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.
it's one thing if the police had probable cause on these guys and got a warrant to put the GPS tracker on their car. if you are suspected of being involved in a crime, the police should have no difficulty getting a judge to sign off on extra surveillance if it will help crack a case. putting these things on people's cars without a warrant, and in at least two cases while it was sitting in someone's driveway, is (or should be) a complete violation of the fourth amendment guarantee to privacy.
So by your argument I should be able to just go take a dump on my front lawn while school kids are waiting for the buss, it is my property after all. I will agree that they shouldn't be able to track your car until leaves your driveway if that makes you feel better but once they get back on public roads it is fair game.
come on, that is not even close to the same thing and you know it. just like the first amendment doesn't protect your right to incite a riot, the fourth doesn't give you the right to privacy when you're deliberately making an ass of yourself to anyone within viewing distance. considering that insurance companies consider your vehicle an extension of your home, i don't see why it's such a stretch to consider your property line an extension of your privacy rights. or are you saying i should send the cops over to put a tracker on your car since you don't mind giving up your personal freedom so easily?
I don't like going with random thoughts on anything, but you just contradicted yourself right there, sir.
"just like the first amendment doesn't protect your right to incite a riot, the fourth doesn't give you the right to privacy when you're deliberately making an ass of yourself to anyone within viewing distance." You go on to then say :"i don't see why it's such a stretch to consider your property line an extension of your privacy rights. or are you saying i should send the cops over to put a tracker on your car since you don't mind giving up your personal freedom so easily?" Well, dude, what do you mean? If something is in plain viewing distance, its no longer private, by your own admission. Thats why you can't just take a dump on your own lawn where anyone can see. Therefore, without signs prohibiting your actions, if it can be seen, its not considered private. Therefore your right to privacy has not been invaded. Further, even if there are signs prohibiting things such as trespassing, if you leave it open to the world then your privacy still hasn't been violated, but someone may have trespassed.
Now searching said car without a warrant would still be trespassing, but attaching a device that monitors where the car goes while its not in private mode (i.e. not in plain sight) isn't invading privacy by any means. How could it? How could you expect privacy in such a situation?
Your mom. That's right. The cat is out of the bag. Your mom.
My mind isn't always in the gutter, it just has VIP access
secret GPS tracking upheld as legal practice
- 16/05/2011 02:37:14 PM
825 Views
How do they expect honest criminals to make a living with rules like this?
- 16/05/2011 06:24:45 PM
435 Views
sure this example is about convicted robbers
- 16/05/2011 06:42:51 PM
407 Views
I will have a problem when I see innocent people being targeted for no reason
- 16/05/2011 09:17:22 PM
389 Views
so get a warrant if these guys are such threats to society
- 17/05/2011 12:57:51 AM
392 Views
once again privacy takes place in private not in public. That is sorta where the word comes from
- 17/05/2011 02:23:05 PM
403 Views
the constitution guarantees the right of privacy to all, not just law abiding citizens
- 16/05/2011 09:14:24 PM
391 Views
where does it say that? It should be real easy to point to since it is in the constiution
- 16/05/2011 09:21:19 PM
452 Views
4th amendment
- 17/05/2011 12:55:00 AM
434 Views
Re: 4th amendment
- 17/05/2011 03:13:13 AM
397 Views
Re: 4th amendment
- 17/05/2011 03:28:36 AM
424 Views
Re: 4th amendment
- 17/05/2011 03:58:49 AM
397 Views
try reading it again it doesn't have the word privacy in it
- 17/05/2011 02:42:44 PM
414 Views
how is surveillance not a type of search? *NM*
- 17/05/2011 09:25:27 PM
217 Views
*NM*
how is different if it is done by GPS or tailing them in a car? *NM*
- 17/05/2011 10:00:53 PM
177 Views
it's not different -- if they get a warrant first
- 18/05/2011 01:50:13 AM
399 Views
*NM*