Feds and Obama want to track you without a warrant

[Dude!]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/public-privacy/#ixzz10GwocAiu

wow...i didn't know the govt
had been allowed to put a
tracking device on your car
without a warrant

Obama wants to reverse
a recent court ruling
deeming the practice illegal

i'm all for catching crooks
but i can't believe this is an
acceptable practice

i say NO

[epo]

Do you know a guy named Lord Jezo?

[A.J.]

Like your EZ-Pass and cellphones don't already give you away.

[Jujubees2]

Did you even read this?

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.

Sound like the ruling that when you're in public anyone can take your photo since you have no expectation of privacy in public places.

[Dude!]

Sound like the ruling that when you're in public anyone can take your photo since you have no expectation of privacy in public places.

taking a photo
is different than using
a dart-gun to attach
a tracking device to a car!

did you even read the article?

[Serpico1103]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/public-privacy/#ixzz10GwocAiu

wow...i didn't know the govthad been allowed to put a without a warrantbama wants to verse
a recent court ruling deeming the practice illegali'm all for catching crooks but i can't believe this is an acceptable practice say NO

The Supreme Court ruled that using GPS without a warrant is permissible. This court only ruled that long term monitoring using GPS without a warrant crosses the line. The courts can either uphold the distinction between short term and long term or allow all waarantless GPS tracking in public.
It is another collusion of technology and privacy rights.

The Court that ruled warrantless GPS tracking was permissible did so in 1983. Where was the great Ron Regan on this one?

[Dude!]

Where was the great Ron Regan on this one?

out to lunch, i guess
like obama

i don't care whose
idea it was....
i'm just shocked to learn of it

i think they should have to
obtain a warrant
to attach a tracking device
to a car or a person

[Misteriosa]

Like your EZ-Pass and cellphones don't already give you away.

or lowjack.. :rolleyes:

[Dude!]

or lowjack.. :rolleyes:

LoJack is your own choice
to track your own car

duh

[Misteriosa]

LoJack is your own choice
to track your own car

duh

but not for use by the govt... they could tap into that too.

[Serpico1103]

out to lunch, i guess
like obama

i don't care whose
idea it was....
i'm just shocked to learn of it

i think they should have to
obtain a warrant
to attach a tracking device
to a car or a person

I guess
you would
have known
about an issue
so important
to you,
if they wrote
legal articles
like
this.

This ruling will probably be over turned. You are in public. The GPS device is merely replacing having to use officers to follow the suspect. Like the DA who was trying to say videotaping police officers in public is illegal. There is no expectation of privacy in pubic.

[TripleSkeet]

Maybe you should say
Obama again. It might make
youre argument work.
But I doubt it.

[Dude!]

IThere is no expectation of privacy in pubic.

um, there certainly is
in that area, of all places!

[Serpico1103]

um, there certainly is
in that area, of all places!

?

[Kevin]

...

Mayby
The
Dingo
Ate
Your
Privacy!

[Dude!]

?

read the last sentence
you wrote....
very slowly and carefully

[Jujubees2]

read the last sentence
you wrote....
very slowly and carefully

Someone in our public affairs office made the same mistake a few years ago when quoting the university president on our public radio station. It ended up in the alumni magazine.

[Serpico1103]

read the last sentence
you wrote....
very slowly and carefully

Oops.
Well, I am a progressive.

No expectation of privacy in public.

[Crispy123]

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/202676/BILLBOARD-FAIL.jpg

[furie]

so the title of this thread is completely misleading. this has nothing to do with the federal government or Obama. It's the courts, who don't fall under the "Feds" label.

[Serpico1103]

so the title of this thread is completely misleading. this has nothing to do with the federal government or Obama. It's the courts, who don't fall under the "Feds" label.

Liberal
spin
.