Yesterday I was talking to the director of homeland sec for the area I live in. A question was brought up about wire tapping and other servailence activities. He infromed us that they can put a tracking device on your car without a court order. His reasoning behind this is that you are on a public road, so it is ok. I argued that the car is private property, and should be treated as so. He did say that they can not use onstar to track unless they have a court order because that is a subscription you pay for. I argued that you pay for your car. Anyways at the end he said he saw my point, but disagreed, and I told him he was still wrong. I just wanted to get other opinoins on it.
Driving is a privilege, not a right!
Stopwatch for someone to mention terrorism.
Rights are rarely taken in one sweeping act. Rights are slowly eroded with things like the Patriot Act, and various departments that have powers which the average citizen is unaware.
Can government install GPS device on your car without a warrant?
11:56 am October 18, 2010, by Jay
I donÃ¢'t understand the mental gymnastics required to believe that this kind of thing is OK:
Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community college student, took his car in for an oil change earlier this month and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage.
The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.
Two days later, FBI agents arrived at AfifiÃ¢??s Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property Ã¢?? a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights.
The FBI claims that it has the unrestricted power to attach the GPS tracker to any vehicle it chooses Ã¢?? yours, mine, AfifiÃ¢??s Ã¢?? without a judicial warrant or other check on its power. The Obama administration agrees, as does the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco. In a case involving an alleged marijuana trafficker, the court ruled that Ã¢??the only information the agents obtained from the tracking devices was a log of the locations where Pineda-MorenoÃ¢??s car traveled, information the agents could have obtained by following the car.Ã¢??
But Alex Kozinski, the chief judge of the 9th Circuit, very much disagrees, arguing that the device is something straight out of OrwellÃ¢??s Ã¢??1984Ã¢?Â³:
Ã¢??By holding that this kind of surveillance doesnÃ¢??t impair an individualÃ¢??s reasonable expectation of privacy, the panel hands the government the power to track the movements of every one of us, every day of our lives.Ã¢??
A federal appeals court in Washington agrees with Kozinski and has ruled that a warrant is required. It threw out the conviction of an alleged cocaine dealer who had been tracked for four weeks using the GPS device. The question appears headed for the Supreme Court, where it astonigishly to me legal experts predict that use of the device will be upheld.
So what makes the GPS tracking system different than being tailed? To my mind, itÃ¢??s the installation of the device on another personÃ¢??s property, without their permission and knowledge and without having to justify to a court why the intrusion is necessary. That seems a blatant violation of the right to privacy and the expectation of privacy.
At its root, the issue comes down to the FoundersÃ¢?? intent in trying to protect individual rights. No, they didnÃ¢??t explicitly write prohibitions of such practices into the Bill of Rights, because they could not have conceived of the technology involved. But had they known, I have no doubt they would have rejected a warrantless intrusion of this magnitude by government.
(FYI, in the case used as an example above, AfifiÃ¢??s attorney claims that he Ã¢??was targeted because of his extensive ties to the Middle East, which include supporting two brothers who live in Egypt and making frequent overseas trips,Ã¢?? NPR reports. Ã¢??His father was a well-known Islamic-American community leader who died last year in Egypt.Ã¢??)
I agree, but this is still wrong. They basicly have the power to put a tracker on everyone of us if they wanted. Like Zeb said, rights are slowly eroded away. Give someone an inch and they take a mile.
Grab a coffee kick up your feet and flip through the PATRIOT Act*... it will be quite eye opening for you. It''s stuffed full of goodies just like this. The wording used is often hilariously open to interpretation by Gov't agencies.
edit: *or atleast a semi-thorough abstract
They probably do not even have to install one , Your car probably has one , your cell phone probably has one
I would not worry about it too much, nothing you can really do, they have done it for a while and will continue to do so..Come to Canada, we have Tim Hortons.
St. Louis overtook Camden, N.J., as the nation's most dangerous city in 2009,
according to a national study released Sunday.
The study by CQ Press found St. Louis had 2,070.1 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, c
ompared with a national average of 429.4. That helped St. Louis beat out Camden, which topped last year's list and was the most dangerous city for 2003 and 2004.
Detroit, Flint, Mich., and Oakland, Calif., rounded out the top five. For the second straight year,
the safest city with more than 75,000 residents was Colonie,NY
a security law that can be intrepreted and abused to ruin your freedom ?!
what a surprise !
in France we have a special term for these liberticide laws. we call them "les lois scÃ©lÃ©rates". (something like "the villainous law").
various governements tried to pass this kind of law to prevent us to riot.
but then we riot to protect our rioting habits.
so it never really worked.
maybe you should learn to riot.
It's the fluoride in the water. Makes people docile.
We are in a police state....
Remember that next time you thank a veteran for your "freedom".
Because if that is what their job is, they failed.
Why do you hate Amerika?
Because Americans have very, very large penises and it makes me feel insecure?
You are off the mark here.
"Well, Doctor, what have we gotâ??a Republic or a Monarchy?"
"A Republic, if you can keep it."
Soldiers have provided the opportunity for freedom. It is the job of the citizenry to maintain freedom from our own government. You see, we have failed them, not the other way around.
Name one war from WW II onward were American soldiers were fighting for American freedom.
And, remember, they took an oath to defen the consitution from "enemies foreign and domestic"