3 ms·

You're just guessing. Hint: look up the fourth amendment.

• scotty79 10y ago
  I'm not really getting your point. What protection about unreasonable searches has to do with the fact that some evidences must be ignored? If somebody is breaching your 4th amendment laws he should be prosecuted, but if he finds a a photo of you and a corpse it shouldn't be ignored just because search was unreasonable.
  • billskills 10y ago
    It's really very simple. If the evidence is not ignored, it's an incentive for illegal searches. > if he finds a a photo of you and a corpse it shouldn't be ignored just because search was unreasonable. You could not be more wrong on that point.
    • scotty79 10y ago
      > It's really very simple. If the evidence is not ignored, it's an incentive for illegal searches. I know that's the theory, but most countries don't have this and they also don't have plague of illegal searches, because, you know, they are illegal and police tends to do legal things and they can loose their jobs and be prosecuted if they start doing illegal things. I understand that the police in USA has a history of allowing police to do illegal things for "greater good" but ignoring evidence is way too late to prevent illegal searches. > You could not be more wrong on that point. In USA, maybe UK and perhaps few other countries I'd be. In virtually any other country I wouldn't be.