Whether you breach the Fourth Amendment 20 percent of the time or 100 percent of the time, it's still not the point. The point is whether or not you still collect millions of people's information with a single warrant.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The fourth amendment specifically was designed to prohibit general warrants. How could collecting every piece of phone data be perceived as anything but a general warrant?
No one in their right mind can say to me with a straight face that the Patriot Act has not aggregated the Fourth Amendment.
If you don't pay your taxes and you don't answer the warrant and you don't go to court, eventually someone will pull a gun. Eventually someone with a gun will show up. I want everything the government does to be done, I just want it to be done voluntarily.
Violating the 4th Amendment guarantees against illegal searches and seizures is not the way to solve crime problems.
In 1979, the Supreme Court ruled 5-3 in Smith v. Maryland that a few days' worth of phone records for a single individual were not protected by the Fourth Amendment. The NSA today, though, collects hundreds of millions of phone records from hundreds of millions of Americans without an individualized warrant.
How can you be conservative and justify wiretapping people without a warrant? We're supposed to be the party of personal freedom and civil liberties.
I think there would be less torture with a warrant requirement than without one.
The Supreme Court must strike down the government's illegal spying program as a violation of our Fourth Amendment right to privacy.
You do not have to incriminate yourself. But once you assert your innocence, and once you say you didn't do anything wrong, you can't then use the Fifth Amendment to say, 'I'm not answering questions.'
Individual warrants every day are used to arrest dangerous people.