Do you think that entrapment by law enforcement officers should require a warrant just like wire taps?

For hundreds of years entrapment, wherein the government induces a person to commit a crime, has been illegal. Recently with a particular drug case that prohibition has been lifted, and entrapment is being used almost indiscrimanently by law enforcement as a cost effective way to get convictions, often paying informants for each conviction that they get.

These "incentivized" investigations have led informants to fabricate stories and to turn on family and friends in the pursuit of profit.

The effect of this has been that now federal and state police agencies are using entrapment and the follow on plea bargain to leverage elected officials, coerce people they dont like, and to ruin their enemies.

Law enforcement and prosecutors view it as a necessary tool particularly for the fight against drugs.

It would seem to me that like wire taps and home and car searches it should require a judicial warrant involving some presentation of probable cause against specific persons. This would prevent some of the nonsense where NY police were leaving walkmans abandoned on the subway benches and then jumping on people who picked them up and charging them with theft.

What do you think?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Best Answer

    I think it should certainly require a warrant against drugs. Each individual being targeted should also be evaluated by the judge prior to allowing this. This would prevent the "fishnet" method they currently use, but still allow large time criminals to be caught.

    As far as prostitution, it should just be legalized. You can argue the morality of it all you want, but regardless it isn't the government's place to be morality police.

  • 9 years ago

    I'm not sure you know the actual definition of entrapment. Leaving a walk-man on a subway bench and then arresting those who pick them up is not entrapment. In no way did law enforcement "force" or coerce the individuals into stealing the items.

    I am curious as to this "drug case" you reference. What case are you talking about?

    Entrapment is against the law. There is no way for anyone to get a warrant to entrap someone.

  • Lisa
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Your uncle is right. United States v. McKinnon. If the police overhear evidence of other crimes, that evidence can be used in court. When the wiretap warrant is reviewed for renewal by a judge (as must happen periodically for the wiretap to continue), the police must inform the judge of the possibility that discussions of legal activiies are being detected that were not included in the original wiretap order.

  • 9 years ago

    Do you even understand what entrapment is?

    Entrapment is not buying drugs and then arresting the seller.

    Entrapment is telling a person to go buy drugs, giving them the money and THEN arresting them for doing what they were told to do.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 4
    9 years ago

    No!

    These tests merely show the true character of these individuals, most of the time the devious and criminal side. Law abiding citizens have nothing to fear! I wouldn't buy dope from a streetcorner hustler much less a cop pretending to be one!

  • 9 years ago

    I think you're just another idiot who doesn't know what "entrapment" is.

    I bet you watched the Catch a Predator series and was screaming "entrapment!"

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    When making a statement like you have done, it is always best to have proof to back it up. In your case you do not. Just accusations doesn't work.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    No, public property = fair game.

  • 9 years ago

    i think that you should learn the definition of ENTRAPMENT

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    I don't believe in "entrapment".. so... No..

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.