"A. Melon" wrote:
Supreme Court to hear thermal peeking case By MICHAEL KIRKLAND
<<snip most of the article>> I don't see how any rational mind could see this type of search as allowed under the US 4th Amendment. Too bad no jurist has asked my opinion. But one line in the article pissed me off:
A subsequent search discovered an indoor marijuana growing operation, firearms and drug paraphernalia, again according to court records.
Kyllo was indicted on one count of growing marijuana,
Since Kyllo wasn't indicted on firearms charges, we must assume that the firearms were legal. Why, then, were they mentioned? Why didn't Kirkland also mention that a search found eating utensils and blue jeans? The American establishment press's bias as regards firearms is a constant irritant. Snarlingly, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong@acmenet.net