Privacy is For Sissies (Trees And Things)

zyxwvutsr: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Thu, 8 Feb 2007 09:46:10 EST

People get restraining orders all the time to limit the activities of stalkers

Stalking is another matter entirely. Anti-stalking statutes are generally written to encompass threatening behavior. If someone is following you s

nmiguy: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Thu, 8 Feb 2007 08:43:48 EST

It may be perfectly legal to follow someone around but a person doesn't have the right to do so. To track somebody. I mean, it is harassment. People get restraining orders all the time to limit the activities of stalkers. Tracking p

dzetetes: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Thu, 8 Feb 2007 02:21:18 EST

I wondered about that myself. When I lived in New Mexico, I didn't have the time or money to get a concealed carry permit, but I wanted to keep a firearm close, as I had some "interesting" neighbors (mentally ill alcoholic gun-toting sex offenders) a

rEvolution inAction: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 20:34:30 EST

Forget about privacy rights.. it's vandalism.

uncarved block: Inevitable?

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 19:51:38 EST

I'm not much of a civil libertarian, mainly because I believe compromise is essential for civilization to keep going. The government should be able show good reason why a behavior or act is warranted, but the bar for me isn't as high as it see

Thalia: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 17:20:00 EST

Both, really. I knew they could use a human to follow my car with no basis. But I would analogize the GPS transmitter to a wiretap. Yes, the conversation leaves my house on a public wire, but that is still private data. And if you c

Lou: Expectation via custom

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 16:12:50 EST

Only your private activities. Driving around on public roads is not a private activity and you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

However, what if by practice or custom, it came to believed that driving is a private activity. It mus

wetkarma: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 16:02:06 EST

Well my question would be: didn't the cops commit tresspass (at minimum) by placing a device on his private property?

profwhat: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:49:01 EST

Is your concern that the police can do this for only $100, or that they can do it without reasonable suspicion? The former is new; the latter is not.

thefadd: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:46:57 EST

Too bad the founding fathers didn't have the foresight to say something explicit like, you shall have the right not to have the government tie a piece of string to your horse for purposes of drawing a line in the dirt so they can come around later and see

Thalia: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:41:06 EST

Or more effectively, placing it on someone else's vehicle.

The issue I have, and the reason this is different from having the individual just followed is because it provides full & complete data of everywhere the person went, how long he stayed at e

Thalia: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:37:42 EST

Just FYI, here the right question was asked. Brennan & Marshall's opinion was in the Knotts case.

MayorBob: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:23:43 EST

The police can surveil you without a warrant, as far as I know. A friend of mine who is a county detective said they did just that to follow someone they suspected of having offed his wife. Even thought hubby tried to take the police to court t

thefadd: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:16:59 EST

I agree. For the police to put a tracking device on an individual's car without a warrant seems wholy wrong on the face of it. I have a question, though. Is it illegal to work around warrant-approved wire tapping and tracking devices placed by law enforcem

zyxwvutsr: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:46:35 EST

People have a right to keep their activities private

Only your private activities. Driving around on public roads is not a private activity and you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

When you jump in your

rombuu: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:43:02 EST
Cars are usually driven on public streets. I don't really expect to have a right to privacy when I'm in public.
When you jump in your car and travel somewhere, nobody has a right to track you without a justifiable need to know.
Th

nmiguy: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:35:25 EST
Brennan and Marshall go on to say "I think this would've been a much more difficult case if the respondent had challenged ... its original installation".
That is very telling. It suggests that the wrong question was asked to be decided. &n

nmiguy: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:29:02 EST
And don't get me started on them "spidey-tracers" either. The Web slinger is violating the privacy rights of guys like Rhino, Kingpin and Doc Ock by placing spidey tracers on their persons.

nmiguy: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:27:01 EST
No it isn't about cars having privacy rights. It is not the observation of some location, it is the tracking of people and their activities. Cars don't drive themselves. People have a right to keep their activities private. That is

snidleywhiplash: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:51:05 EST
From the rather poorly-written decision:

From someone else the police learned that the defendant was driving a borrowed Ford Tempo. They went looking for it and found it parked on a public street near where the defendant was staying. The poli

Thalia: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:48:57 EST
The cops put it on there, to track him. I'm unclear what your question is.

port1080: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:48:27 EST
Are you really implying that cars have privacy rights?
That's a meaningless argument. Telephone wires don't have privacy rights, but it's still illegal for the government to listen to your telephone conversations without a warrant of some sor

rombuu: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:39:43 EST
Are you really implying that cars have privacy rights?

thefadd: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:32:35 EST
The write-up doesn't specify how the gps device ended up on the suspects car and I can't open pdf documents because this computer at work is exceptionally lame. Can anyone tell me?

wetkarma: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:28:11 EST
Back in the days of the Greeks, Plato wrote the above subject in the Republic...it roughly means who will watch the watchers or who will protects us from the protectors?

Lou: Opportunities

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:19:34 EST
While this is a sucky thing, I can't help but think that a whole cottage industry will crop up that will help people defeat these things. And of course, that brings up a whole set of other issues.
Science fiction writer and physicist David Brin wr

nmiguy: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 10:48:50 EST
It is one thing to watch a location to see what happens. Another thing entirely to track a person wherever they go.

port1080: Re: Privacy is For Sissies

Wed, 7 Feb 2007 10:20:19 EST
While I don't agree with the court's logic, I can kind of see where they were coming from. To look at a parallel case - it's legal for the police to put a suspect under surveillance and to sit in an apartment across from his house and watch him at all tim