Search & Seizure Without Warrant
- Thread starter rockinbbar
- Start date
- Status
rockinbbar
New member
Originally Posted By: conservative1911Probable Cause: If your looking for fish you can't open the glove box, if your looking for big game you can't open a six-pack cooler. Contraband found in these cases such as; gun or pot would necessarily be thrown out. Much case law concerning this. Size matters.
Mostly, but not entirely.
As I mentioned earlier, the officer has the right to search the area around where you may be standing or sitting to insure his safety while he is in contact with you. That area may indeed extend to anything you can reach quickly. Including the glovebox, etc. Anything they find thereof is considered a "good" find for evidence.
Originally Posted By: frozenbuttSeen on wardens last night that the montana wardens can't make arrests for anything thats got do with drugs. Figured they would be able to.
They should be able to, if they are a commissioned peace officer within their jurisdiction. (Commissioned Peace officers take an oath to uphold ALL laws. Not just CERTAIN laws) If it's their Dept. Policy that they can do nothing about it, then it is certainly not out of the question for them to notify an agency that CAN do something about it....
Mostly, but not entirely.
As I mentioned earlier, the officer has the right to search the area around where you may be standing or sitting to insure his safety while he is in contact with you. That area may indeed extend to anything you can reach quickly. Including the glovebox, etc. Anything they find thereof is considered a "good" find for evidence.
Originally Posted By: frozenbuttSeen on wardens last night that the montana wardens can't make arrests for anything thats got do with drugs. Figured they would be able to.
They should be able to, if they are a commissioned peace officer within their jurisdiction. (Commissioned Peace officers take an oath to uphold ALL laws. Not just CERTAIN laws) If it's their Dept. Policy that they can do nothing about it, then it is certainly not out of the question for them to notify an agency that CAN do something about it....
rockinbbar
New member
Originally Posted By: howlingHello...my dad is gone right now and I enjoy reading on here too and he said I can keep an eye on here and talk about certain things so if a Game Warden seems above the law where does the 4th admendment come in.
They are not above the law. They operate within it. The law isn't always there to protect the public.
Exceptions to the 4th Amendmant are what we are talking about here, and the various ways they do indeed get around it.
They are not above the law. They operate within it. The law isn't always there to protect the public.
Exceptions to the 4th Amendmant are what we are talking about here, and the various ways they do indeed get around it.
I once worked at Arkansas Nuclear One.
Entering the plant one day, I set off an explosive sniffer. I was immediately taken aside, frisked, and had my pockets emptied. When they saw an open pack of cigarettes, and I told them I just smoked a couple, they informed me that the sniffer detected the nitrides from me smoking earlier. They wanted to make sure I didn't have any explosive or what-not.
Entering the plant one day, I set off an explosive sniffer. I was immediately taken aside, frisked, and had my pockets emptied. When they saw an open pack of cigarettes, and I told them I just smoked a couple, they informed me that the sniffer detected the nitrides from me smoking earlier. They wanted to make sure I didn't have any explosive or what-not.
frozenbutt
New member
Originally Posted By: frozenbuttSeen on wardens last night that the montana wardens can't make arrests for anything thats got do with drugs. Figured they would be able to.
They should be able to, if they are a commissioned peace officer within their jurisdiction. (Commissioned Peace officers take an oath to uphold ALL laws. Not just CERTAIN laws) If it's their Dept. Policy that they can do nothing about it, then it is certainly not out of the question for them to notify an agency that CAN do something about it.... [/quote]
The warden said he could not. Gave the guy a good tounge lashing for smoking weed. I'm sure they would call normal law enforcment but they had their hands full.
They should be able to, if they are a commissioned peace officer within their jurisdiction. (Commissioned Peace officers take an oath to uphold ALL laws. Not just CERTAIN laws) If it's their Dept. Policy that they can do nothing about it, then it is certainly not out of the question for them to notify an agency that CAN do something about it.... [/quote]
The warden said he could not. Gave the guy a good tounge lashing for smoking weed. I'm sure they would call normal law enforcment but they had their hands full.
NdIndy
New member
Not really, jurisdiction has to be met as well and in many places jurisdiction isn't state wide for all laws. So staties can enforce only state laws, can't enforce municipal ordinance. But city cops can do both as they reside in the city and the state. Some states may require a special statute to cover state laws.
As a 'fer instance, DUI is a state statute and is the charging statute for DUI's that take place in the city rather than having a separate DUI ordinance in place. But on the charging citation you'll notice a 28-2 ordinance along with the DUI statute (been a while so I don't remember the #'s). The 28-2 is the municipal ordinance that gives city the right to enforce the state law.
Flip side, county cop sees a xxx lawbreaker in city limits. State cop has criminal jurisdiction in the county, but can't enforce a municipal code. So if the county/state has not set a separate law for that eventuality, there's nothing the county cop can directly do. If he wants the city law enforced he has to contact the city and file as a witness to the cities case.
Clear as mud?
As a 'fer instance, DUI is a state statute and is the charging statute for DUI's that take place in the city rather than having a separate DUI ordinance in place. But on the charging citation you'll notice a 28-2 ordinance along with the DUI statute (been a while so I don't remember the #'s). The 28-2 is the municipal ordinance that gives city the right to enforce the state law.
Flip side, county cop sees a xxx lawbreaker in city limits. State cop has criminal jurisdiction in the county, but can't enforce a municipal code. So if the county/state has not set a separate law for that eventuality, there's nothing the county cop can directly do. If he wants the city law enforced he has to contact the city and file as a witness to the cities case.
Clear as mud?
Bowknutt
New member
Originally Posted By: rockinbbarUS Customs & Border Patrol already have you pegged with what you are doing and what you have inside you vehicle when you stop at the inspection point.
People entering the US are subject to a search of themselves and their belongings upon entry.
Some of the sophisticated NEW tools the Customs & Border Patrol have are pretty "invasive"...
Have you noticed the "cameras" and trailer set up at the checkpoints? They can detect nitrates, radiation, and other things. These are on BOTH sides of the highway. If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them....
They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile....
How many of you have seen the big, white F-450 trucks at a Border Patrol checkpoint lately? It has a huge "Box bed" on it?
Wanna guess what THAT is?
It is an X-Ray lab that can drive around your vehicle, or even an 18 wheeler and take an "x-ray" of the entire contents of the vehicle, including contraband & humans and or animals that may be hidden in your vehicle. The probable cause resulting from the new high tech devices are good enough to search anything they deem needs searching. They "see" the guns in your vehicle too. How many, what kind, and how loaded up on ammo you are.
With Big Brother providing technology like that, how long will it be before a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
What happens when private industry gets the technology? It's already here in some cases with some companies....They have digital "sniffers" that you have to walk through to gain entry to where you work....The sniffers, can, and will detect whether you have been shooting within the past several hours, or have been reloading, or handling reloading components. Setting THAT alarm off, you WILL be subjected to a WAY more thourough search and have to answer questions about why you set off their sniffer. This proceedure can take HOURS. You probably won't be paid for it. After you set the sniffer off a couple of times and spend 2-3 hours being searched and questioned, you will probably be told that due to the costly proceedure that YOU keep making them put you through, that if it happens once more, you will be fired, because you are not worth the trouble to keep as an employee....(The preceeding has indeed already happened, BTW)
Interesting points made here. Mostly it involves PROBABLE CAUSE... With enough probable cause, they can do pretty much what they want, when they want.
Shucks Barry--there you go I be looking over my shoulder now for the the big white truck!!!
David
People entering the US are subject to a search of themselves and their belongings upon entry.
Some of the sophisticated NEW tools the Customs & Border Patrol have are pretty "invasive"...
Have you noticed the "cameras" and trailer set up at the checkpoints? They can detect nitrates, radiation, and other things. These are on BOTH sides of the highway. If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them....
How many of you have seen the big, white F-450 trucks at a Border Patrol checkpoint lately? It has a huge "Box bed" on it?
Wanna guess what THAT is?
It is an X-Ray lab that can drive around your vehicle, or even an 18 wheeler and take an "x-ray" of the entire contents of the vehicle, including contraband & humans and or animals that may be hidden in your vehicle. The probable cause resulting from the new high tech devices are good enough to search anything they deem needs searching. They "see" the guns in your vehicle too. How many, what kind, and how loaded up on ammo you are.
With Big Brother providing technology like that, how long will it be before a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
What happens when private industry gets the technology? It's already here in some cases with some companies....They have digital "sniffers" that you have to walk through to gain entry to where you work....The sniffers, can, and will detect whether you have been shooting within the past several hours, or have been reloading, or handling reloading components. Setting THAT alarm off, you WILL be subjected to a WAY more thourough search and have to answer questions about why you set off their sniffer. This proceedure can take HOURS. You probably won't be paid for it. After you set the sniffer off a couple of times and spend 2-3 hours being searched and questioned, you will probably be told that due to the costly proceedure that YOU keep making them put you through, that if it happens once more, you will be fired, because you are not worth the trouble to keep as an employee....(The preceeding has indeed already happened, BTW)
Interesting points made here. Mostly it involves PROBABLE CAUSE... With enough probable cause, they can do pretty much what they want, when they want.
Shucks Barry--there you go I be looking over my shoulder now for the the big white truck!!!
David
This surprised me one night.Me and a buddy took a hound out for some training.I had a gun,22LR,and a spotlight in the car.This is illegal in Pa.On the way back to the car,I saw a flashlight shining by my car and ran to see what was up.It was a state trooper.He asked if it was my car,and did I know having a light and gun was illegal.I said that I knew it was wrong,just too lazy to put the gun away before we took the dog out.He took my name and address and said he had to turn this info over to a warden.He couldn't give me a citation.I was kinda shocked by that.And I think he just blew it off,cause I never heard anything after that.
4949shooter
New member
This was posted by a game warden on officer.com:
Member
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Date:Sep 2003
Location:N. Idaho
Posts:366Wow, after reading all the replies it makes me feel like I should be able to walk on water and shoot lightening bolts from my *****. Now for the rest of my reply...I'm not big into legal wording I'll try to explain as best I can (also just finished a 16 hour day so my mind might not be working right...spelling might suck too ).
We do not have any authority that allows us to violate 4th amendment rights. We are constantly obtaining search warrants to enter houses to look for illegal wildlife etc, just like any "regualar" cop does for drugs etc. We have to play the articulable suspicion and probable cause game like every other cop. Realize that every court, judge, prosecutor, and jury pool will be different all across the country. Some may allow more questionable actions than others will. If a game warden truly entered a house w/o a warrant then there is either (A) exigent circumstances or (B) never gone to a supreme court ruling concerning the entry. My agency has lost some big poaching cases because of bad search warrant entries.
Now for the "more power" aspect. In a way we kinda do when it comes to checking licenses and checkstations. That has come about through a variety of court rulings that basically boil down to our duties of fish and wildlife preservation and protection. Joe Public MUST prove to me that he has a fishing license if I see him fishing. Joe Public must also stop at a checkstation if he has been hunting etc. so we can verify that wildlife is being preserved and protected properly. In comparison you can't just pull a car over to check a drivers license. Because a lot of laws/rules are federally based we also carry federal ID through US Fish and Wildlife service. Alot of waterfowl and migratory bird stuff is federal. This is also our basis from where we can legally cross a state line to pursue a wildlife violation.
As to seizing firearms. It is not a violation of 2nd amendment. We are not prohibiting that person to own a gun, the gun(s) we seize are evidence in a crime. That also goes for ATV's, Campers, Trucks, etc. If they were used in commiting a wildlife crime they are evidence. The bigger the case the more those kind of seizures occur.
As to finding non-wildlife crime. That depends on what authority the "game warden" has in his state. I am a fully sworn certified peace officer just like any city, county, or state cop. I can write speeding tickets, arrest DUI's, seize meth found in a search etc. The difference is we focus on fish and wildlife. If we come across a non-F&G situation we will try to get a county or state cop to take care of it. This is MAINLY because defense attorneys will have a field day with us on the stand because of the "lack of experience" with DUI, drugs, etc. Same reason a deputy or state cop will try to get one of us if they stumble on a illegal wildlife situation. Avoid giving a defense attorney any "ammo".
nuff said
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?54905-game-warden-or-state-police/page2
Member
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Date:Sep 2003
Location:N. Idaho
Posts:366Wow, after reading all the replies it makes me feel like I should be able to walk on water and shoot lightening bolts from my *****. Now for the rest of my reply...I'm not big into legal wording I'll try to explain as best I can (also just finished a 16 hour day so my mind might not be working right...spelling might suck too ).
We do not have any authority that allows us to violate 4th amendment rights. We are constantly obtaining search warrants to enter houses to look for illegal wildlife etc, just like any "regualar" cop does for drugs etc. We have to play the articulable suspicion and probable cause game like every other cop. Realize that every court, judge, prosecutor, and jury pool will be different all across the country. Some may allow more questionable actions than others will. If a game warden truly entered a house w/o a warrant then there is either (A) exigent circumstances or (B) never gone to a supreme court ruling concerning the entry. My agency has lost some big poaching cases because of bad search warrant entries.
Now for the "more power" aspect. In a way we kinda do when it comes to checking licenses and checkstations. That has come about through a variety of court rulings that basically boil down to our duties of fish and wildlife preservation and protection. Joe Public MUST prove to me that he has a fishing license if I see him fishing. Joe Public must also stop at a checkstation if he has been hunting etc. so we can verify that wildlife is being preserved and protected properly. In comparison you can't just pull a car over to check a drivers license. Because a lot of laws/rules are federally based we also carry federal ID through US Fish and Wildlife service. Alot of waterfowl and migratory bird stuff is federal. This is also our basis from where we can legally cross a state line to pursue a wildlife violation.
As to seizing firearms. It is not a violation of 2nd amendment. We are not prohibiting that person to own a gun, the gun(s) we seize are evidence in a crime. That also goes for ATV's, Campers, Trucks, etc. If they were used in commiting a wildlife crime they are evidence. The bigger the case the more those kind of seizures occur.
As to finding non-wildlife crime. That depends on what authority the "game warden" has in his state. I am a fully sworn certified peace officer just like any city, county, or state cop. I can write speeding tickets, arrest DUI's, seize meth found in a search etc. The difference is we focus on fish and wildlife. If we come across a non-F&G situation we will try to get a county or state cop to take care of it. This is MAINLY because defense attorneys will have a field day with us on the stand because of the "lack of experience" with DUI, drugs, etc. Same reason a deputy or state cop will try to get one of us if they stumble on a illegal wildlife situation. Avoid giving a defense attorney any "ammo".
nuff said
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?54905-game-warden-or-state-police/page2
NM Leon
New member
Got any links or reference numbers to laws or court opinions Barry?
What you seem to be saying is that in NM the Fourth Amendment somehow doesn't apply. In Hester v. U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that "Homeowners possess a privacy interest that extends inside their homes and in the curtilage immediately surrounding the outside of their homes, but not in the "open fields" and "wooded areas" extending beyond the curtilage".
There ARE times when a warrant isn't needed. Besides consent, when there is reasonable suspicion that a crime is in progress or is about to occur, if the person was validly arrested and the search was reasonably conducted, and in emergency circumstances where quick action is required (if officers have reason to believe that evidence is being destroyed, or that someone is injured or otherwise in need of assistance for example). if LEOs make a warrantless search they have to be able to justify the reasons in court (or any evidence found is likely to be excluded).
Quote:If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile....
Nonsense. X-rays don't leave radioactive particles to be detected, and they certainly don't make you (or anything else) radioactive. That's not only basic science, it's basic common sense. The reason x-ray techs, nuclear plant techs etc wear dosimeters (radiation badges) is because the radiation they've been exposed to can't be directly detected. The only thing that could make something else (you) radioactive would be intense neutron radiation, and you'd be dead.
Quote:With Big Brother providing technology like that, how long will it be before a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
What happens when private industry gets the technology? It's already here in some cases with some companies....They have digital "sniffers" that you have to walk through to gain entry to where you work....The sniffers, can, and will detect whether you have been shooting within the past several hours, or have been reloading, or handling reloading components.
It's private industry that sells the machines to the government, and you can buy one for yourself if you're interested. They are less than impressive though at detecting residue from shooting.
When I went back to Iraq a year ago, I got into a conversation with one of the TSA guys and asked about their detection since I was wearing the same jacket that I'd been wearing while firing many hundreds of rounds at the range a day before (two years before I'd gone through Phoenix, Houston, Atlanta, Heathrow, Dubai, and Baghdad airports with fired brass in the bottom of my dufflebag not detected). He tested me and my bags out of curiosity with the "sniffer", and it came out negative. He then used the "wipes" which came out positive.
He wasn't very surprised that the 'sniffer" didn't pick anything up except for the amount of shooting I'd done at a crowded range. According to him, if they set the sensitivity of the machine to be able to pick up normal amounts of gunshot residue, it would be constantly giving false positives from people who had used common household cleaners etc.
If they overcame the "normal environmental" sensitivity problems and drove by your house detecting your ammo etc, it would NOT be "perfectly legal" or admissible in court in most circumstances, unless they had a warrant.
Those folks OT linked to aren't very smart. They just showed everybody how to defeat their technology. Hide whatever you are smuggling under the seat you are sitting on and their "passive filters" will block it out while they're blocking your body out.
We drove through x-ray scatter-van check points in Iraq all the time, but there wasn't any passive filtering. Didn't particularly like that.
We also drove through active EMF transmitters that would set bombs off. REALLY didn't like that, especially after it set off some ammo (rockets) that our guys had loaded.
What you seem to be saying is that in NM the Fourth Amendment somehow doesn't apply. In Hester v. U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that "Homeowners possess a privacy interest that extends inside their homes and in the curtilage immediately surrounding the outside of their homes, but not in the "open fields" and "wooded areas" extending beyond the curtilage".
There ARE times when a warrant isn't needed. Besides consent, when there is reasonable suspicion that a crime is in progress or is about to occur, if the person was validly arrested and the search was reasonably conducted, and in emergency circumstances where quick action is required (if officers have reason to believe that evidence is being destroyed, or that someone is injured or otherwise in need of assistance for example). if LEOs make a warrantless search they have to be able to justify the reasons in court (or any evidence found is likely to be excluded).
Quote:If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile....
Nonsense. X-rays don't leave radioactive particles to be detected, and they certainly don't make you (or anything else) radioactive. That's not only basic science, it's basic common sense. The reason x-ray techs, nuclear plant techs etc wear dosimeters (radiation badges) is because the radiation they've been exposed to can't be directly detected. The only thing that could make something else (you) radioactive would be intense neutron radiation, and you'd be dead.
Quote:With Big Brother providing technology like that, how long will it be before a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
What happens when private industry gets the technology? It's already here in some cases with some companies....They have digital "sniffers" that you have to walk through to gain entry to where you work....The sniffers, can, and will detect whether you have been shooting within the past several hours, or have been reloading, or handling reloading components.
It's private industry that sells the machines to the government, and you can buy one for yourself if you're interested. They are less than impressive though at detecting residue from shooting.
When I went back to Iraq a year ago, I got into a conversation with one of the TSA guys and asked about their detection since I was wearing the same jacket that I'd been wearing while firing many hundreds of rounds at the range a day before (two years before I'd gone through Phoenix, Houston, Atlanta, Heathrow, Dubai, and Baghdad airports with fired brass in the bottom of my dufflebag not detected). He tested me and my bags out of curiosity with the "sniffer", and it came out negative. He then used the "wipes" which came out positive.
He wasn't very surprised that the 'sniffer" didn't pick anything up except for the amount of shooting I'd done at a crowded range. According to him, if they set the sensitivity of the machine to be able to pick up normal amounts of gunshot residue, it would be constantly giving false positives from people who had used common household cleaners etc.
If they overcame the "normal environmental" sensitivity problems and drove by your house detecting your ammo etc, it would NOT be "perfectly legal" or admissible in court in most circumstances, unless they had a warrant.
Those folks OT linked to aren't very smart. They just showed everybody how to defeat their technology. Hide whatever you are smuggling under the seat you are sitting on and their "passive filters" will block it out while they're blocking your body out.
We drove through x-ray scatter-van check points in Iraq all the time, but there wasn't any passive filtering. Didn't particularly like that.
We also drove through active EMF transmitters that would set bombs off. REALLY didn't like that, especially after it set off some ammo (rockets) that our guys had loaded.
rockinbbar
New member
Do you just like to argue, Leon?
It ain't ME that needs to brush up on their case law or knowledge of what equipment is at the border patrol DHS check points.
Never said the NM or any other state does away with the 4th amendement either. I said that the courts have upheld searches to gather "fruits of the crime" in circumstances above listed in my initial post. I will post this link though, and mention that my next door neighbor runs the BP office here, and we talk...as well as the note my father had to present to BP at the checkpoint coming back from Las Cruces to where he lives after recieving medical radiation.... http://www.allbusiness.com/government/go...12301065-1.html
Another thing I failed to mention that is indeed a warrantless search where evidence found can be used against you is the routine "Inventory" on impounded vehicles. Such as when you are arrested for DWI & they haul you off to jail. They impound the car you were driving and go through every nook & cranny of it and list items in the car on the "inventory sheet". Also, in this case any contraband the officer conducting the "Inventory" happens to find will further your legal problems.
I'm not saying that LEO's forgo any legal proceedure to secure a search warrant under normal circumstances either. (Including game wardens)...All I did was cite the ways that a search warrant can be curtailed in the examples of the first post. The main way game wardens get to search without consent or warrant is to gather fruits of the crime that they think may be disposed of before they can secure a waarant. This was also covered very extensively in my first post. All I did was cite what any cop that went to the academy knows.
Most of what I cited is listed here: http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimP...oWarrantReq.asp The exception numbers 5 (Five) and 6 (Six) is what gives an officer the legal means to search because he feels evidence can be removed or disposed of.
All the above are very easily verified. Just pick up the phone and call someone that's a lawyer or works with the devices I listed. It's not top secret.
Wanna argue, then have it. I stated what I know. Your milage may vary...
It ain't ME that needs to brush up on their case law or knowledge of what equipment is at the border patrol DHS check points.
Never said the NM or any other state does away with the 4th amendement either. I said that the courts have upheld searches to gather "fruits of the crime" in circumstances above listed in my initial post. I will post this link though, and mention that my next door neighbor runs the BP office here, and we talk...as well as the note my father had to present to BP at the checkpoint coming back from Las Cruces to where he lives after recieving medical radiation.... http://www.allbusiness.com/government/go...12301065-1.html
Another thing I failed to mention that is indeed a warrantless search where evidence found can be used against you is the routine "Inventory" on impounded vehicles. Such as when you are arrested for DWI & they haul you off to jail. They impound the car you were driving and go through every nook & cranny of it and list items in the car on the "inventory sheet". Also, in this case any contraband the officer conducting the "Inventory" happens to find will further your legal problems.
I'm not saying that LEO's forgo any legal proceedure to secure a search warrant under normal circumstances either. (Including game wardens)...All I did was cite the ways that a search warrant can be curtailed in the examples of the first post. The main way game wardens get to search without consent or warrant is to gather fruits of the crime that they think may be disposed of before they can secure a waarant. This was also covered very extensively in my first post. All I did was cite what any cop that went to the academy knows.
All the above are very easily verified. Just pick up the phone and call someone that's a lawyer or works with the devices I listed. It's not top secret.
Wanna argue, then have it. I stated what I know. Your milage may vary...
NM Leon
New member
Do you just like to post BS to scare folks, Barry?
I recognize and understand the detection equipment used at Border Patrol DHS checkpoints very well, having been recently subjected to them (and more) in an active combat theater.
You said: If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile.....
That's completely different than ...the note my father had to present to BP at the checkpoint coming back from Las Cruces to where he lives after recieving medical radiation.
X-rays will not leave any traces of radioactivity to be detected. An X-ray machine is the equivalent of a spotlight, just in a different spectrum of light. It doesn't leave any residue and can't be detected after the fact by a radiation detector any more than a light meter would get a reading off of you in the dark after the spotlight had been turned off. That's just basic science that you are old enough to have learned in high-school. It can't happen, it's a physical impossibility, so stop trying to cry wolf and scare people.
Radioactive isotopes injected into your blood stream (medical radiation) are something else altogether and WILL show up (for a while), not because your body has been turned radioactive, but because you have radioactive particles inside your body (until they are flushed out).
The number of patients that are injected with radioactive isotopes vs the number that get x-rays is what, 1,000:1? To "warn" guys that they are going to need a note from the doctor to get past a check point if they've had an x-ray is irresponsible at best.
Again, cite the case law and court decisions where the courts have upheld that A warden out here can also search your residence without warrant if they believe that you are holding "Fruits of the Crime", and anywhere any court has said that warrant-less drive by searches would be legal or admissible in court,
as in a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
Most of what your link says is pretty much what I said about warrant-less searches, and even expands on it:
Unless the fact-pattern fits one of the six exceptions discussed above, a warrant is required for police to conduct a search or seizure. Note that for Exception 1, search incident to a lawful arrest, and Exception 5, the automobile exception, although no warrant is required, there is a probable cause requirement. For a search incident to a lawful arrest, the officer must have had probable cause for the original arrest. If the original arrest was unreasonable or unlawful, the evidence discovered from the search will be excluded as fruit of the poisonous tree (see the subchapter on the Exclusionary Rule). For the Automobile Exception, the officer must have probable cause to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of a crime, instrumentalities of a crime, contraband, or fruits of a crime, whether the vehicle is moving or already stopped. Exception 4 ("stop and frisk") does not require probable cause, but does require "reasonable suspicion." Only Exception 3 (consent) requires no grounds on the part of the police for making the search.
It's okay for your mileage to vary, but it ought to be somewhere within reaching distance of reality.
I recognize and understand the detection equipment used at Border Patrol DHS checkpoints very well, having been recently subjected to them (and more) in an active combat theater.
You said: If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile.....
That's completely different than ...the note my father had to present to BP at the checkpoint coming back from Las Cruces to where he lives after recieving medical radiation.
X-rays will not leave any traces of radioactivity to be detected. An X-ray machine is the equivalent of a spotlight, just in a different spectrum of light. It doesn't leave any residue and can't be detected after the fact by a radiation detector any more than a light meter would get a reading off of you in the dark after the spotlight had been turned off. That's just basic science that you are old enough to have learned in high-school. It can't happen, it's a physical impossibility, so stop trying to cry wolf and scare people.
Radioactive isotopes injected into your blood stream (medical radiation) are something else altogether and WILL show up (for a while), not because your body has been turned radioactive, but because you have radioactive particles inside your body (until they are flushed out).
The number of patients that are injected with radioactive isotopes vs the number that get x-rays is what, 1,000:1? To "warn" guys that they are going to need a note from the doctor to get past a check point if they've had an x-ray is irresponsible at best.
Again, cite the case law and court decisions where the courts have upheld that A warden out here can also search your residence without warrant if they believe that you are holding "Fruits of the Crime", and anywhere any court has said that warrant-less drive by searches would be legal or admissible in court,
as in a big white truck drives down your street and sniffs out your gunpowder for reloading, or detects how many guns you keep in your home, and how much ammo you have for each gun? What will they use the information for? All perfectly legal. They are indeed "searching" without warrant in those cases, aren't they?
Most of what your link says is pretty much what I said about warrant-less searches, and even expands on it:
Unless the fact-pattern fits one of the six exceptions discussed above, a warrant is required for police to conduct a search or seizure. Note that for Exception 1, search incident to a lawful arrest, and Exception 5, the automobile exception, although no warrant is required, there is a probable cause requirement. For a search incident to a lawful arrest, the officer must have had probable cause for the original arrest. If the original arrest was unreasonable or unlawful, the evidence discovered from the search will be excluded as fruit of the poisonous tree (see the subchapter on the Exclusionary Rule). For the Automobile Exception, the officer must have probable cause to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of a crime, instrumentalities of a crime, contraband, or fruits of a crime, whether the vehicle is moving or already stopped. Exception 4 ("stop and frisk") does not require probable cause, but does require "reasonable suspicion." Only Exception 3 (consent) requires no grounds on the part of the police for making the search.
It's okay for your mileage to vary, but it ought to be somewhere within reaching distance of reality.
So a game warden can come in to your house without a warrant if he believes that you have a duck that you shot out of season, but a regular old cop needs a warrant if he believes you have a murder weapon in your house? That is not accurate and without meeting one of the 6 exceptions to the general requirement for a search warrant, a warrant is required. The fact that the evidence can be destroyed is not an emergency. Just about any evidence can be destroyed, or desposed of. If that were a reason to just go busting in then we would not need warrants at all. I can guarantee you that a game warden has no more authority to enter your home than any other law enforcement officer does.
Originally Posted By: steve154So a game warden can come in to your house without a warrant if he believes that you have a duck that you shot out of season, but a regular old cop needs a warrant if he believes you have a murder weapon in your house?
Based on what I have been reading here the last couple of days, the answer is...yes, but only if you live in New Mexico or Oregon.
Those 2 states have their own 4th Amendments, and the original one, usually referred to as "the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America" does not apply to game wardens in those 2 states.
So your duck is safe in New York.
Based on what I have been reading here the last couple of days, the answer is...yes, but only if you live in New Mexico or Oregon.
Those 2 states have their own 4th Amendments, and the original one, usually referred to as "the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America" does not apply to game wardens in those 2 states.
So your duck is safe in New York.
Originally Posted By: NM Leon
Quote:If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile....
Nonsense. X-rays don't leave radioactive particles to be detected, and they certainly don't make you (or anything else) radioactive. That's not only basic science, it's basic common sense. The reason x-ray techs, nuclear plant techs etc wear dosimeters (radiation badges) is because the radiation they've been exposed to can't be directly detected. The only thing that could make something else (you) radioactive would be intense neutron radiation, and you'd be dead.
I read, and re-read, the original post...Rockinbbar NEVER said that the equipment would go off because of having recently having a medical x-ray...not onec, not even implied.
The concern here is the cumulative effect of x-ray...having another dose of radiation soon after just having one at the doctor's office is not a good practice and COULD be harmful.
The dosimeter you mention keeps track of the CUMULATIVE dosage over time...you are correct on that...but once again, rockinbbar did NOT state that the equipment at the border would detect recent medical x-ray.
I urge you to re-read the original post and then modify your reply.
Quote:If you just had an X-Ray, you have to explain that to them. Your Dr. should have given you a "hall pass" to get past them.... They WILL call and talk to your Dr. before they let you go. You'd better hope he's not playing golf without his cell phone, or you could be there awhile....
Nonsense. X-rays don't leave radioactive particles to be detected, and they certainly don't make you (or anything else) radioactive. That's not only basic science, it's basic common sense. The reason x-ray techs, nuclear plant techs etc wear dosimeters (radiation badges) is because the radiation they've been exposed to can't be directly detected. The only thing that could make something else (you) radioactive would be intense neutron radiation, and you'd be dead.
I read, and re-read, the original post...Rockinbbar NEVER said that the equipment would go off because of having recently having a medical x-ray...not onec, not even implied.
The concern here is the cumulative effect of x-ray...having another dose of radiation soon after just having one at the doctor's office is not a good practice and COULD be harmful.
The dosimeter you mention keeps track of the CUMULATIVE dosage over time...you are correct on that...but once again, rockinbbar did NOT state that the equipment at the border would detect recent medical x-ray.
I urge you to re-read the original post and then modify your reply.
- Status