DOJ says warrantless cell phone tracking should remain or law enforcement can be "crippled"
1. atheisticemetic posted on 09 May 2012, 08:32 0
wait you mean to tell me they dont need our permission to track us? =-O
2. superguy posted on 09 May 2012, 08:38 4
That damn 4th amendment. If we could get around it, we could track dissidents ... err criminals like every other authoritarian or communist country in the world. Look how little crime North Korea has. They do it right!
If law enforcement has such a need to track people, then they clearly have a case that a judge would sign off on a warrant for it. Otherwise, leave people alone and respect their privacy.
3. tedkord posted on 09 May 2012, 10:12 0
Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It's just a goddamned piece of paper!
6. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 10:34 1
When you have both the government and law enforcement willfully ignoring the constitution, we are no longer a free republic.
I dont give a s**t what excuse they make. Get a damn court order. You dont have a right to track us at will, but WE the people have a right to privacy.
15. medicci37 posted on 09 May 2012, 13:09 0
@ tedkord, Tell that 2 all the men & women who sacrificed their life, so dueshe bags like you are free.
20. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 16:35 0
i think he was trying to be sarchastic, medicci
22. medicci37 posted on 09 May 2012, 17:44 0
Yeah, i guess your right. I had thought that myself at first. But then i remembered how i thought The same about Taco's comments at first. But unfortunately, I was wrong on both accounts.
23. tedkord posted on 09 May 2012, 18:11 1
Yeah, I was just parroting the line GWB supposedly yelled out when a staffer mentioned that some provisions of the Patriot Act might be unconstitutional. Believe me, I am anti big, intrusive government.
24. medicci37 posted on 09 May 2012, 19:38 0
2 bad he wasn't being sarcastic. I don't think any president has screwed the country as much as he did.
25. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 20:08 0
no.. no.. we have a new one thats screwing us just as bad and worse depending on the subject. we just went from dumber to dumber-er..
4. Droid_X_Doug posted on 09 May 2012, 10:18 1
It is just so inconvenient to have to get a warrant. Judges can ask embarrassing questions about probable cause that the coppers just don't have the information to be able to answer the judge's question with. North Korea has it about right - you are guilty until proven innocent....
Oh, and BTW, the coppers can put a tracking device/tap/whatever that would require a warrant on you and then go and get the warrant. They just have to get the warrant within 72 hours of doing the deed.
5. dcgore posted on 09 May 2012, 10:23 0
Phone conversations "are" private. Warrants should be enforced!!
7. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 10:36 0
Its not going to matter soon. Our lovely big liberal government has passed a law requiring Black Boxes in all new cars by like 2015. Just like airplanes, those black boxes will have GPS and record everything you do.
"What did we do with the constitution? Oh, i think bob over there used it as toilet paper by accident.. dont worry, we will just write a new one with out all those pesky first amendment rights in it" - US Gov.
8. Droid_X_Doug posted on 09 May 2012, 10:52 1
@dc - wireline phone conversations are private. Wireless phone conversations are 'broadcast' by the caller and in the absence of encryption, are not private.
9. Droid_X_Doug posted on 09 May 2012, 10:55 2
@remix - the warrant-less surveillance jumped when W came to town. I don't recall him being accused of being liberal. Did I miss something? ;-)
10. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 11:43 1
its an extension of the patriot act. Something that needs to go away. Obama had his chance to not renew the patriot act, and decided to use it. The warrantless phone thing has only come around in the last few years under obama.
i accuse W of being a liberal on many things. Especially big government things. He was a social conservative but he was liberal with government and expanded government more than most presidents.. well until Obama.
11. Droid_X_Doug posted on 09 May 2012, 12:05 2
Barry has basically expanded an item that had been started by W. Example - drone attacks. Barry has presided over more drone attacks in 3 1/2 years than W. did in 8. But W. started the drone attacks. Same for the Patriot Act. W. started it, and Barry figured it could be beneficial. BTW, I don't recall where Mittens has disavowed the Patriot Act, so he and Barry are kind of like 2 peas in the same pod in that regard.
12. Droid_X_Doug posted on 09 May 2012, 12:11 2
Also, the warrant-less phone tapping was extensively used during W's tenure. If memory serves, there is a section of the Patriot Act devoted to it. The latest GPS tracking scandal involes stretching the boundaries of even the Patriot Act.
Things have to be pretty bad when even the Supremes get indigestion.... Especially the neocons on the court.
13. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 12:32 1
you want to read something that will really knock your socks off that ties directly into this?
Go pick up April's issue of wired. The cover story is on a new super spy center they are building in Utah. Its not meant to spy on the world as much as its meant to spy on EVERY communication between US citizens.. all without a judicial order.
It also ties very well into the conversation because it goes over the patriot act, the unconstitutional wireless tapping that went on for like 6 years before someone blew the whistle.. and then the government reacted by passing the bill to make it legal. It also goes into the fact that certain members of the NSA went to Obama when he took over and begged him to end it... and instead he doubled down on it. The spy center and a bunch of other "OMG" crap are obama's babies. But Bush laid most of the groundwork.
When it comes to stomping on the constitution, both parties are guilty as hell. Thats why im neither Dem or Rep. :)
Neither party wants to get out of war. Dont let them fool ya. War is the best reason to convince people to allow the government to trample the constitution.. in the name of "safety".
17. shimmyx20 posted on 09 May 2012, 13:46 2
Every election cycle I'm reminded of the South Park episode with the election between the Douche and the Turd Sandwich.
We're f**ked either way
18. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 14:09 0
were getting to the point where I miss the douche and turd.. weve gone down to old sewer water vs rotten eggs on dirty butt cheeks.
27. parkwaydr posted on 10 May 2012, 07:53 0
Don't forget, war is also a huge money maker.
14. D_Tech-tive posted on 09 May 2012, 12:37 0
If sorry police can't convince a judge to issue a warrant then they have no business worrying about what I'm doing even if it is illegal!
Also shame on the carriers for selling out their customers!
Bad enough you got douche bags with badges making up excuses just to pull you over and harass to see if the can find something while the run your license!
Classic example " We had reports of someone in a white BMW mugging people"
16. Forsaken77 posted on 09 May 2012, 13:38 0
What happened to good ole fashioned police work? Cops have been doing their jobs for the last hundred years without tracking devices, so they aren't gonna be "crippled" now without them. It's like the cops are cheating in a game of cops-n-robbers.
19. MorePhonesThanNeeded posted on 09 May 2012, 16:32 0
All i got from this was that AT&T make lots of money off giving up your whereabouts, and hold your information indefinitely...nice. Anyway you should not have to even think about this sort of thing as a Judge who is there to uphold the law and protect the citizens from even the government who is filled with a lot more crooks per square foot than the most crime filled cities.
21. remixfa posted on 09 May 2012, 16:35 0
the government made warrantless searches legal a few years ago.
26. RocioZeigler posted on 10 May 2012, 06:43 0
they also disclose your location with an alarming level of punctuality at all times when they are on.