Some of you may have heard of a new “organization” called Oath Keepers. There is a lot of conflicting information on the internet about them. There is much effort to portray them as “radical rightwing ” individuals with an evil agenda to overthrow the government. The same philosophy that sees the word “patriot” as a terrorist threat. But what is an “Oath Keeper”, really?
When most of our officials including police officers are sworn in they must TAKE AN OATH.
n. pl. oaths
Fourth Amendment – Search and Seizure
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.
Probable Cause – “a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime“.
What IS reasonable? I suppose that could be left up to interpretation and opinion. THAT is the loophole. I had a short lesson recently from a very good teacher who is a State Trooper. The gist of this lesson was that ANYTHING AT ALL can be used as probable cause if they wish to perform a search. A tiny dried out grass clipping from the lawn in the wrong place could give an officer “probable cause” to search for drugs, because it “looks like marijuana”. Or a fleck of cigarette ash could be used as probable cause to search if the supposed “crime” includes ANYTHING that could end up looking remotely like those ashes…
Are these the signs of an oath keeper? NO. An oath keeper is NOT someone who can bend and manipulate the rules to suit their situation.
The “Probable Cause” rule is there for a REASON. If it were REALLY that easy to find probable cause for a search, then it would not be listed in the Constitution as a protection.
“Reasonable suspicion”. Does this mean that if a police officer happens to have known someone for years and years, and they are pretty sure you would probably have something illegal in your possession if they could just get a search warrant somehow, that they have free reign to invent, manipulate, or otherwise fabricate “evidence” in order to meet the standards for probable cause? NO! This is totally unprofessional behavior. Anyone practicing their profession using these tactics is BREAKING their oath to uphold the constitution.
- A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
- A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
- Oppressive, dictatorial control.
I would assume that taking an oath to uphold something as important as the Constitution would be rather important to follow thru on, much like signing a contract, and acting in such a way as to circumnavigate the instructions of the Constitution would be a breaking of the contract and grounds for firing.
But I have never seen anyone be fired for not following the oath they took.
Which is exactly why these “Oath Keepers” have appeared on the scene. Now, how can being an Oath Keeper be a BAD thing?