people deserve to be safe but, personal privacies and freedom are important too. freedom comes with risks. but if you take away freedom because of these risks you, create a more dangerous world where, you have no rights and, the government can take your guns. 🤐
Ben Franklin also stated: " question authority !" Zemmerman wrote - the Government keeps secrets from Citizens so WHY not keep secrets from the government!?"
Had to subscribe! ... as a law student I get really bored with the whole formally of teaching, so listening to Mr. Hughes explanation is certainly less stressful and coloquial. (so refreshing). Thank you Keith Hughes :)
Tommyidol420 well look at the patriot act. It shows the citizen value safety over their rights. Pretty sure terrorist groups are privateers hired by nations.
Man thanks for breaking this down in an understandable way, I was always curious about laws and the amendments, but reading on my own, I didn't understand much of what is written, or how it is applicable. I'm a dummy who wants to learn and your video is very informative and helpful. I'm gonna subscribe
Involuntarily committing someone to a mental hospital (who is Not a harm to themselves or others) violates the 4th amendment by seizing their person, property, and "stealing the mind" by invading their privacy with intrusive questions.
Well do you know the police can follow you everywhere and they have this technology coming from the satellite beaning on us infrared sensors under their radar. Well I have one here he invades my space for 8 years survival of the fittest. Did you just constantly saying repeating on the airwaves.
When the cops pull you over and after they hand you the ticket then ask you if they can look in your trunk the correct response is "does this mean we're done officer?".
The correct response is do you have a legal lawful valid search warrant?,are you conspiring against my rights?,Are you depriving me of my constitutionally protected rights under color of law?
@@blackquiverhe's wrong, reasonable suspicion doesn't exist anywhere in the 4th amendment text, probable cause in the 4th amendment text is only to get a legal lawful valid search warrant nothing else.
What is the purpose for the 4th Amendment when it's not being enforced? Having something for the sake of having it means nothing if at the end of the day the government is violating it?
Exactly, they don't even need a warrant to search. They can see everything through our cameras. We wouldn't even know about it if Snowden didn't do anything.
The 4th Amendment is practically dead and irrelevant anymore and it’s sad. We the people sold out our privacy and searches for “safety and security.” Especially, after 9/11.
@@jupitercyclops6521 The people are allowing it, and they act as if their rights were given to them by the government. If the citizens want your rights back, then you have to take it back. No oppressor ever willingly give up their control over those they are oppressing.
@@BrianSmith-Fitzgarld I agree. I would like to think this is the beginning of that. The problem, or a problem, is our civil rights have been taken away bit by bit for generations now. Over time.we've lost so many, it makes getting 5hem back very very, difficult, dangerous, and costly. We are going to have to pay for the generations before us who sat by and watched them wither away in the name of the war on drugs and war on terror.
A friend was arrested at work on an arrest warrant for suspicion of theft. That night when he was being booked was told that he's also charged with poss with intent and para. He wasn't present when they found it and it was in a common area which dozens of people were in and had access to his bag . they took a lot of items from his desk, which is a shared desk including wallet , phone , keys. wallet had insurance card, health savings act and when tried to retrieve was told those were evidence. how is a health savings account card he uses for family dr visits and meds evidence? he hadn't been in that room for several hours. Can this stick?
I've been swamped in videos about 4th amendment rights because I was involved in an incident in which I believe my 4th amendment rights would have been violated if I did not cooperate. In an effort to just get on with my business and satisfy the Florida Sheriff's curiosity ... I cooperated. I had nothing to hide, no criminal background, was not planning on or had committed a crime. So I really didn't care what they asked ... I went along with it. But my landlord said everything they did was so many violations of the 4th amendment. Brief Summary: I ride a bicycle. Everywhere. To Work, to the Store, all places. I have all the proper lighting and safety requirements. I was coming from the store, CIRCLE K which is on the corner of Denton Blvd and Racetrack Road. I was headed home to cross Racetrack Road to my home which is further down Denton Blvd. When the Pedestrian Crosswalk light signaled me to cross, I went to cross. A Florida Sheriff was coming up to the stop at that same time but DID NOT stop at the white line that is before ALL crosswalks. The Deputy stopped at the crosswalk instead, which is further past that line. I simply looked at them while I was crossing and I looked directly at him and shook my head as if in disbelief that a cop would actually violate a traffic law. The white line is THERE FOR A REASON. gd idiots. But anyway..... I continued across the crosswalk and back onto the sidewalk, heading on my way home. Not 30 seconds later, this cop turns his lights on, I keep riding though. I didn't do anything wrong. As I am about to reach out of travel distance from his patrol car, he sounds his siren briefly... So I stop. I go and see what he wants. He comes up to me and tells me I have to have a light on the front of my Bicycle so he can see me. It is a $62 fine for not having one. I am familiar with the statues regarding bicycles and it was said that a Bicycle in FLORIDA must have a light on the FRONT and REAR and the rider wearing a HELMET during NIGHT TIME operation of a bicycle when on PUBLIC ROADS. Sidewalks do not count as public roads. I told him this, and he said it doesn't matter. I have to have it anyway. Well, I showed him my front light which IS operational ... the only issue is the MOUNTING BRACKET that holds it on the handle bars broke on my exit from the store (CIRCLE K) ... Rather than leaving it dangle back and fourth, which renders it useless pointing at the ground, I stuffed it back into my pouch. After that, he decided to request my ID, which I willingly gave. I have nothing to hide. Then he asked to search me for Drugs and Weapons ....... of course I obliged, I have nothing to hide. But this is when I got pissed.... I know there is a right I have against such a request or such actions. Then he requests that I allow him to check the VIN# on my bike to make sure it isn't stolen..... ok it isn't.... but I oblige. after 30 seconds of the stop he had TWO additional patrol cars pull up in a barricade facing me. 3 officers. He can't find anything. I didn't do anything wrong. I have not committed nor did they have any RAS or PC that I was about to commit a crime. All three tried asking me questions on where I was going, what I was doing. I look like a homeless guy on a bicycle. MY OWN CHOICE. I have a place to live, I have a full time job, I am a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. The ONLY thing he had was that I had no front light on my bicycle, ON A SIDEWALK or CROSSWALK. So I became very interested in what particulars the 4th Amendment really granted me in terms of this. I urge EVERYONE to read and understand the 4th Amendment. Because I guarantee that the next time, if there is one, I will be a VERY wealthy individual with the satisfaction of having a corrupt dipshit cop behind bars for having VIOLATED my given rights UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES as well as several FLORIDA STATE STATUTES. I will close my statement with this........ The reason the US is as it is today is because everyone just goes with the flow. Challenges nothing and lets their given rights be null and void based on consent AND ignorance. LEARN THE LAW and the CONSTITUTION and stand up for yourself as an individual... not against your neighbor, but against your OPPRESSORS ..... THE US GOVERNMENT and ALL officials under that flag.
They did violate your 4th amendment I hope you can sue this sheriff deputy and held this sheriff accountable honestly We have to protect the constitution amendments at all cost this are our rights and should not be taken away this tyrants who don't respect and don't follow the constitution are the one's that need to go now
Always protect the constitution and it's amendments we need this tyrant police and tyrant sheriffs to all be held accountable now we need justice to be done
You're right about the government they're involved in mind control technology that can read your thoughts and has the power to to do whatever it takes. I have one in my house invading my privacy 24/7 some kind of experiment they're working on.
Great video Keith (as always). I noticed though that you mentioned the US v. Jones case involving GPS tracking and said that you have an expectation of privacy while driving around. You still do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in your public movements, Scalia dodged that issue there and based the decision purely on a physical trespass doctrine. One of the concurring opinions said they would have found the extended tracking itself to have intruded on the person's expectation of privacy, but as it stands right now US v. Knotts is still good law in saying there is no expectation of privacy in your movements on public streets (Open Fields). Although Knotts has been heavily criticized in the Circuit Courts (deservedly, I would say).
I was sitting on the side of the road in ny and a cop tells me to get out of my car and he searched my car with out any reason while yelling at me saying where are the drugs he then ripped my carpet up trying to find drugs and started damaging my car. They didint find any drugs but he had to charge me with something because I told him he wasn't allowed to search my car with out a warrant they pushed me to the back of the car and started searching my car anyways I got charged with a 4th Degree weapon possession for a freaking baseball bat!! Is there anything I can do to fight this case this could mean up to 1 year in prison.
This may sound weird but, was there a baseball and glove along with the bat? Something like that happened to a coworker years back. He told the Judge he plays baseball and it was normal to have a baseballs, gloves and bats in the car. It's not illegal to have sport equipment in your car. The judge agreed with him and he walked out a free man. Hope that some help to you.
hey, I've commented on maybe 4 videos in the last 8 years, but I really want to thank you for this video and the work you are doing. I am learning very quickly the importance of our rights (especially since I live in PA and they have just given police the right to search your car w/o a warrant here) and like you said, "stand smart" for some stupid reason, ppl where I live do not care that this has just been passed but I constantly make the argument that "what if you are into some weird kinky shit and your coming home from your same sex partner or something......" Mapp vs. Ohio = gold thanks
They just put up 34 security cameras in the apartment building I live in, and they're putting up about 30 more, plus one in each elevator, two elevators (13 floors). Is this in any violation of the fourth amendment? or any amendment? They also have put in a fire alarm speaker inside the apartment, made by the company SIEMENS, which I'm very suspicious of.
Conscius Energeia as long as it's not in your actual apparent where you live and reside but is outside in public view I would assume that the property owners have the right to put camera's on the property that they own. No clue about the fire thing though.
No. The cameras are not a violation of your 4th amendment. I have not the slightest clue on how your apartment building is setup but let's say there are hallways in the building and that is where the cameras are. There is no expectation of privacy in the hallways. Another definition you should look at is "domicile" and what that means. A domicile is protected and you do have an expectation of privacy inside your actual apartment.
Can my 4th amendment right be violated and cause probable cause to be searched while being pulled over if i was nervous at the time of a traffic stop .. or for advising the officer i was simply gonna reach for my license or california ID.
My question, what about private companies stopping to check your items purchased. Example-walmart stops you to see your receipt and contents without probable cause. I know i don't have to stop but if they continue to try at every visit can it be considered harrassment?
Can cops cone on your property to give abandoned car violation? I did forget to put on new tag sticker but wouldn't they know its up to date in their system. I don't think could see tag without coming on to property.
yes the NSA is breaking the law!!! I am expecting that my conversation with my girlfriend on my pc is private!!! if they think it is constitutional to listen to my private calls on my pc (that is in my house) then what is the difference if they listen to me and my friends in my house with a high acoustic sound detecting drone!!! is that constitutional, cause they will say , well we are not in your house but we have the right to listen to the vibrations above your house..
I'm in Houston tx they entered my house and turned it upside down but they came into my house around 8:50 and the warrant was not signed Until 11:15 at night so when they entered the warrant was not standing what could happen then?
what if your 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights are violated by a federal employee who is not a law enforcement officer? serious question. I'm shopping for an attorney and having trouble finding info because I'm not a legal expert.
I should point out that (or I believe that I am correct on this) that the 4th Amendment only applies to government officials and not civilian contractors. Police, NSA, FBI, DEA all need a warrant. Private security people don't. The military have their own system and I'm not sure how UCMJ handles search and seizure issues but it would be interesting to find out!
And, depending what state the Law Student was in, he could be required to give an ID or state his name to the police. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes
Well in 2002 cell phones were an open air form of communication, anybody could listen to a call if they had a radio that could tune to the frequency being used. So there is no expectation of privacy since anybody could listen. Today however the communication is encrypted and there is an expectation of privacy.
I'm beginning to think I've got psychic network problems and not 4th amendment problems. Or both. But the psychic network problems are a little bit trickier to navigate.
If someone calls you and has the police listening and you get busted because of that,does that violate your 4th amendment rights based on the "expectation of privacy"?
+David Harrell Nope. Check out United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745 (1971). That falls into the "false friends" doctrine. It's basically considered that you assume the risk when you speak to someone that they could go tell someone else (including cops). The fact that they are broadcasting it live makes no difference. It's the same concept as when police have someone wear a "wire" and record a conversation with someone.
If any warrant signed by 'Non-Judicial Judge', in other words, Coram Non Judice Magistrate then warrant void on its face. Political Subdivisions, aka Municipal Body [Nisi Prius/Quasi Body] as 'inferior courts of limited jurisdiction', do that all the time, which valid until challenged via acquiescence by inaction. A esq will never challenge, see Corpus Juris Secundum Volume 7, Rule 4 which states: the duty of the attorney is to the courts, and the public, 'not the client'.
Hugh, am I crazy or did you quote MC Lyte? "I rock the party that rocks the party" really dude? And Good Times theme song to end this? You are a cool dude.
4th Amendment is practically dead in this country and we gave up any type of privacy and unreasonable search’s for “safety and security” after 9/11. Now we have the NSA spying and tapping phone calls and monitoring emails, TSA searches at all airports even though people that have been searched have no probable cause of a crime. DUI checkpoints and potential searches without a warrant from a judge to search a car. FBI and DHS using facial recognition software from drivers licenses photos without citizens permission. The 4th Amendment is irreverent in today’s society.
The government can spy on your thoughts and mind reading technology exist now mind control martial law just come in your house and just do whatever they want.
Keith When you were talking about the expectation of privacy, and if what the NSA was doing, My thought was as soon as you brought up Kitz Vs Us was that because of the expectation of privacy it was illegal to tap the conversation, But now that the NSA has tapped everything and our we all have Snowden telling every one, We no longer have an Expectation of Privacy ..
HipHughester Walter here. The Fourth is hard. Thanks for the introduction to it. After the series on the Bill of Rights, maybe you can address the big picture on rights. Why do we hobble the government. Is there a time when slippery slope argument is important. That kind of stuff.
I'm lost on this one how is it invasion of privacy for a dog to sniff at the front door of a residence but it's not invasion of privacy when law enforcement conducts an "open air sniff" on your person or vehicle on the roadways?
+p findlen I switch networks and they were all automatically turned off I will make sure to turn this one on, I have 500 videos so I haven't gotten around to all of them future
Let me rake your brain. I am talking about identification papers the 4th says "the right to be secure .. in their papers" But to whom do the papers belong? That is the question. Does a paper truly belong to the person that has them or the state that issued it.
Let me “rack” your brain. Yes a paper belongs to the person that the state has issued them to. What kinda question is this? Your question is to vague to answer.
weeks versus United States it's my understanding that that can't case can't be brought up District Court does he operate on your policy since 1991 we can only use Supreme Court cases after 1991 listen to an interview with a judge that stated this fact
The GPS locator case was struck down but then the police asked the telecommunications company for all the meta data from the guys phone and the phone company handed it over. He was convicted anyway.
I place a card with my P.O.I stating What to say to police: 1) Are you detaining me 2) I don't consent to searches 3) I don't answer questions without my attorney. Results: 13 police encounters and I've never been searched. You just have to Sat "I don't consent to searches"
The fact that he had a gun visible wasn't enough to ask to see the license? Not making a any kind of pro/anti gun thing here, just wondering about the legality of confirming licenses. If someone is selling stuff on the street where you need a license, can the police ask to see your commercial license without any cause other than the fact that they are selling on the street where a license is required?
Im not defending the practice and personally I agree with u. The bureaucratic problem is the emails & data have a middle man, the network. currently the network isnt complaining in fact they are working with the NSA seemingly. The choice therefore to knowingly use this middle man is urs. again, don't shoot the messenger. I could argue around this for sure, obviously we are talking semantics. Think kid in school putting stuff in his locker. He doesn't own the locker. Like u dont own the server.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons (body), house's (home, properties), papers (license/permits,/insurance/registration/or any other documents paperwork they might possess), effects (all personally property in their house, on their property,on their persons,in their vehicle/automobile) AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES "SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED ","NO WARRANT SHALL ISSUE BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE" Therefore the only reasonable search or seizure is only done so with a legal lawful valid search warrant, probable cause is only to get said search warrant. Law enforcement have no legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction whatsoever to search anyone or anything or seize anyone or anything whatsoever without a legal lawful valid search warrant period.
from 8:27.... Cop: Mam, do you mind if we look through your trunk? Mam: Yeah. How does that constitute consent? It sounds to me like she did mind having her trunk searched and thus isn't giving consent.
Amendment IV: 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. The section: "persons, houses, papers and effects" refers strictly to people, residences and forms of tangible property. (It does not include evidence of passage into public domain, such as electronic records regarding telephone calls, emails, texts and other footprints regardless of the slippery slopers.) "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." refers to warrants. (This passage does not mention searches and seizures conducted in the absence of warrants.) What seems to be guaranteed is the right to argue, and it's within these tests of boundaries and specifics that our rights and freedom are maintained.
US vs Leon scares me. If the ultimate seizure is death and someone is shot due to a mistake on the address but good faith protects the cop. That's fucked up
I'm not sure if this has been addressed yet, but the first case you mention as "Smith v Mary" is actually "Smith v Maryland" (at least so far as I can tell when trying to search for Smith v Mary, and then reading further about Smith v Maryland). Other than that, this was a fantastic video and I can't wait to watch your other ones.
I think that anything you do in the privacy of your own home or vehicle should be protected under the 4 th amendment unless theres probable cause for insistence some one who is a registered sex offender owning child porn and and exposing himself in public and or acting inappropriately on internet chats with under aged people and in public shows probable cause to seize his computer and search his house
Apparently these middle guys--Apple, Google, ATT, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc.--were reluctant to hand over customer/citizen private information to the NSA but were faced with overwhelming commercial pressure to do so. Discuss among yourselves.
Who’s here because their teacher assigned them this?
Me unfortunately
Me 😂
✋️
meee
Your teacher assigned you this? Mine didn't, I'm here cause I wanna know my shit
Ben Franklin said if we give up or freedom for safety, then we deserve neither of them.
people deserve to be safe but, personal privacies and freedom are important too. freedom comes with risks. but if you take away freedom because of these risks you, create a more dangerous world where, you have no rights and, the government can take your guns. 🤐
And we end up with neither also.
Ben Franklin also stated: " question authority !" Zemmerman wrote - the Government keeps secrets from Citizens so WHY not keep secrets from the government!?"
Had to subscribe! ... as a law student I get really bored with the whole formally of teaching, so listening to Mr. Hughes explanation is certainly less stressful and coloquial. (so refreshing). Thank you Keith Hughes :)
Did you graduate
@@arrowcrusherhopefully she did
Are you still studying law?
Agree
No question about it. The NSA is infringing on the 4th Amendment.
Tommyidol420 well look at the patriot act. It shows the citizen value safety over their rights. Pretty sure terrorist groups are privateers hired by nations.
We should all flag this for child pornography so the FBI all have to watch it.
Uhm that is the worst idea I have ever heard in the history of ideas. You trying to get me thrown in some cell in Cuba? #jeesh
Keith Hughes
It's all for the cause brother.
Sounds like an angry leftist
Why would you do that? Did you go to the school of Jussie Smollet, & Edawn Coughman
That’s not how this works, unfortunately.
Man thanks for breaking this down in an understandable way, I was always curious about laws and the amendments, but reading on my own, I didn't understand much of what is written, or how it is applicable. I'm a dummy who wants to learn and your video is very informative and helpful. I'm gonna subscribe
u know what the NSA thinks about the Constitution, diddly squat
uuqameknksj’Miss the new hhuarc Rogue
I grew up in the 80's, so that crap is embedded somewhere deep in my frontal lobes. Thanks for the kudos, hope u have subbed!
Very good videos. Helped me tons in my Government classes. Thank you so much!
Involuntarily committing someone to a mental hospital (who is Not a harm to themselves or others) violates the 4th amendment by seizing their person, property, and "stealing the mind" by invading their privacy with intrusive questions.
Well do you know the police can follow you everywhere and they have this technology coming from the satellite beaning on us infrared sensors under their radar. Well I have one here he invades my space for 8 years survival of the fittest. Did you just constantly saying repeating on the airwaves.
When the cops pull you over and after they hand you the ticket then ask you if they can look in your trunk the correct response is "does this mean we're done officer?".
If it's reasonable suspicion..he says it in the video..
The correct response is do you have a legal lawful valid search warrant?,are you conspiring against my rights?,Are you depriving me of my constitutionally protected rights under color of law?
@@blackquiverhe's wrong, reasonable suspicion doesn't exist anywhere in the 4th amendment text, probable cause in the 4th amendment text is only to get a legal lawful valid search warrant nothing else.
The only reasonable search and seizure under the 4th amendment text is only with a legal lawful valid search warrant.
RUclips is the only place on the internet where people reply to seven year old comments.
"If you have nothing to hide, why would you deny a search?". That's what stupid people say.
i even had one lady ask me is the 4th amendment was the one about guns, people are hilarious.
Because they should not interfere with your daily life it is an invasion of privacy .....
You are fantastic you're video is educational and truly objective.
Juana Juana We do try. Thanks.
What is the purpose for the 4th Amendment when it's not being enforced? Having something for the sake of having it means nothing if at the end of the day the government is violating it?
Exactly, they don't even need a warrant to search. They can see everything through our cameras. We wouldn't even know about it if Snowden didn't do anything.
The 4th Amendment is practically dead and irrelevant anymore and it’s sad. We the people sold out our privacy and searches for “safety and security.” Especially, after 9/11.
Exactly. That's the problem with all our rights. The state decides what's reasonable
@@jupitercyclops6521 The people are allowing it, and they act as if their rights were given to them by the government. If the citizens want your rights back, then you have to take it back. No oppressor ever willingly give up their control over those they are oppressing.
@@BrianSmith-Fitzgarld I agree.
I would like to think this is the beginning of that.
The problem, or a problem, is our civil rights have been taken away bit by bit for generations now.
Over time.we've lost so many, it makes getting 5hem back very very, difficult, dangerous, and costly. We are going to have to pay for the generations before us who sat by and watched them wither away in the name of the war on drugs and war on terror.
like the zeppelin shirt
me too. thanks
I do not consent to searches. Am I being detained or am I free to go?
i am being forced to watch this
good call. that one was for my dad, he used to watch reruns everyday after work. I can still smell the sawdust (he worked in a lumber yard).
A friend was arrested at work on an arrest warrant for suspicion of theft. That night when he was being booked was told that he's also charged with poss with intent and para. He wasn't present when they found it and it was in a common area which dozens of people were in and had access to his bag . they took a lot of items from his desk, which is a shared desk including wallet , phone , keys. wallet had insurance card, health savings act and when tried to retrieve was told those were evidence. how is a health savings account card he uses for family dr visits and meds evidence? he hadn't been in that room for several hours. Can this stick?
Your videos have hep me so much in my intro to law course in college. THANK YOU
I've been swamped in videos about 4th amendment rights because I was involved in an incident in which I believe my 4th amendment rights would have been violated if I did not cooperate. In an effort to just get on with my business and satisfy the Florida Sheriff's curiosity ... I cooperated.
I had nothing to hide, no criminal background, was not planning on or had committed a crime. So I really didn't care what they asked ... I went along with it. But my landlord said everything they did was so many violations of the 4th amendment.
Brief Summary:
I ride a bicycle. Everywhere. To Work, to the Store, all places. I have all the proper lighting and safety requirements. I was coming from the store, CIRCLE K which is on the corner of Denton Blvd and Racetrack Road. I was headed home to cross Racetrack Road to my home which is further down Denton Blvd. When the Pedestrian Crosswalk light signaled me to cross, I went to cross. A Florida Sheriff was coming up to the stop at that same time but DID NOT stop at the white line that is before ALL crosswalks. The Deputy stopped at the crosswalk instead, which is further past that line.
I simply looked at them while I was crossing and I looked directly at him and shook my head as if in disbelief that a cop would actually violate a traffic law. The white line is THERE FOR A REASON. gd idiots. But anyway.....
I continued across the crosswalk and back onto the sidewalk, heading on my way home. Not 30 seconds later, this cop turns his lights on, I keep riding though. I didn't do anything wrong. As I am about to reach out of travel distance from his patrol car, he sounds his siren briefly... So I stop.
I go and see what he wants. He comes up to me and tells me I have to have a light on the front of my Bicycle so he can see me. It is a $62 fine for not having one. I am familiar with the statues regarding bicycles and it was said that a Bicycle in FLORIDA must have a light on the FRONT and REAR and the rider wearing a HELMET during NIGHT TIME operation of a bicycle when on PUBLIC ROADS.
Sidewalks do not count as public roads. I told him this, and he said it doesn't matter. I have to have it anyway.
Well, I showed him my front light which IS operational ... the only issue is the MOUNTING BRACKET that holds it on the handle bars broke on my exit from the store (CIRCLE K) ... Rather than leaving it dangle back and fourth, which renders it useless pointing at the ground, I stuffed it back into my pouch.
After that, he decided to request my ID, which I willingly gave. I have nothing to hide.
Then he asked to search me for Drugs and Weapons ....... of course I obliged, I have nothing to hide. But this is when I got pissed.... I know there is a right I have against such a request or such actions. Then he requests that I allow him to check the VIN# on my bike to make sure it isn't stolen..... ok it isn't.... but I oblige.
after 30 seconds of the stop he had TWO additional patrol cars pull up in a barricade facing me. 3 officers.
He can't find anything. I didn't do anything wrong. I have not committed nor did they have any RAS or PC that I was about to commit a crime. All three tried asking me questions on where I was going, what I was doing.
I look like a homeless guy on a bicycle. MY OWN CHOICE. I have a place to live, I have a full time job, I am a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN.
The ONLY thing he had was that I had no front light on my bicycle, ON A SIDEWALK or CROSSWALK.
So I became very interested in what particulars the 4th Amendment really granted me in terms of this.
I urge EVERYONE to read and understand the 4th Amendment. Because I guarantee that the next time, if there is one, I will be a VERY wealthy individual with the satisfaction of having a corrupt dipshit cop behind bars for having VIOLATED my given rights UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES as well as several FLORIDA STATE STATUTES.
I will close my statement with this........ The reason the US is as it is today is because everyone just goes with the flow. Challenges nothing and lets their given rights be null and void based on consent AND ignorance.
LEARN THE LAW and the CONSTITUTION and stand up for yourself as an individual... not against your neighbor, but against your OPPRESSORS ..... THE US GOVERNMENT and ALL officials under that flag.
Rum Runner thank you.
You captured my attention and I get sleepy after reading, this is inspiring.
They did violate your 4th amendment I hope you can sue this sheriff deputy and held this sheriff accountable honestly We have to protect the constitution amendments at all cost this are our rights and should not be taken away this tyrants who don't respect and don't follow the constitution are the one's that need to go now
Always protect the constitution and it's amendments we need this tyrant police and tyrant sheriffs to all be held accountable now we need justice to be done
You're right about the government they're involved in mind control technology that can read your thoughts and has the power to to do whatever it takes. I have one in my house invading my privacy 24/7 some kind of experiment they're working on.
i love this guy!!! his videos have been helping a lot for my big state history project!
Great video Keith (as always). I noticed though that you mentioned the US v. Jones case involving GPS tracking and said that you have an expectation of privacy while driving around. You still do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in your public movements, Scalia dodged that issue there and based the decision purely on a physical trespass doctrine. One of the concurring opinions said they would have found the extended tracking itself to have intruded on the person's expectation of privacy, but as it stands right now US v. Knotts is still good law in saying there is no expectation of privacy in your movements on public streets (Open Fields). Although Knotts has been heavily criticized in the Circuit Courts (deservedly, I would say).
How does the court view 🤔 big brother like Facebook or other companies montering accounts of private citizens?
I was sitting on the side of the road in ny and a cop tells me to get out of my car and he searched my car with out any reason while yelling at me saying where are the drugs he then ripped my carpet up trying to find drugs and started damaging my car. They didint find any drugs but he had to charge me with something because I told him he wasn't allowed to search my car with out a warrant they pushed me to the back of the car and started searching my car anyways I got charged with a 4th Degree weapon possession for a freaking baseball bat!! Is there anything I can do to fight this case this could mean up to 1 year in prison.
This may sound weird but, was there a baseball and glove along with the bat? Something like that happened to a coworker years back. He told the Judge he plays baseball and it was normal to have a baseballs, gloves and bats in the car. It's not illegal to have sport equipment in your car. The judge agreed with him and he walked out a free man. Hope that some help to you.
video of law student is gone... Is google removing examples of successful exercise of rights against tyrannical employees of the government?
hey, I've commented on maybe 4 videos in the last 8 years, but I really want to thank you for this video and the work you are doing.
I am learning very quickly the importance of our rights (especially since I live in PA and they have just given police the right to search your car w/o a warrant here) and like you said, "stand smart"
for some stupid reason, ppl where I live do not care that this has just been passed but I constantly make the argument that "what if you are into some weird kinky shit and your coming home from your same sex partner or something......"
Mapp vs. Ohio = gold thanks
great stuff
A search is asking questions, asking to look at something,or searching things or someone.
My 4th amendment was violated on 2/19/2015 by the 3rd precinct of long island.at 1:04 pm.
4. Yrs later..and?.
blackquiver He’s probably locked up now
Walmart notoriously violates the 4th ammendment with greeters checking your cart
It only applies to law enforcement personnel and other government employees, not private company employees.
Well you're helping me write a last minute essay on the subject. It also peaked my interest in a lot more of your videos.
They just put up 34 security cameras in the apartment building I live in, and they're putting up about 30 more, plus one in each elevator, two elevators (13 floors). Is this in any violation of the fourth amendment? or any amendment? They also have put in a fire alarm speaker inside the apartment, made by the company SIEMENS, which I'm very suspicious of.
Conscius Energeia as long as it's not in your actual apparent where you live and reside but is outside in public view I would assume that the property owners have the right to put camera's on the property that they own.
No clue about the fire thing though.
No. The cameras are not a violation of your 4th amendment. I have not the slightest clue on how your apartment building is setup but let's say there are hallways in the building and that is where the cameras are. There is no expectation of privacy in the hallways. Another definition you should look at is "domicile" and what that means. A domicile is protected and you do have an expectation of privacy inside your actual apartment.
Can my 4th amendment right be violated and cause probable cause to be searched while being pulled over if i was nervous at the time of a traffic stop .. or for advising the officer i was simply gonna reach for my license or california ID.
RyDeRBiZz408 if you say no, the CANNOT enter
Where's the music from? And can you provide links to where you got the evidence? Thanks
My question, what about private companies stopping to check your items purchased. Example-walmart stops you to see your receipt and contents without probable cause. I know i don't have to stop but if they continue to try at every visit can it be considered harrassment?
How does the 4th apply to tracking someone with a cell phone?
how does this work with the Boston Bombing search?
Can cops cone on your property to give abandoned car violation? I did forget to put on new tag sticker but wouldn't they know its up to date in their system. I don't think could see tag without coming on to property.
yes the NSA is breaking the law!!! I am expecting that my conversation with my girlfriend on my pc is private!!! if they think it is constitutional to listen to my private calls on my pc (that is in my house) then what is the difference if they listen to me and my friends in my house with a high acoustic sound detecting drone!!! is that constitutional, cause they will say , well we are not in your house but we have the right to listen to the vibrations above your house..
We want the 202 version of this and all others in the series
I'm in Houston tx they entered my house and turned it upside down but they came into my house around 8:50 and the warrant was not signed
Until 11:15 at night so when they entered the warrant was not standing what could happen then?
or state court our court system now operates under public policy which has a different Constitution and the starting date of 1991
No you don't talk to much man. You make learning this stuff exciting. Thank you.
what if you have a summons to court and they have a check point? Do you have to submit even tho it's not your will but the courts that you go.
Plain view is only affirmation to get the warrant. Because they can affirm that they actually saw the evidence or the crime committed.
what if your 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights are violated by a federal employee who is not a law enforcement officer? serious question. I'm shopping for an attorney and having trouble finding info because I'm not a legal expert.
if you find a good one send me the info here. i need one
2001 illegal wire taps. No warrant on wire taps. 2016 Due process violation. Entrapment 2019 No warrant on wire taps
Writs of Assistance sounds a lot like the TSA
I should point out that (or I believe that I am correct on this) that the 4th Amendment only applies to government officials and not civilian contractors. Police, NSA, FBI, DEA all need a warrant. Private security people don't. The military have their own system and I'm not sure how UCMJ handles search and seizure issues but it would be interesting to find out!
I was Fourth Amendment violated I have some questions
And, depending what state the Law Student was in, he could be required to give an ID or state his name to the police.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes
What was the case on the drug dog coming to the home called I would like to learn more about it
shouldnt possession of fire arms and drugs be protected by the 4th amendment?
Yes
Its also protected by the 5th Amendment. You can’t be denied life, liberty ,and property without due process.
Possession of all property is protected. Laws that tyrants have made violate this literally millions of times a day.
Well in 2002 cell phones were an open air form of communication, anybody could listen to a call if they had a radio that could tune to the frequency being used. So there is no expectation of privacy since anybody could listen. Today however the communication is encrypted and there is an expectation of privacy.
unless you let them you say yes you can search.
okay, but doesn't this violate the 5th amendment under one cannot be a witness against oneself?
I'm beginning to think I've got psychic network problems and not 4th amendment problems. Or both. But the psychic network problems are a little bit trickier to navigate.
If someone calls you and has the police listening and you get busted because of that,does that violate your 4th amendment rights based on the "expectation of privacy"?
+David Harrell Nope. Check out United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745 (1971). That falls into the "false friends" doctrine. It's basically considered that you assume the risk when you speak to someone that they could go tell someone else (including cops). The fact that they are broadcasting it live makes no difference. It's the same concept as when police have someone wear a "wire" and record a conversation with someone.
If any warrant signed by 'Non-Judicial Judge', in other words, Coram Non Judice Magistrate then warrant void on its face.
Political Subdivisions, aka Municipal Body [Nisi Prius/Quasi Body] as 'inferior courts of limited jurisdiction', do that all the time, which valid until challenged via acquiescence by inaction.
A esq will never challenge, see Corpus Juris Secundum Volume 7, Rule 4 which states: the duty of the attorney is to the courts, and the public, 'not the client'.
Hugh, am I crazy or did you quote MC Lyte? "I rock the party that rocks the party" really dude? And Good Times theme song to end this? You are a cool dude.
That barking noise in your video scared the heck out of me lol
Good explanation of how the law was written, it's weird how much our laws don't respect the Article. For example fisa courts.
4th Amendment is practically dead in this country and we gave up any type of privacy and unreasonable search’s for “safety and security” after 9/11. Now we have the NSA spying and tapping phone calls and monitoring emails, TSA searches at all airports even though people that have been searched have no probable cause of a crime. DUI checkpoints and potential searches without a warrant from a judge to search a car. FBI and DHS using facial recognition software from drivers licenses photos without citizens permission. The 4th Amendment is irreverent in today’s society.
The government can spy on your thoughts and mind reading technology exist now mind control martial law just come in your house and just do whatever they want.
The Patriot act is indeed unconstitutional in my opinion.
DUHHHH
Sue the government Obama and bush.
Perfect HH. Thank you for the info/effort!!
Thank you for teaching people the constitution it's the most important thing we have thank you so much
I was wondering if you could elaborate on selective incorporation I am using it as one of my study questions and it would help if I knew more.
check this one out Brain Wrinkling the 14th Amendment
thanks
Keith When you were talking about the expectation of privacy, and if what the NSA was doing, My thought was as soon as you brought up Kitz Vs Us was that because of the expectation of privacy it was illegal to tap the conversation, But now that the NSA has tapped everything and our we all have Snowden telling every one, We no longer have an Expectation of Privacy ..
HipHughester Walter here.
The Fourth is hard. Thanks for the introduction to it.
After the series on the Bill of Rights, maybe you can address the big picture on rights. Why do we hobble the government. Is there a time when slippery slope argument is important. That kind of stuff.
I'm lost on this one how is it invasion of privacy for a dog to sniff at the front door of a residence but it's not invasion of privacy when law enforcement conducts an "open air sniff" on your person or vehicle on the roadways?
Why don't you allow an embed for sharing? I wanted to include your comments in a presentation.
+p findlen I switch networks and they were all automatically turned off I will make sure to turn this one on, I have 500 videos so I haven't gotten around to all of them future
Let me rake your brain.
I am talking about identification papers
the 4th says "the right to be secure .. in their papers"
But to whom do the papers belong? That is the question. Does a paper truly belong to the person that has them or the state that issued it.
Let me “rack” your brain. Yes a paper belongs to the person that the state has issued them to. What kinda question is this? Your question is to vague to answer.
weeks versus United States it's my understanding that that can't case can't be brought up District Court does he operate on your policy since 1991 we can only use Supreme Court cases after 1991 listen to an interview with a judge that stated this fact
The GPS locator case was struck down but then the police asked the telecommunications company for all the meta data from the guys phone and the phone company handed it over. He was convicted anyway.
Democracy is a messy hard fought buissness not for the faint of heart.
"A people who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither."
Benjamin Franklin
Can you go over the 4th amendment as it relates to NOT wearing a coronavirus mask
Anybody else notice the Led Zeppelin t shirt. One of the many reasons this guys a boss
Yes I noticed it. I'm a big fan of the best band of all time, Led Zeppelin!
I was about to point it out, you beat me to it.
I place a card with my P.O.I stating
What to say to police:
1) Are you detaining me
2) I don't consent to searches
3) I don't answer questions without my attorney.
Results: 13 police encounters and I've never been searched. You just have to Sat "I don't consent to searches"
Does this reply in 2020?
Other words basically if big brother wants to know something, then you have no right.
The fact that he had a gun visible wasn't enough to ask to see the license? Not making a any kind of pro/anti gun thing here, just wondering about the legality of confirming licenses. If someone is selling stuff on the street where you need a license, can the police ask to see your commercial license without any cause other than the fact that they are selling on the street where a license is required?
Im not defending the practice and personally I agree with u. The bureaucratic problem is the emails & data have a middle man, the network. currently the network isnt complaining in fact they are working with the NSA seemingly. The choice therefore to knowingly use this middle man is urs. again, don't shoot the messenger. I could argue around this for sure, obviously we are talking semantics. Think kid in school putting stuff in his locker. He doesn't own the locker. Like u dont own the server.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons (body), house's (home, properties), papers (license/permits,/insurance/registration/or any other documents paperwork they might possess), effects (all personally property in their house, on their property,on their persons,in their vehicle/automobile) AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES "SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED ","NO WARRANT SHALL ISSUE BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE"
Therefore the only reasonable search or seizure is only done so with a legal lawful valid search warrant, probable cause is only to get said search warrant.
Law enforcement have no legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction whatsoever to search anyone or anything or seize anyone or anything whatsoever without a legal lawful valid search warrant period.
from 8:27....
Cop: Mam, do you mind if we look through your trunk?
Mam: Yeah.
How does that constitute consent? It sounds to me like she did mind having her trunk searched and thus isn't giving consent.
Amendment IV:
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.
The section: "persons, houses, papers and effects" refers strictly to people, residences and forms of tangible property.
(It does not include evidence of passage into public domain, such as electronic records regarding telephone calls, emails, texts and other footprints regardless of the slippery slopers.)
"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." refers to warrants. (This passage does not mention searches and seizures conducted in the absence of warrants.)
What seems to be guaranteed is the right to argue, and it's within these tests of boundaries and specifics that our rights and freedom are maintained.
+James Barnes: I appreciate the attention, sweetheart, but I'm simply not interested.
You mean to tell me you didn't have nothing else to do but repeat/retype everything in this video?... 😂
US vs Leon scares me. If the ultimate seizure is death and someone is shot due to a mistake on the address but good faith protects the cop. That's fucked up
I'm not sure if this has been addressed yet, but the first case you mention as "Smith v Mary" is actually "Smith v Maryland" (at least so far as I can tell when trying to search for Smith v Mary, and then reading further about Smith v Maryland). Other than that, this was a fantastic video and I can't wait to watch your other ones.
Smith an English name as far as I know just saying
I think that anything you do in the privacy of your own home or vehicle should be protected under the 4 th amendment unless theres probable cause for insistence some one who is a registered sex offender owning child porn and and exposing himself in public and or acting inappropriately on internet chats with under aged people and in public shows probable cause to seize his computer and search his house
you helped me so much ipassed my US HISTORY REGENT exam with 98 thank ya so much
Universal Declaration of Human Rights Art 3, 9, and 12.
I'll call this. Keeping our head, above water. And the water can be thicker than mud. Good job.
Plain view is only probable cause to get said search warrant.
domain specific language, anyone?
There is a poll on the amendments here: civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_9b7f7c61a0ba517e
can u do civil procedure
Can u please rename this series to some thing like The Con simplified.
It's too late, that boat has sailed. If you heard how I was saying "dummy" you wouldn't be offended.
But in order to attract more people that would be a great idea.
Apparently these middle guys--Apple, Google, ATT, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc.--were reluctant to hand over customer/citizen private information to the NSA but were faced with overwhelming commercial pressure to do so. Discuss among yourselves.
A phone call is never probable cause.