Arguably, the rule of law has taken tremendous amendments to be the way it is today. The 4th amendments are one of the laws that affect many people in a nation. Peace officers in this case are not an exception. The 4th Amendment in one way or another is viewed by scholars to be contradicted, since it favors other people while oppressing the work of others. Critically, the 4th Amendments have been found to be a factor to increased crime rate, and at the same time opposing the search and the peace process. The 4th Amendments give individuals the right to be secure in their houses, papers, persons, as well as effects, against unreasonable seizures and searches (Smith 5). Therefore, as a peace officer I believe the 4th Amendments are a barrier to my roles.
Notably, the 4th amendment grants people the constitutional right not to undergo any search by a peace or police officers without certain probable cause. This prevents the peace officers from searching suspected criminal in the right time. Hence, it is evident that most suspected criminal and crime activities go unchecked leading to increase in crime in society. If critically analyzed, the 4th Amendments take away the powers of the peace officers since it does not give the police the right to check without cause. The 4th amendment in directly or indirectly protects the police.
The significance of parole cause puts peace officers in a critical position in handling the crime situation in the public. The fact that a peace officer should provide or have rational suspicion before acting and arresting a suspect limits the entire action of peace officers. Therefore, if a peace officer suspects that an individual is a danger to society he/she should first have a rational suspicion. In the courtroom the issues of probable cause is also known as rational suspicion (Smith 14) . As a peace officer the 4th amendments prevent me from acting instantly unless there is a rational suspicious. In most cases, this requirement has led to a lot of deaths, property loss, yet in the real sense the law is suppose to protect people and property from unreasonable seizure and search.
In addition, the 4th amendments have prevented the peace officers from providing the first hand evidence in the court of law. In fact, some of the cases in court have been withdrawn due to lack of proof and violation of the 4th amendments. The criminals are given another chance to carry out other criminal activity; this gives the peace officers a hard time in eliminating criminals in society (Smith 43). The peace officers cannot present evidence for the criminal was turned loose due to the procedural requirement of the law. Hence, the 4th Amendments could mean letting away the criminal to commit and go on violating the law in the watch of peace officers.
The exclusionary rule has conflicting effects on the role of peace officers. The 4th amendments tend to decrease peace officers search without the probable cause; in this case, this effect leads to a decrease in the probability of searching a crime and providing evidence that will lead to conviction. The barrier towards searching and seizure indirectly increases crime, shifting the blame on the role of peace officers in the society. The 4th amendments postponed the work of the peace officers; hence, at any given time the peace officers are forced to search a big number of people in society who are suspected to be quality. The peace officers incur a lot of lose and energy in executing their roles. In general perspective, the 4trh amendment adversely affects the role of peace and officers and increase crime.
Work cited
Smith, Rich. Fourth Amendment: The Right to Privacy. Edina, MN: ABDO Pub. Co, 2008. Print.
