The Instigator
blabber90
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
mria24
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The US government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 803 times Debate No: 54248
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

blabber90

Pro

P1: According to the fourth amendment of the US constitution it is stated that,"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." Which is basically stating that every individual has the right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary invasions. Therefore, No individual should have these fundamental rights violated from anyone else including the authority (government) itself without their consent for the government guarantees the protection of these rights to the individual.

P2: Unless there is reasonable basis i.e. probable cause, such as a strong indication that there is evidence provided at a certain location for an alleged criminal ,then the search can take place, but of course followed by a warrant issued from the authority (judge or magistrate) permitting the search to be done. There are also exceptions to the search that can take place without a warrant,however, if that is the case it still must be done out of a strong evident basis for the cause. No individual should have to experience an invasion and violation to their rights of freedom and privacy.

C: The US government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause.

Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu...
mria24

Con


P1: Probable cause is required for making an arrest or conduct a search or warrant. “Having probable cause requires a reasonable basis for believing a crime may have been committed (for arrest) and that evidence of the crime is present in the place to be search (for search)” This requirement is very strict and has lead people who are guilty to walk away without being punished for their actions.
P2: In 2009 Marcos Oliver was found to be in full cardiac arrest. Sergeant Kite picked up a phone that was constantly beeping and read “Wat if I got 2 take him 2 da hospital wat do I say and dos marks on his neck omg.” Though Sergeant Kite did not search with probable cause nor had a warrant he found that the boyfriend of Marcos mother was the one who caused his death. The person was not convicted since the search of the text message violated the person’s fourth amendment. This is one of many cases that have not lead to the conviction of a criminal because of the fourth amendment probable cause.
P3: Only one in ten searches leads to an arrest. Though it is not a great feeling to have an official search you stuff without probable cause it is best for the safety of society.

Conclusion: The US government should substantially increase its authority to search without probable cause.

Source:
http://www.law.cornell.edu...
http://www.dmlp.org...
http://www.stop-watch.org...
Debate Round No. 1
blabber90

Pro

P1: Another reason for the establishment of the fourth amendment was to protect individuals (civilians) from the government's abuse of authority. In order to prevent the possible abuse of authority ,there was a guideline needed restricting the government or police officials searching an individual without a proper accordance to its regulations that is safe and just for the individual being searched. That is why no individual can be searched unless with a probable cause followed by a official warrant as a proof guaranteeing the individual to be searched that there is a reasonable cause for the search.

P2: There have been so many cases that government,police officials have searched individuals without a probable cause or without a warrant, which led to serious offense for individuals. In the case of Nathanson vs. US (1933), it was concluded that a warrant cannot be issued to search a private dwelling with only a mere affirmation of belief or suspicion,but with a probable cause based on facts or circumstances presented to him under oath or affirmation. There needs to be a reasonable basis followed by facts supporting the reason for the search of an individual so that individuals are protected from unfair treatments from officials.

C: The US government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause.

Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu...
http://www.law.cornell.edu...
mria24

Con

P1: I am not questioning the steps / guidelines required to search like a search warrant but what I disagreeing with is requiring probable cause for a search. For example searches being done at the train station should be allowed and continued because there are people traveling who might cause harm to others. Even if the person does not look suspicious nor has a big bag there is still the possibility that they could be planning to do harm to people.


P2: When the cell phone was searched after Marcos death it was also done without probable cause and they the boyfriend of the mother was not convicted because the search was not done according to the guidelines and this lead to the freedom of a murderer.

P3: To repeat my third premise from before only one in ten searches leads to an arrest. The people that are being searched are not going to be arrested unless they have done something against the law.

Conclusion: The US government should substantially increase its authority to search without probable cause.

Source:

http://www.law.cornell.edu......
http://www.dmlp.org......
http://www.stop-watch.org......

Debate Round No. 2
blabber90

Pro

P1: To search an individual or place without a probable cause is an invasion of privacy and that breaks the fundamental rights given to the individual by the established constitution. The government will be breaking the established fundamental rights. Whatever the noble cause it may be but to search without a probable cause is taking away the individual's freedom of rights. No one has the right to do that.

P2: Even if you say that most searches may not to lead to an arrest, you can't be sure that would be the case for every individual. And to carry out an arrest you would need a probable cause that needs to be based on facts rather than mere belief or suspicion. By searching (even if it was done out of a noble intention) without an probable cause is acting upon mere belief or suspicion because you are just randomly searching someone without a reason and seeking an opportunity for an arrest of an individual, and by law, this is considered to be the " fruit of the poisonous tree", which is unlawful.With the famous cases Mapp Vs. Ohio (1961) and Katz Vs. US (1967) the US court ruled that unreasonable search and seizure to be unconstitutional and the evidence obtained from an unlawful search may not be introduced in court. No individual should feel intruded and that their rights taken away.

C:The US government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause.

Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu...
http://www.uscourts.gov...
http://www.uscourts.gov...
mria24

Con

By going on the social media we are exposing ourselves and our actions. Yes there may be cases where a search leads to an arrest and there are times when they are for minor things but it is still not reasonable. Taking a chance and searching someone without probable cause is similar to mi identification of a witness. Some officers ask for a search warrant or arrest someone based on witness identification and 75% of the convictions are overturned by DNA tests. If this is probable cause then we are also taking a change and it is not a fact that the person is the right person and the same is with searching without probable cause.

Conclusion: The US government should substantially increase its authority to search without probable cause.

Source:
http://www.innocenceproject.org...
http://www.law.cornell.edu......

Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.