Innocent until proven guilty. The right to be secure in their own person from unwarranted searches and seizures
These concepts are doomed to the history books. Our children are being taught from an early age that they must prove they’re innocent, without even being accused of anything.
Take drug tests for student athletes. Why should ANY student, let alone a student being involved in extracurricular activities, be forced to pee in a bottle? If there is an accusation of drug use, let the accuser come forward. If the accusation is credible, then have the student take a drug test. If it comes back negative, deal with the accuser. And compensate those falsely accused. Stop teaching our children that it’s proper for them to prove their innocence, unless someone is willing to put their name and reputation on the line with an actual accusation first.
Like DUI checkpoints.
Can anyone show me exactly where in the US Constitution that government is permitted to close a public road and not permit one to pass until they have proven they are innocent? The cops are not looking for any one person. There is no emergency. They’re not looking for escaped prisoners in someones trunk. They’re just stopping EVRYONE traveling on that particular road and looking for anything they can find. And refusal to cooperate is considered probable cause for even greater intrusions into one’s privacy. This is EXACTLY the type of searches the founding fathers had in mind when the Fourth Amendment was written. And the Fifth.And red light cameras
Where does it say that if you are accused of a crime, and you are innocent, you must act as a policeman and help them solve it? Proving your innocence isn’t enough, you must accuse someone else of committing the crime, even though you weren’t there and didn’t see it happen. It’s like being accused of robbing a bank, proving you were 400 miles away in another state, and unless you solve the crime yourself, being found guilty of it anyway.How is this Constitutional?
It’s common knowledge that both the states and federal governments are building fingerprint and DNA databases. How is this Constitutional?
Example: I taught Industrial Electric and Motor Control, and PLC Programming at the local technical school. Part time, adults, night school. I was strongly recruited, due to my skills and work history.
As part of my yearly teaching certification, I underwent a background check.
Then, last year, the State started requiring teachers such as myself to submit their fingerprints as part of the certification process. This violates the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches. How? Every Time there’s a bank robbery, burglary, murder, or who knows what else committed, and fingerprints are found, they would check to see if anyone in the database has a match.
Why aren’t the cops allowed to just go door to door seeing if anybody in the neighborhood has a match to the incrementing prints? Because they must first have probable cause, a reason to suspect that person did it. Fourth Amendment says so. So how can the government check all teachers, lawyers, gun owners, and anybody Else’s fingerprints they may have happened to collect? By saying that the prints were given to them voluntaries. No one is forcing me to take that job, but taking it means I give up my Fourth Amendment rights.
At least four of my daughter’s friends went to college for teaching, child care, and one went to work with the criminally psychologically “challenged”. All are good kids, smart, and all are already have their prints in the system. None of them were told that they would be checked against any crime ever committed, they thought they were passing a background check. Just what kind of crime to you suppose they were expecting these college freshmen to have committed?
Just a few examples of how our children, and adults, are being taught to submit rather than stand up for themselves.