Why aren't 2nd amendment advocates protecting the 4th amendment from the Bush admin?

Question

They talk a good game about the 2nd amendment is needed to protect the rest. So when are they going to start protecting them?

-
When will ANY person give a valid reason why an after-the-fact warrant would interfere with anything other than providing oversight?

To date, no one can because they know it does not. Feel free to correct me.
-

Answer 1

Far too many people believe that giving the government a little more power wont hurt anything. And in times of war or military conflicts, citizens are eager to give an administration the proper tools necessary to win. Historically, governments will almost always take advantage of this mindset knowing full well it is only temporary. The separation of powers and the checks and balances built in to the constitution were done so by very intelligent people who understood the nature of people in power as well as what that power does to a persons nature.

We cannot afford to allow a chipping away of our rights for any reason including what the government assures us is extra security. Its not about having something to hide. Its about being able to continue with freedom of movement within this country without having your papers checked and eyed suspiciously wherever we go. The goal of terrorists is not to kill people. The goal is to create fear in the living. When we allow our country to become a police state, they win.

Answer 2

Well, If someone breaks into my house without a warrant they are getting shot. Thats how I protect the 4th amendment. See how neatly that works. As for wiretaps, they need warrants. Those outside the US don't really have Constitutional protection. Inside the US they need warrants. If I catch someone tapping my phone, they will get the same treatment. Without a warrant they are just burglars and can be shot on sight no matter what kind of badge they have. Now you know how to use the 2nd amendment to protect the 4th.

Answer 3

I've never understood that myself. It does little good to have a gun if you allow the government to seize property (including your gun) at will, lock you up forever for no reason, and spy on everything you do.

But maybe that's just me.

Edit: Well, I'm glad all these conservatives are ready to give Hillary the right to spy on anyone at anytime. With all the conspiracies about Vince Foster and the Clinton shady dealings, I would not have thought they would have trusted them with such power. Especially with 70% (Bush's number) to 90% (Red Cross) of the detainees being innocent.

Answer 4

It's the "probable cause" clause. What IS "probable?" If you are acting in a supect manor, is this not probable cause? If you receive phone calls and text messages from known terrorists overseas, does this not make a case for "probable cause?" So, what you are saying is that those of us who support this "probable cause" clause should then look with suspicion upon those who don't? And that we should then exercise our right to bear arms? Works for me. All yellow bellied, spineless, brainless libs, up against the wall!

Answer 5

Chi Bro,

I agree with you most of the time and we have good debates.

But I have problems with the words " against unreasonable searches" and "but upon probable cause".

Who defines unreasonable and upon probable cause?

Answer 6

" The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Unreasonable is relative, the standard differs from person to person.

Answer 7

I do not understand what the concerns are of honest law abiding citizens. I do not call terrorists in the middle east or europe, so the governent has no reason to listen to my telephone conversations.

But if they wanted to , well go right ahead, I have nothing to hide from the Government or the Police.

Answer 8

I say everyone needs to get involved with protecting our rights as american citizens.

Answer 9

The key word is unreasonable.