http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2013150,00.html
This is very scary and disturbing!!!!!!
UNREAL!!!!!!!!
This is very scary and disturbing!!!!!!
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
The Government Can Use GPS to Track Your Moves
- Thread starter Dude111
- Start date
Werbung:
9th circuit court workin' hard for you libs....
Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant....
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who dissented from this month's decision refusing to reconsider the case, pointed out whose homes are not open to strangers: rich people's. The court's ruling, he said, means that people who protect their homes with electric gates, fences and security booths have a large protected zone of privacy around their homes. People who cannot afford such barriers have to put up with the government sneaking around at night
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2013150,00.html#ixzz0xkUJ0Xvd
The states affected are California, Hawaii, Nevada, Washington, Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Montana and....Guam.
Likin' it libs?
Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant....
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who dissented from this month's decision refusing to reconsider the case, pointed out whose homes are not open to strangers: rich people's. The court's ruling, he said, means that people who protect their homes with electric gates, fences and security booths have a large protected zone of privacy around their homes. People who cannot afford such barriers have to put up with the government sneaking around at night
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2013150,00.html#ixzz0xkUJ0Xvd
The states affected are California, Hawaii, Nevada, Washington, Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Montana and....Guam.
Likin' it libs?
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Re: 9th circuit court workin' hard for you libs....
as a Lib, nope not at all..but I was against all the bush Republican wire taps, and invasion of privacy...also Republicans claim there is not right to privacy ( Roe V wade was in part do to the right of Privacy I believe)
Republicans also enjoy supporting letting police get warrents after the fact
as a Lib, nope not at all..but I was against all the bush Republican wire taps, and invasion of privacy...also Republicans claim there is not right to privacy ( Roe V wade was in part do to the right of Privacy I believe)
Republicans also enjoy supporting letting police get warrents after the fact
Re: 9th circuit court workin' hard for you libs....
This is not a "lib" vs. "con" issue. It is a Libertarian vs. authoritarian issue.
It is not the first time that Constitutional rights have been ignored in the name of the so called "war on drugs" (which is not something that "libs" have been championing, BTW.) Check out asset forfeiture laws as an example.
As long as we have a complacent citizenry, we will have judges violating basic rights.
This is not a "lib" vs. "con" issue. It is a Libertarian vs. authoritarian issue.
It is not the first time that Constitutional rights have been ignored in the name of the so called "war on drugs" (which is not something that "libs" have been championing, BTW.) Check out asset forfeiture laws as an example.
As long as we have a complacent citizenry, we will have judges violating basic rights.
These threads need to be merged. Consider it done.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
I came back was was like, this thread looks wrong then the one I posted on lol I see now why, merged.
Yea pretty sure I see nothing most liberals support in this...not sure why it was even thought there would be
Yea pretty sure I see nothing most liberals support in this...not sure why it was even thought there would be
So, the war on drugs is a huge failed government program that has been championed by "libs"? I suppose that if your definition of "lib" is someone who expects the government to save us from ourselves, then you do have a point. Many of those people call themselves "conservatives", however, who support a "law and order" sort of platform.
Votes work. Writing congresspeople works. Writing letters and protesting works.
Voting based on TV ads and party loyalty does not work.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
well I can see you read the talking points and bumper stickers....
As in the laws that already exist but aren't enforced by the government? The lib answer, make a new law, instead of enforcing the old one.
Which is maybe why so many conservatives have left the Republican party, and regrouped, while dems stay loyal.
War on drugs? Do you really think that because of a pot case that came to light that is being challenged is the reason for this law? Oh, COME ON.
I didn't have to leave the Republican Party. It left me.
Wait until the next election and see how loyal the Democrats remain.
There are people in both parties who would not cross party lines to vote against Beelzebub, and we all know it.
Enforcing the war on drugs is the reason cops do this sort of thing to begin with. It is the reason the unconstitutional asset forfeiture laws stay in place.
Werbung:
Similar threads
