Strip Searches Persuasive Essay

No one should be searched without a good reason and warrant. People should have the right of privacy- it is important to them. It is ethical for police to have search warrants before searching a person’s personal belongings. There have been recent conflicts on police powers over the pass years. Police are disobeying the fourth amendment by searching illegally. Critics frown upon police, while supporters agree with the police. Being searched without a permit is unconstitutional, and police could take advantage of their power, and abuse it. It makes US citizens feel less secure and safe. Citizens need to be guaranteed rights as long as they behave.

Today’s search and seizure law were made by the founding fathers of America who felt that government should be ruled by the people and not the other way around. This amendment specifically gives the right to citizens of the United States to be secure in their homes and belonging

Law enforcement officers across the country have undergone extensive training and have been entrusted with powers to protect the public. They have every right to remain vigilant in conducting their job to ensure their safety as well as the publics. They are authorized to conduct specific types of searches with out a warrant and three types of searches are: plain view search, consent to search, and stop and frisk. We will look at each type of search closer and attempt to throughly describe each. A plain-view search is a tool an officer can utilize to legally confiscate or seize a specific item. This type of search requires the officer: to view the item while he or she is in the immediate area, recogize and realize the item can be seized,

Police brutality and the use of force is a big problem in American today, so police departments are taking a few steps to prevent this from happening. There are multiple cases where some police officers’ actions are questioned, leading to an untrusting public. No matter if it was racial, hate, a mentally unstable police officer, or the police officer was just doing their job, there’s an easy way to find out now. Body cameras are being used in various cities and states and have proved to keep the level of police brutality and injustice down.

Everyone is entitled to privacy, especially when it comes to law enforcement. To make the public, and the officers protecting them, feel protected the implementation of body-worn-cameras in the police force is occurring. Sometimes, this equipment malfunctions and ends up doing more harm than the good it promised. When this occurs, a reevaluation of how the cameras are being used should happen to make sure improvements occur. As shown by the recent privacy violations to the Round Lake Police Department regarding body-worn cameras, officers need to become more familiar with the technology they are using and stricter policies about their usage are necessary.

According the the fourth amendment, Individuals have the right to refuse a requested search. Many people are not familiar with this right because of the fear of further punishment. Officers will ask to do a scan through of personal items if one seems suspicious or just in general to check if anyone if not following the law. For example, In Florida v. Bostick (1991), a police officer was

Within the United Kingdom we have all walked past a policeman and seen on television searching individuals on the highway. This statutory right given to the police has been a cause of mistrust between the police and members of the public for over 40 years. It is perceived as an unwarranted attack on civil liberties especially within the black, Asian, and minority ethnic. (BAME)

Police brutality is the extreme misconduct against civilians by police officers by ways of ranging from beating, sexual abuse, killing, and harassing (BRITANNICA). Although, police officers are given jurisdiction to use discretion on their reason and use of force, some officers take advantage of their limits and exercise excessive force. It is inappropriate and unacceptable for a uniformed police officer to unnecessarily harm citizens (HUFF POST). Police brutality of a defenseless citizens can lead to protests, riots, and public outrage. When tensions occur, complaints by citizens are often never investigated due to law enforcement’s desire to cover up the mistreatment and because police brutality is difficult to prove depending on the scenario. The case of Rodney King, racial discrimination, NFL protests, body cameras, excuses, and the September 11th terrorist attacks were all affected by the misconduct and violence brought upon by police brutality.

Police do not have the ability to search a person without authorization or warrants, as Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms offers the right to freedom from unreasonable searches or seizures.

I feel that locker searches are an invasion of one’s privacy. I also feel that through locker searches we would be able to increase safety among schools, campuses, locker rooms and many other places. Lockers are a area where you place a assortment of things in which for some people could include hazardous things such as weapons, drugs, etc. Although all this is at risk I still feel as though lockers should be private. And if one is not to be trusted with a locker why should he or she be issued a locker. I suppose many horrible encounters have led behind the lack of locker searches. Endeavors such as murders, poisons, and maybe even sometimes suicide. So if I were really asked to reevaluate my decision on keeping locker checks private I would

I strongly believe that there should be random locker searches. Most kids use their locker for their books and supplies, others not so much. Lockers are a perfect place to hide weapons, drugs, and other forbidden contraband because they think it's their private space. If you have a policy to have random locker searches kids will probably think twice before they try to bring something. Also if you say they are random no one can say that you are only searching them because of their race or their history.

Most individuals can identify a police officer by their uniform, which subconsciously conveys power and authority. People with a presence of a police officer tend to hide or stop any illegal, deviant activities, because of the sudden worry of getting caught. Canada is a place of numerous cultures, and ethnicities that fused together to create a strong sense of multiculturalism, but depending on the background and social status of the individual the police

Recently, towards the end of September, the state of New Jersey passed a law that allows police officers to search anyone’s car without a warrant. Before this decree, police must have consent from the driver or a mandated warrant issuing the search. Now, police do not need consent from the owner and can conduct a search without a warrant. This law invades people’s rights to privacy. This law racially profiles people. This law damages people’s property. The ability the police officers have to search ones car is not only unreasonable and unjust, nut unconstitutional as well.

The victim of this particular crime has filed a complaint with the local Police Department to initiate the investigation, based on the initiation of this complaint any information that the victim had provided to the Police Department A little company known as crime stoppers had offered her award to solicit new information as well as new leads to solve this crime. Victims of this crime give you exact information to crime stoppers in hopes of receiving the reward for their information, crime stoppers did not agree with this logic. This case ended up going through the judicial process. Where the court found in favor of crime stoppers. I believe what should’ve happened in this case crime stopper should have done a public disclosure test to determine

Strip searches is a practice of removing one’s clothing in an attempt to find contraband the person strip searched may possess. This practice serves as a method used on individuals in the process of being sent to a correctional facility in an attempt to ensure contraband does not make it’s way inside the facility. According to the fourth amendment, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. In theory, this amendment gives the people the ability to defend one’s privacy from prosecution whether that be prosecution through strip searches or seizures of their property, in the situation where prosecution is deemed unjust. However the term “unreasonable” as said in the fourth amendment, is vague because there is no clear-cut on what is deemed an unreasonable search and seizure causing controversy whenever an individual believes that there fourth amendment has been violated. So what is the rule when it comes to strip searches? On 2012, the court ruled strip searches may be conducted on any criminal in the process of being sent to jail.