With out your permission

[Jerrymac]

http://www.local6.com/news/15639652/detail.html

[kathyp]

i saw that.  how will they know that the bees are "killer bees"?  will they test them first?

[johnnybigfish]

Good question!
I bet they'll just kill 'em all and use the excuse of "Killer Bees".
your friend,
john

[Jerrymac]

I was thinking more along these lines.
    * Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable 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.

But I could be misinterpreting that I guess.

[kathyp]

i think you are correct.  i would guess that they'd get around that by the local laws and prior complaints. i'm guessing that if you didn't respond to the complaints they would say that you were in violation of the law and the seizure was not unreasonable.

[KONASDAD]

Many of our constitutional protections can be trumped by "health, safety and welfare" conscerns. Secondly, constituional protections only work if you exercise them. Someone will have to get charged first, and than attack the staute.  Additionally, if there is no "punitive" component, their is no "seizure". What is more interesting is when they find someones marijuana field and seize it w/o warrant. The smart officer will leave and get a warrant. That way the seizure is w/ warrant, while the search placed him on persons property lawfully(pursuant to ordinance) and would probably be upheld as w/in plain view.