g it? They used heat-seeking thermal imaging on Mr. Kyllo's house and detected the signature of three strong halide lights. Based on this information they were able to get a warrant to search Mr. Kyllo's home. Kyllo's lawyers argued that the thermal imaging was a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The governments lawyers claimed it did not apply as they only measured heat on the outside of the home. (Kyllo v. U.S.)
             The final decision: "Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a search and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant." (Danny Lee Kyllo's Homepage) So a criminal is set free because his Fourth Amendment rights were violated. Who, in their right mind, would think of using heat-seeking thermal imaging to search for marijuana? Wouldn't the cost make it rather impractical? Mr. Kyllo was not a repeat felon whom they hoped to catch in order to put away a major drug dealer. It was his first offense. I am not defending him, I am trying to understand the lengths that the government went to in order to arrest him, just to have it blow up in their faces due to our good old search and seizure law.
             We have no privacy in our homes, we have no privacy on our person. A police Ball 3
             officer saw two men standing on a street corner. One would walk up to a store window, look inside then walk back and talk with his friend. They continued to do this about a
             dozen times. A third man joined them for a few minutes, then they followed him up the street. Thinking the three men were acting suspiciously, the officer approached them and asked their names. They mumbled a response, at which time the officer spun one of the
             men around and patted him down. He found and removed a pistol. The man was charged with carrying a co...