Ovid (publius_ovidius) wrote,
Ovid
publius_ovidius

  • Mood:
So, a cop decides he doesn't like you. It might be nice if he could just walk into your home and maybe look around without a warrant. In California, he just might be able to. Seems all he needs to do is say "gosh, I think you may have been drinking and driving" and he can walk in and bust you. The reasoning (if you want to call it that) from the California Supreme Court seems to be that your diminishing blood alcohol level has the same legal standing as you deliberately destroying evidence (another reason that police can enter a home without a warrant).

So if you live in California, the next time you have friends over for a couple of drinks, make sure that you haven't pissed off any police. They can just walk in and bust you for being drunk, claiming a "neighbor tipped them off", and have a look around your apartment at the same time. Or maybe like the case which prompted the California ruling, if you've pissed off a neighbor and they see you drinking at home, maybe they'll claim you drove home. Who knows?

Of course, no one would ever abuse this, right? Of course not ...

(Note that this still doesn't give the police the right to search your apartment. However, if you have something in plain sight which the police officers might reasonably be expected to see, it can be used against you.)
Tags: 1984, philosophy, politics
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 4 comments