Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/thre

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by Denny Crane, Sep 22, 2010.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 1 of 2
  1. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/public-privacy/#ixzz10GwocAiu

    Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’

    The Obama administration has urged a federal appeals court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects’ vehicles to track their every move.

    The Justice Department is demanding a federal appeals court rehear a case in which it reversed the conviction and life sentence of a cocaine dealer whose vehicle was tracked via GPS for a month, without a court warrant. The authorities then obtained warrants to search and find drugs in the locations where defendant Antoine Jones had travelled.

    The administration, in urging the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to reverse a three-judge panel’s August ruling from the same court, said Monday that Americans should expect no privacy while in public.

    “The panel’s conclusion that Jones had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the public movements of his Jeep rested on the premise that an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the totality of his or her movements in public places, ” Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Smith wrote the court in a petition for rehearing.

    The case is an important test of privacy rights as GPS devices have become a common tool in crime fighting, and can be affixed to moving vehicles by an officer shooting a dart. Three other circuit courts have already said the authorities do not need a warrant for GPS vehicle tracking, Smith pointed out.

    The circuit’s ruling means that, in the District of Columbia area, the authorities need a warrant to install a GPS-tracking device on a vehicle. But in much of the United States, including the West, a warrant is not required. Unless the circuit changes it mind, only the Supreme Court can mandate a uniform rule.
     
    Denny Crane, Sep 22, 2010
    #1
  2. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    This is why I walk everywhere... of course, the police could affix a GPS tracker on my fat ass and I might not notice! :D
     
    BlazerCaravan, Sep 22, 2010
    #2
  3. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.

    j/k. I'm not a fan of warrant-less GPS affixing.
     
    Minstrel, Sep 22, 2010
    #3
  4. BLAZER PROPHET

    BLAZER PROPHET Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    18,725
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    dental malpractice claims adjuster
    Location:
    Portland area
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I was all for it until it came to this sentence. First, it's absurd on its face. Second, define "while in public". Does it mean anywhere I may go outside my house or apartment? Does it mean only while away from any private dwelling or building as in an outdoor cafe? What about my private car? That's about as Orwellian as it can get. I mean, I applaud the tailing of a convicted drug trafficker as I think one loses a certain amount of rights due to certain types of convictions, but "any american". That's way over the top.
     
    BLAZER PROPHET, Sep 22, 2010
    #4
  5. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I disagree that a person has the reasonable expectation of privacy in public places, but the guy's jeep and a person's body are private property.

    In public places, you may be video taped by multiple cameras, and I don't see any reason to stop putting up (security) cameras. And the police can look at those video tapes, as we see on TV all the time (video of some guy robbing a 7-11 store or whatever).

    The police can follow anyone they want in public places. They can follow you as you drive or walk down the street. There's never been any issue with that.

    Attaching a GPS device is a very different thing, as it does violate property rights. The car/jeep is not public property. A warrant is clearly required by the constitution for several reasons:

    5th amendment in part reads:

    nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


    (That's three reasons right there!)

    The 4th amendment reads:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


    The car/jeep is one of the guy's effects.

    Of course, there are cases where a warrant is not immediately required, as in the case of wiretapping terrorists' phones.

    Go Obama!
     
    Denny Crane, Sep 22, 2010
    #5
  6. BLAZER PROPHET

    BLAZER PROPHET Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    18,725
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    dental malpractice claims adjuster
    Location:
    Portland area
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Nonetheless, we are entitled to certain freedoms.
     
    BLAZER PROPHET, Sep 22, 2010
    #6
  7. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I think you need to re-read my post.
     
    Minstrel, Sep 22, 2010
    #7
  8. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,036
    Likes Received:
    57,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Big brother... The funny thing is, thousands of Americans use On Star, which is basically the same thing. On Star can go as far as stopping your car while it's in motion and locking/unlocking the doors. That kind of control is scary.
     
    Natebishop3, Sep 22, 2010
    #8
  9. EL PRESIDENTE

    EL PRESIDENTE Username Retired in Honor of Lanny.

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,346
    Likes Received:
    22,532
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I think you mean hundreds of Americans.
     
    EL PRESIDENTE, Sep 22, 2010
    #9
  10. The Sebastian Express

    The Sebastian Express Snarflepumpkin

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,395
    Likes Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Pretty creepy, to be honest. Not cool.
     
    The Sebastian Express, Sep 22, 2010
    #10
  11. BLAZER PROPHET

    BLAZER PROPHET Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    18,725
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    dental malpractice claims adjuster
    Location:
    Portland area
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Quite right.
     
    BLAZER PROPHET, Sep 22, 2010
    #11
  12. Paxil

    Paxil Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Software engineer
    Location:
    Hillsboro
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    How would one expect privacy about where they are if they are driving in their car? Explain to me how we would enforce that... "I am driving in my car... you are voilating the law if you are looking at me!"
     
    Paxil, Sep 23, 2010
    #12
  13. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    This is mainly all a big show to give the false impression to citizens that they indeed still have privacy.

    Every car, truck or van sold in the US already has a gps chip installed at the factory. This has been the case for several years now.

    Also, our government, and many others, already can get a quite detailed visual and audio of all living entities in just about any building on earth, especially our homes.

    Of course, the police are not given access to this technology as they are just as likely to resist as an ordinary citizen when the overthrow comes.
     
    MARIS61, Sep 23, 2010
    #13
  14. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Not everyone lives in an apartment. Some people own thousands of acres of land.

    I drive my car on my own and other's private property every day. I have spent nearly a week driving it daily at a friend's ranch without ever leaving private property. Sometimes it's parked in a private garage.

    I used to own a windowless van and everyone but the front seat riders had an expectation of privacy.
     
    MARIS61, Sep 23, 2010
    #14
  15. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    Actually, it's hundreds of thousands, but it's their personal choice.
     
    MARIS61, Sep 23, 2010
    #15
  16. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I know you're joking but even so that statement has never held a grain of truth.

    It is not my loyalty to my country that comes to question here, but that of the people who control "the government".

    I'm not the one who keeps trying to circumvent personal freedoms this country is based on and therefore destroy it.
     
    MARIS61, Sep 23, 2010
    #16
  17. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    The issue isn't that the cops can look at some car in public places, it's that they attached a GPS device to someone's car without a warrant.
     
    Denny Crane, Sep 23, 2010
    #17
  18. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I agree with you. Both that I was joking and that it has never held a grain of truth.
     
    Minstrel, Sep 23, 2010
    #18
  19. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    In another test case (or maybe stemming from the same one) being appealed Oregon DEA trespassed onto private property to attach a gps and later arrested a man for marijuana dealing. Demonstrating that several Federal judges have forgotten everything they ever knew about The Constitution and it's amendments, and most of the basics from law school, or are merely servants of the New World Order, they ruled it okay.

    http://www.switched.com/2010/08/28/cops-dont-need-warrants-to-plant-gps-on-cars-federal-court-say/
     
    MARIS61, Sep 23, 2010
    #19
  20. Paxil

    Paxil Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Software engineer
    Location:
    Hillsboro
    Re: Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’ Read More http://www.wired.com/

    I know how you feel... I feel the same way about parking tickets... wish they couldn't attach them to my car either. ;)

    I do get your point... but I just personally don't feel there is a problem with it. As someone already mentioned... you car is already recording quite a bit of data about what it is doing.
     
    Paxil, Sep 23, 2010
    #20
Page 1 of 2

Share This Page