Um...

[conuly]

Isn't this illegal?

I'm sure there's an amendment about that... Let's see... *dredges up the 10th grade*

1. Speech, press, religion, assembly and petition
2. Bear arms
3. No quartering of soldiers in peacetime
4. No unreasonable search/seizures, "just cause"
5. No self-incriminating statements, no double jeopardy
6. Speedy, impartial jury trial
7. Trial by jury for civil suits >$20
8. No excessive bail, no cruel and unusual punishments
9. This list doesn't mean there aren't other rights
10. Rights not covered by the constitution are ceded to the states

Comments

[stejcruetekie.livejournal.com]

I don't know, I still don't see what the problem is here. There's nothing unconstitutional about what they're doing. The Miranda warnings totally don't apply here. The FBI is simply following well established procedure.

BTW, as far as people who say "something is unconstitutional"... It's not us who decides that - it's the court. If the court says something isn't unconstitutional, it's not. The constitution specifically gives the court that explicit power. You don't like what the court decides? Vote for people who agree with you.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

The Miranda warnings totally don't apply here.

I don't believe she's saything they do. They were only brought up once I went off on a tangent about not knowing the individual amendments and she commented that most people don't, although everyone can remember the Miranda warning (and I presume what went unsaid was "due to its over use on television.")

[conuly]

You don't like what the court decides? Vote for people who agree with you.

That doesn't make any sense. Judges are appointed, not elected.

And I do think that this constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure. I really, truly do. I can decide for myself if I think it's constitutional, just so long as I realize that this matters not a whit in the making of public policy.