September 5, 2007 | 3 Comments

Look, just because you went to jail for peeping at teenagers, that doesn’t give the government the right to confiscate your “massive” porn collection. Or does it? Actually, we’re a little unclear on this … what does the Constitution say about spank mags again? (marinij.com)

Tags: , , , ,

Author:Dashiell

View all posts by Dashiell →
  • Azndude51

    It kinda sucks to have that huge of a collection to be taken away, but there’s always the internet, the largest porn collection in the world…

  • Conrad

    I’m pretty sure that if the articles in question have nothing to do with the case, by law, they must be returned. Much like his car keys.

  • el_guapo42

    Among other things, it says:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    So, in order for the seizure to have any shot at being legal, a judge somewhere would have had to sign off on a warrant particularly describing the things to be seized. Must have made for a more interesting document than one usually encounters in official business.