# A serious suggestion for making police searches of homes less controversial **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 28, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219 "2017-03-28T13:48:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2017, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/21 "2017-03-28T22:28:02Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Not exactly. The presumption of innocence only applies in a court of law - the police are under no obligation to assume innocence. Yes they are, absent probable cause. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2017, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/22 "2017-03-30T04:06:41Z")
The only benefit I see from the OP’s suggestion is that it would make authorities/cops really, \*really \*reluctant to carry out searches unless absolutely necessary. ---
**Author:** ![jz78817](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jz78817/32/1028_2.png) [@jz78817](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jz78817)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2017, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/23 "2017-03-30T08:20:16Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Come on, guys, I put this in IMHO rather than GD for a reason. I know I used the word seriously in the topic heading but didn’t any of you detect that my tongue was firmly in my cheek? Even with the bit about the cameras at the end? > > Ah well, my bad. I can see that I’ll have to be more open in my satire in future. My attempt at A Modest Proposal failed miserably. Yes, don’t say it, I’m no Swift. 🙂 don’t blame your audience for the fact that your “joke” sucked. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2017, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/24 "2017-03-30T10:48:49Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Shodan > The presumption of innocence only applies in a court of law - the police are under no obligation to assume innocence. > [@jtur88](#): > > Yes they are, absent probable cause. You need probable cause to get a search warrant. Hopefully when they burst in they won’t throw a flash bang [into your baby’s playpen](http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/05/baby-in-coma-after-police-grenade-dropped-in-crib-during-drug-raid/). ---
**Author:** ![Teuton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/teuton/32/3864_2.png) [@Teuton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teuton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2017, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/25 "2017-03-30T11:20:11Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > The only benefit I see from the OP’s suggestion is that it would make authorities/cops really, \*really \*reluctant to carry out searches unless absolutely necessary. Except the occasional one, who’ll be disturbingly into it. ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2017, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219/26 "2017-03-30T14:30:18Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Yes they are, absent probable cause. Uh, then how could anyone ever be arrested? If the police are obligated to assume everyone is innocent until proven guilty, why can they arrest anyone? I am not sure what you mean by “absent probable cause”. If you mean that police can arrest someone when they have good reason to believe them guilty, then we are saying the same thing. The police, in order to do their job, have to be able to decide that someone is guilty, at least highly likely to be guilty, in order to function. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-serious-suggestion-for-making-police-searches-of-homes-less-controversial/783219.md?page=1)