How does stop-and-frisk loosen the Fourth Amendment's restraints?
What will be an ideal response?
Reasonable suspicion is something of a compromise between the conflicting goals of crime control and due process; it can be seen as achieving a balance between having unrestricted law enforcement and being able to apprehend lawbreakers. When police activity does not constitute a search, the Fourth Amendment does not apply. By extension, then, when the Fourth Amendment does not apply, probable cause is not required. Much the same logic applies to a stop-and-frisk. If police conduct falls short of a stop or a frisk, the Fourth Amendment does not apply.
You might also like to view...
This Act, enacted in 1990 requires the US Justice Department to collect data on crimes that manifest prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity:
a. Hate Crime Statistics Act b. The Penalty Enhancement for Hate Crimes Act c. Hate Crimes and Penalties Act d. None of the above
This type of cell provides supplies and other support to other cells, like bomb-making materials
a. tactical operation cells b. intel cells c. logistic cells d. fund-raising cells
When the witness tell the investigating officer different stories about how the accident occurred, the officer should keep in mind that
a. One witness is deliberately attempting to tell the officer a false account of what he saw b. All witnesses see the accident in exactly the same way; therefore one or more witnesses are lying to the officer c. Different witnesses will perceive the same situation differently, and, therefore, each witness maybe telling the truth as he/she perceived it to be. d. None of the above
The practical definition of probable cause is "Less certain than not."
a. True b. False Indicate whether the statement is true or false