Wat do u think are sum of america's traditional civil liberties?

Question

Do u believe that routine searches of people would be an acceptable trade-off of civil liberties in exchange for protection against terrorists.

Answer 1

Good question -

The Courts have made some exceptions to the freedoms set out in the Bill of Rights. Usually, these exceptions are drawn quite narrowly, though.

A person at the border has less rights than a person elsewhere.

Police can make a brief stop and "pat down" for their own protection - there has to be some articulatable reason for the stop, though.

Let's not get hung up on the word "terrorist" - our civil liberties protect everybody, no matter what they are labeled. I remember when all a police officer had to do was mutter "communist" and the enemies of freedom were screaming to do away with the suspect's liberties - to protect us from godless communism, of course.

Answer 2

Well, in the US, most civil liberties are defined in the Constitution.

So, in your example, the 4th Amendment is the relevant standard: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures"

So, by that standard, are routing searches "reasonable" given the danger of not doing them, versus the intrustion of doing them?

And does it matter whether the search is someplace like an airport or subway station, where people are concentrated and where they can avoid going to avoid the search? Does the answer change if police can simply grab people off the street for no reason, with no reasonable suspicion of criminal activity?

Answer 3

Well I think we should keep what we have