There is a common misconception that the 4th Amendment makes a police officers job harder. It does not. In fact, it cracks down on corruption in the police force to some degree, as they cannot just arrest whoever they want.

Recently, SWAT teams are usually assigned more relatively trivial things to investigate.

The same cannot be for immigrants. As long as you are not certified with the Department of Homeland Security, you are able to be searched unlawfully.

An arrest warrant is acquired in a court of law by presenting a judge with probable cause for arresting the suspect. If there is any pertinent evidence that can be presented to the judge when requesting an arrest warrant that will speed up the process then it should be disclosed. That is why many officers or prosecutors make sure they have probable cause and at least two pieces of evidence to present to the judge before requesting an arrest warrant. Arrest warrants are most commonly required when a crime is committed out of view of a police officer.

Source: http://www.lawfirms.com/resources/criminal-defense/defendants-rights/what-arrest-warrant-means.htm

If you had something to incriminate you, the police would have a warrant.

Yes, but, how many more people were unlawfully arrested because of things like PRISM?

Opening Statement: Imagine if, randomly, in the middle of the night, a SWAT team burst into your house, without a warrant, and started "collecting evidence", and immediately arrested you. The Fourth Amendment prevents this from becoming a reality

Honestly, while I agree with this, I still do feel that it is a rather strange point, especially considering that basketball isn't played with baskets.