The exclusionary rule is a deterrent against searches and seizures. Any evidence that is gained through an illegal search or seizure is now inadmissible in criminal proceedings, per the exclusionary rule. Supporters of the exclusionary rule argue that it helps prevent illegal searches and seizures against law enforcement. Those against the exclusionary rule argue that the exclusionary rule keeps criminals out of jail and there are other preventative measures such as suspending police officers without pay, dismissing them from a case, or in extreme circumstances terminating employment of officers who violate the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects all citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures from all government officials.
In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.
To clarify, although Holmes quarrels that the Supreme Court was right in their decision to arrest Schenck whom, “…as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive of evils that Congress has the right to prevent.” In contrast, this decision violates the 13th Amendment since Schenck was not presenting an harm or danger. But, however, his actions were, “…more like someone shouting, not falsly, but truly…” In a sense, the Supreme Court was incorrect in their decision; therefore, U.S. citizens have the right to protest during times of
Stop question and frisk has created a lot of controversy because of the misuse police officer are giving it. Evidence provided by the Huffington Post and the New York Times suggest that many of these stops can be attributed to racial. in a 2011 Statistic given by the Center for Constitutional Rights, show that black and Latinos are disproportionately stopped, black make the 51% of the people being stop and frisk and Latinos/Hispanic make the 33%. But, this not enough to say that stop question and frisk is not a useful tactic and that is not a good tool for officer and community safety. Journalists have mentioned about an increase in murder in New York City, and one of the reasons to this is that the city has settled the practice of stop question and frisk because "the department 's stop and frisk tactics were unconstitutional" said the judge Shira A. Scheindlin of Federal District Court.
According to the magazine daily news it suggest, “the NYPD Patrol Guide encourages the use of pepper spray for noncompliance (Moskos, 2014).” It seems like it is a less lethal technique, but it is actually still dangerous because people may be allergic to the acidic substance and might end up dying. Overall, the use of force needs to be done, but only when it is 100% necessary or else the community will see it as a violation of the law. If the use of force is being used when it is necessary, people will not be disrespecting the police and protesting police
The 2nd amendment of the United States is ¨The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.¨ This statement plainly states that every American has the right to bear arms, there are no other possible interpretations of this amendment that make any logical understanding. The rights cannot be violated because the Government deems it to be politically incorrect, The rights of the people are not being read broadly enough and the misinterpretation leads to ignorance and irrational fear of firearms. ( Ferrara, 1) The District of Columbia´s ban on firearms is totally unconstitutional and a violation of American Liberty. The Mayor, Adrian Fenty argues that since the ban crime rates have dropped; This is a complete fallacy. Since the 1976 ban murder
A major benefit for having body cams is the fact that it will decrease the force used by Police Officers. For the past couple of years there has been many videos of Police Officers using excessive force against innocent victims, especially with African Americans. “The notion has been around for a while. But since August 's fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri -- for which witness accounts varied widely -- it 's gained traction to become part of the national conversation about police conduct.” (Brandon Griggs 1) People have been recently protesting against Police Officers because of the excessive force people have seen them use recently in viral videos. Some Departments have been using body cams and have seen some significant results.
I think that Utilitarians favor exploring the alternatives because doing something to someone, even a criminal, who has committed a heinous crime, morally wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right, it is setting the wrong view for society. I do not agree with not punishing people who do wrong things. I feel that no matter how big the crime or infraction is, there must be punishment, if not then society will keep breaking the rules, and then we would live in an unsafe world, we would not have a sound mind, and be able to function,
Comey believes police officers have the right to be forceful when confronting a suspect. He also indicates that videos of police brutality should not be posted or distributed in any way. Not do only this sounds absurd, but it also sounds as though it is not significant if some of the people who are arrested are also brutally treated. If police officer can be abusive and treat their suspect roughly then they would be breaking Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (US Const. amend.
People take advantage of Amendment One by verbally hurting someone purposely or they will state false facts. The Constitution does not protect these acts at of abuse. For example Amendment Two states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Although United States citizens have the right to bear arms, some people choose to use this law to commit crimes such as murder or robbing banks. To use one law to violate another does not make logical sense whatsoever, and committing a crime based on the Constitution is not protected in the Constitution.The Constitution gives us the opportunity to achieve Equality in society. Based on the Constitution, equality is achievable.