[nickycummings]

In November of 1978, 913 people out of 1,100 people committed suicide in Guyana in a settlement called Jonestown. This settlement was ruled by a person named Jim Jones. He held psychological control of the inhabitants.

What would have been the constitutional ramifications of profiling Jim Jones before such an incident?

[firmbeliever]

Is this homework? Have you done any research on this? If you have,why not present it here & some of the members could guide you to a better answer or help to polish your answer.

.

[nickycummings]

I think the government did know about Jones. Remember Leo Ryan was a Congressman who went down there and was killed.

I am sure the ACLU would scream about it but those people didn't want to die (most of them) and Jones was insane.

That is a great question though. It does make you think, doesn't it.

BTW the government did profile Koresh. He was on a watch list and that led to the problem there. I mean after Ruby Ridge they should have realized going after people like that was a bad idea but that leads to the other question of how to save the lives of those people (especially the young who are not there by choice) when their "prophet" goes insane. In the end Koresh died for gun parts. He was stockpiling them and the government did know about it but no one needed to die for gun parts. Period.
If Jones had let those people leave who wanted to and then been done with it, he would have been OK but he was insane. In Jones case, he caused the problem. In the case of Koresh, the government holds more than their fair share of the blame. The FLDS might be evil in my own opinion but they have never killed people (that I know of) or committed mass suicide.

[firmbeliever]

Nicky,
I asked you a question,if this was homework,you could have just answered no... there was no need to give a reddie for my answer.

.

[Alder]

The Fifth Amendment contains the due process requirements for search and seizure (warrants, usually, unless you're the Bush administration). There are a bajillion Supreme and lower court decisions in this area. No warrant is required for surveillance that does not intrude where you have an expectation of privacy. I.e. your home, your landline telephone conversations, etc. The things you do in public are fair game for monitoring by the FBI or any other interested government agency. Back in the 60's the FBI created files for all sorts of public and not-so-public figures. As I recall, a few years ago, they allowed people to request a copy of those files, and all sorts of ex-hippies like Ken Kesey got theirs just for fun.

The 5th Amendment pertains to the federal govt. The 14th extends the same restrictions to actions by state agencies.

Don't often get a question pertaining to my day job... ;)

[nickycummings]

:o Firmbeliever

Sorry, I thought you were like others that the first thing they say is we don't do homework questions. This is not homework, is just some research I been doing in my own. Thanks

[Aymarae]

Nicky, you're a flippin liar, this is exact details used by AIU online University, I have seen you post exact details to the assignment IP5 for Forensic Psychology in several places, you're a flippin cheat.