Dr.Who
Well-Known Member
Imagine if you will that the gov needed to search a person's car. To do the search the gov would need a warrant. This is nothing earth shattering and it basic constitutional rights kind of stuff.
The rational is of course that we have a right to privacy. The right to privacy has been elevated to very high levels in this country.
There is a supreme court case coming up in which the gov placed GPS units under the bumper of innocent people's cars in order to track where they are going or have been.
"A person who knows all of another’s travels can deduce whether he is a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups — and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts,” wrote U.S. Appeals Court Judge Douglas Ginsburg in a recent ruling that the Supreme Court will be examining this week to determine if warrants should be required for use with trackers."
By itself this is astounding. Add in some other examples like the raid of the Gibson guitar factory or other cases we seem to be hearing about almost daily now and a clear pattern emerges.
In case you think this is just some isolated police force that went too far:
"The Obama administration will be defending the warrantless use of such trackers in front of the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning. The administration, which is attempting to overturn a lower court ruling that threw out a drug dealer’s conviction over the warrantless use of a tracker "
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/gps-tracker-times-two/all/1
The rational is of course that we have a right to privacy. The right to privacy has been elevated to very high levels in this country.
There is a supreme court case coming up in which the gov placed GPS units under the bumper of innocent people's cars in order to track where they are going or have been.
"A person who knows all of another’s travels can deduce whether he is a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups — and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts,” wrote U.S. Appeals Court Judge Douglas Ginsburg in a recent ruling that the Supreme Court will be examining this week to determine if warrants should be required for use with trackers."
By itself this is astounding. Add in some other examples like the raid of the Gibson guitar factory or other cases we seem to be hearing about almost daily now and a clear pattern emerges.
In case you think this is just some isolated police force that went too far:
"The Obama administration will be defending the warrantless use of such trackers in front of the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning. The administration, which is attempting to overturn a lower court ruling that threw out a drug dealer’s conviction over the warrantless use of a tracker "
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/gps-tracker-times-two/all/1
