a fix, so they go around harassing citizens to get money for that fix? (I personally think many of these politicians are strung out on opiates anyway, like Rick Perry during his "Oops" debacle.)
edit on 30-3-2015 by enlightenedservant because: didn't know the names of some substances were censored. "Oops" - said in Rick Perry's voice

new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in