[Dakota]

With one of your earlier posts, I was not addressing your point at all, but rather the rationalization that led to your conclusion. I said that pretty clearly.

With Jefferson, the poster merely stated the he owned slaves. From that I assumed he was intending to attack his character or his expertise or his right to comment on liberty since he kept people in slavery. I countered that this, to me, indicated the the poster could not address the issues of loss of liberty in modern American society at all and instead chose to try to have Jefferson's views discounted through attack on Jefferson as a man.

The poster then said he was not attacking him since what he said was true, but was claiming that the interpretation of the constitution had changed regarding slavery, and I pointed out that the interpretation had not changed, but rather that the consitution had been amended. And. besides, whether on not the charge was true had nothing to do with the fact that it was personal attack rather than a couter to his views.

So, do you actually belive search warrants are an impediment to the protection of the innocent?