Active Users:1334 Time:03/05/2026 03:33:03 PM
it's about 4th and 5th amendment, imho moondog Send a noteboard - 26/08/2010 03:00:01 AM
It is cheaper so it might become more common but from a privacy point of it really isn't that much different. I think the gated property thing is a bit over rated as well since all they would need to do follow you until you stop at a public place and attach it there. Yes people with privacy fences have a greater expectation of privacy behind the fence then people do not have on just like people who park in their garage would have a greater expectation of privacy then people who don’t. Arguing that people can not expect privacy behind a privacy fence because everyone does not have one is like arguing that people should not expect privacy in their home because there are homeless people.

Part of the problem is people see this as being simply a case for the courts. If you oppose then get laws passed to make it illegal.



you have a right to privacy *IN YOUR CAR* but you don't have the right to expect that your car is private property? on 4th amendment grounds, this sounds like a classic illegal search. and on 5th amendment grounds, it seems like there's a lot of self-incrimination going on, not to mention private property being used for public surveillance. this is a terrible, awful, horrible decision by the court. hopefully the supreme court strikes it down.
"The RIAA has shown a certain disregard for the creative people of the industry in their eagerness to protect the revenues of the record companies." -- Frank Zappa

"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
Reply to message
1984 at last...Very Disturbing - 25/08/2010 04:08:04 PM 1747 Views
what a stupid decision... - 25/08/2010 04:16:49 PM 1089 Views
Re: what a stupid decision... - 25/08/2010 04:23:26 PM 1298 Views
You don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in your driveway - 25/08/2010 04:32:08 PM 1111 Views
the police aren't snapping pictures. - 25/08/2010 04:36:32 PM 1048 Views
oddly enough you can dance naked in front of the window - 25/08/2010 05:01:33 PM 1129 Views
yah, i know there are instances like that - 25/08/2010 05:15:59 PM 1120 Views
How is it really that much different then following in car or helicopter? - 25/08/2010 04:27:28 PM 1129 Views
it's less that people shouldn't expect privacy behind a fence... - 25/08/2010 04:35:28 PM 1033 Views
it's about 4th and 5th amendment, imho - 26/08/2010 03:00:01 AM 1169 Views
It does seem wrong - 25/08/2010 05:04:39 PM 1099 Views
^ that's what i was trying to say - 25/08/2010 05:16:35 PM 1252 Views
When it comes to stuff like this I always same the same thing - 25/08/2010 05:09:01 PM 1137 Views
true. but what if they only think you're breaking the law? - 25/08/2010 05:19:52 PM 1012 Views
Well they would easily find out you weren't a drug dealer - 25/08/2010 05:25:40 PM 1127 Views
wait, now i'm guilty until proven innocent? - 25/08/2010 05:32:42 PM 1159 Views
most of those people deserved to be tasered *NM* - 25/08/2010 05:45:29 PM 509 Views
most of the old women and non-resisting people deserve to be tasered? *NM* - 25/08/2010 09:07:12 PM 567 Views
most of them are resiting they resisting - 25/08/2010 09:13:29 PM 1095 Views
but they aren't resisiting in a way that puts the officer in danger, i mean. - 25/08/2010 09:22:06 PM 1135 Views
but effective - 25/08/2010 09:55:30 PM 997 Views
yes nothing says "better than arguing" than ELECTROCUTING SOMEONE - 25/08/2010 11:14:55 PM 1147 Views
any physical altercation is dangerous for a police officer - 25/08/2010 11:30:07 PM 1001 Views
you see plenty of videos where the person wasn't being aggressive, though. - 25/08/2010 11:46:43 PM 1155 Views
Sorry but he needed to be tasered - 26/08/2010 02:57:19 AM 1127 Views
well we're getting a little off topic here and going to a sidebar soon.. - 26/08/2010 03:36:43 AM 1055 Views
And when someone dies because they get electrocuted? - 26/08/2010 06:52:13 AM 1368 Views
I believe Jefferson had a certain famous quote about that... *NM* - 25/08/2010 07:50:48 PM 566 Views
It was Franklin. - 25/08/2010 10:12:54 PM 1164 Views
i do love that quote - 25/08/2010 11:17:11 PM 1056 Views
They did. He says it in Congress and, if I recall correctly, Dickinson gets annoyed. - 25/08/2010 11:37:41 PM 982 Views
it's a lovely musical - 25/08/2010 11:47:29 PM 984 Views
Enforcers of the law are not supposed to be above it. - 25/08/2010 05:56:00 PM 1035 Views
Re: Enforcers of the law are not supposed to be above it. - 26/08/2010 06:47:30 AM 1271 Views
This feels like two separate issues to me. - 25/08/2010 05:25:50 PM 1188 Views
even if they are not restricted, driveways are private property - 25/08/2010 05:34:00 PM 1142 Views
I don't think that's true. - 25/08/2010 05:55:26 PM 1067 Views
you don't need permission to walk up someone's driveway until they have posted a no trespassing sign - 25/08/2010 06:00:02 PM 1154 Views
yes, and that's a relatively expected activity - 25/08/2010 07:24:54 PM 1198 Views
Should a person without a garage be penalized - 25/08/2010 05:36:37 PM 1268 Views
They're not being penalized; it works in the other direction. - 25/08/2010 05:59:59 PM 1251 Views
I think... - 25/08/2010 09:47:51 PM 1115 Views
Or you could go the other way, and say it's legal for them to put a GPS tracker on your house. - 25/08/2010 10:30:32 PM 984 Views
I wouldn't mind a GPS tracker on my house - 25/08/2010 11:16:10 PM 1050 Views
They need a fucking warrant. End of story. Fuckers *NM* - 26/08/2010 12:13:04 AM 532 Views
ummmm.... - 26/08/2010 03:35:30 AM 1070 Views
I do believe that would require a warrant though *NM* - 26/08/2010 04:57:36 AM 442 Views
The GPS in a phone being on will show up, though - 01/09/2010 12:36:13 PM 1007 Views
I have 3 words for you... - 27/08/2010 01:59:13 PM 1316 Views
I have one word horseshit *NM* - 27/08/2010 06:18:33 PM 510 Views
right - 27/08/2010 10:19:53 PM 1123 Views
*shrug* Old news, really. - 02/09/2010 02:50:00 PM 1073 Views

Reply to Message