4th Amendment Under Threat

The title of the article seems to lay this at Biden’s feet, but the article doesn’t really do that (nor should it).


Welcome to the United States, one nation under corporations. With liberty and justice only to mega rich ceos.

1 Like

You should write a book. :open_book:

1 Like

Good. Throw out all these “amendments” and rewrite the constitution for a new age, new people new society.

Carry over the things that are good and do away with the nonsense.

I’m not sure which is scarier, your embrace of authoritarianism, your antipathy to freedom, or your disregard for protections of individual rights.


In my opinion, the only difference between the USA and PRC is the PRC is honest about what “rights” you have and not have. While the USA tells you that you have all these rights but makes complicated exceptions for them, then criminalizes the exercise of those rights when they are the exception.

That and the USA is really controlled by corporations, not the people’s votes as we’re led to believe. All of various media outlets are controlled by about 5 companies. They control everything you see and hear. Corporations like Google can about trample on your 4th amendment rights by making deals with law enforcement agencies.

You think crackdowns don’t happen in the US? It does. Such as BLM protestors arrested due to appearance in protests using facial recognition software.

There are enough laws in the US that they can trample on anyone’s rights at will, by using various laws to their advantage. And they will lawyer their way out of everything. Such as saying you never had such and such rights due to your status.

This is NOT the intent of the Bill of Rights.

You should be worried about your ignorance and blindness

I am always worried about my ignorance and endeavor to correct it as much as possible. However, while my sight isn’t what it was, I’m far from blind and glasses more than correct.

The complexity of the legal question in the article gets ratcheted up a notch by the presence of guns. In gun-free countries the police can break into a home under certain circumstances, eg., if they believe that they must do so to prevent loss of life, and they will do it in a manner that is (usually) consistent with that aim. In the US, the fact that guns are everywhere means either that (a) any such entry is a violent onesided shoot-out or (b) the entry isn’t attempted in the first place to avoid a violent onesided shoot-out.

In this particular case, I’d say the police acted properly. It isn’t their fault that the law allows people who may not be of sound mind (temporarily) to own lethal weapons. I don’t see any way to fix the problem for as long as Americans consider that particular right to be non-negotiable; inevitably, they’re going to give up other rights to hold onto it. The right to own guns is fundamentally incompatible with the right to a civilized, effective and humane police force.

:rofl: Far far far from honest. Have you actually read their constitution?

1 Like

Based on what is in the article, the police acted extremely inappropriately. The question is only whether they acted unconstitutionally, which I believe they did. We’ll see if the conservative judges back up the people’s rights or support the police.

There is no reason this has to be the case.

1 Like

Not sure to laugh or cry about such issues. In America many police departments use asset seizures to prop up their operating budgets. The previous Attorney General Bill Barr even wanted to expand this practice. Without even filing charges against you…your assets like home, car, cash can be seized and you are expected to prove your innocence before the government sells your assets and pockets the cash.

But try to seize someone’s guns…now that’s a whole different ballgame.

[Police abuse civil asset forfeiture laws while innocents pay the price (usatoday.com)]

Chance for real bipartisanship: End ‘policing for profit’ – Press Enterprise(Police abuse civil asset forfeiture laws while innocents pay the price)

1 Like

To me the obvious answer is to restore citizens’ protections where there is police abuse, not to expand the police abuse to other categories of things.

1 Like

Chinas constitution. You mean those papers with a sentence wrapped inside of a cookie that we all feel good about afterwards and forget about all our worries with?


All right here!

Some hilarious gems right here. Click here. Warning: Long and obnoxious.

All citizens of the People’s Republic of China are equal before the law.

The State respects and preserves human rights.

Article 34 All citizens of the People’s Republic of China who have reached the age of 18 have the right to vote and stand for election, regardless of ethnic status, race, sex, occupation, family background, religious belief, education, property status or length of residence, except persons deprived of political rights according to law.


Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.

To quote @Rocket

Article 36 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoy freedom of religious belief.
No State organ, public organization or individual may compel citizens to believe in, or not to believe in, any religion; nor may they discriminate against citizens who believe in, or do not believe in, any religion.
The State protects normal religious activities. No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the State.
Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination.

Article 37 Freedom of the person of citizens of the People’s Republic of China is inviolable.
No citizen may be arrested except with the approval or by decision of a people’s procuratorate or by decision of a people’s court, and arrests must be made by a public security organ.
Unlawful detention or deprivation or restriction of citizens’ freedom of the person by other means is prohibited, and unlawful search of the person of citizens is prohibited.


Article 39 The residences of citizens of the People’s Republic of China are inviolable. Unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a citizen’s residence is prohibited.


Article 40 Freedom and privacy of correspondence of citizens of the People’s Republic of China are protected by law. No organization or individual may, on any ground, infringe upon citizens’ freedom and privacy of correspondence, except in cases where, to meet the needs of State security or of criminal investigation, public security or procuratorial organs are permitted to censor correspondence in accordance with the procedures prescribed by law.


Article 41 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China have the right to criticize and make suggestions regarding any State organ or functionary. Citizens have the right to make to relevant State organs complaints or charges against, or exposures of, any State organ or functionary for violation of law or dereliction of duty; but fabrication or distortion of facts for purposes of libel or false incrimination is prohibited.
The State organ concerned must, in a responsible manner and by ascertaining the facts, deal with the complaints, charges or exposures made by citizens. No one may suppress such complaints, charges and exposures or retaliate against the citizens making them.
Citizens who have suffered losses as a result of infringement of their civic rights by any State organ or functionary have the right to compensation in accordance with the provisions of law.


Article 48 Women in the People’s Republic of China enjoy equal rights with men in all spheres of life, in political, economic, cultural, social and family life.
The State protects the rights and interests of women, applies the principle of equal pay for equal work to men and women alike and trains and selects cadres from among women.


1 Like

Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.

This gets me every time.

People on the left side of the aisle cannot figure out what they want. They want to get rid of police but at the same time give them more power.

If they can confiscate weapons, why not take the knives, hammers, metal pipes, 2X4s etc. A lot of ways to kill yourself or somebody else.

I just cant bring myself to load a chinese government site on any of my devices. Just cant. But ya its pretty bad. Would be funnier oif there wasnt so much mass murder, slavery, forced castration etc etc.

That’s why I copied some of my favourites.

The last one is intentional for @icon