A person’s home is given the highest level of protection against unreasonable search and seizure. In light of the greater risk to personal safety inherent in today’s world is it possible that this concept is outdated and should be lessened in order to provide more protection for citizens? Has the standard already been eroded beyond an acceptable point? Is it possible to protect both a persons’ right against unreasonable search and seizure as well his/her right to be safe? If so, how? If not, why not?
Some things an officer may do after an arrest, according to court decisions, include: search the arrestee, search the area of immediate control, search the vehicle the arrestee was riding in, search the passenger compartment, handcuff the arrestee, monitor the person’s movements, and search the arrestee at the place of detention. Discuss the different justifications for each of the things an officer is allowed to do after an arrest. Do any of the actions go beyond what you would consider to be acceptable were you the “arrestee”?
