▁limit ▁because ▁there ▁are ▁laws ▁against ▁speed ing ." ▁ ▁Return ing ▁to ▁the ▁majority ' s ▁apparent ▁confusion ▁over ▁the ▁meaning ▁of ▁" poss essions ", ▁Pe ck ▁said ▁it ▁was ▁ins ult ing ▁to ▁the ▁fram ers ▁of ▁the ▁Verm ont ▁Constitution ▁to ▁suggest ▁that ▁they ▁" simp ly ▁toss ed ▁in ▁words ▁w illy - nil ly ▁with ▁no ▁intent ▁that ▁they ▁have ▁any ▁particular ▁meaning ; ▁merely ▁filling ▁in ▁bl anks , ▁as ▁it ▁were , ▁with ▁the ▁first ▁word ▁that ▁came ▁to ▁mind ." ▁He ▁believed ▁that ▁they ▁chose ▁their ▁words ▁carefully ▁and ▁would ▁not ▁have ▁expected ▁the ▁level ▁of ▁protection ▁the ▁court ▁was ▁giving ▁land own ers . ▁ ▁Pe ck ▁also ▁called ▁the ▁majority ' s ▁holding ▁that ▁the ▁search ▁was ▁un const itution al ▁" a ▁gross ly ▁unf air ▁example ▁of ▁police - bash ing ", ▁that ▁he ▁himself ▁took ▁personally . ▁ ▁Pe ck ▁fe ared ▁that ▁the ▁majority ' s ▁decision ▁would ▁unnecess arily ▁hand ic ap ▁the ▁state ' s ▁police ▁in ▁prevent ing ▁crime . ▁He ▁accused ▁it ▁of ▁" cho [ osing ] ▁the ▁possible ▁prest ige ▁with ▁which ▁it ▁may ▁be ▁hon ored ▁by ▁law ▁reviews ▁and ▁other ▁constitution al ▁activ ists ▁among ▁the ▁courts , ▁and ▁legal ▁writers , ▁to ▁a ▁recognition ▁of ▁the ▁rights ▁of ▁the ▁individual ▁inhabitants ▁of ▁the ▁State ▁of ▁Verm ont ." ▁At ▁the ▁very ▁least , ▁the ▁majority ▁should ▁have ▁held ▁the ▁issue ▁to ▁be ▁decided ▁on ▁a ▁case - by -