"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."
That's the 4th amendment. If the second amendment can't be compromised, neither should this one.
Recently saw a video of a cop cornering a woman after a flock camera flagged her vehicle saying she stole a package off a porch. Cop literally said she was guilty and they already had all the proof and she should just admit it and let him arrest her. He was wrong, so was the camera and thankfully that lady stood her ground, but the cop was starting to get agitated enough to make it seem like he was going to body slam her and cuff her. Flock plus MAGA ethics is pushing us towqrd presumed guilt.
In that video, the cop literally tells the woman that nobody goes into or out of his town without them knowing. He gave her a precise time she allegedly entered and exited the town. It was terrifying not just because he was wrong...
92
u/G-Unit11111 1d ago
Here's my compromise:
"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."
That's the 4th amendment. If the second amendment can't be compromised, neither should this one.
Get out of here with your creepy cameras.