Michigan doing full sweeps of phones for traffic stops
04-26-2011, 04:10 PM
#22
show me California Code that says this.
Refusing consent is NOT in and of it self probable cause.
however
If he is able to develop probable cause independant of your refusal, he will be able to obtain a search warrant. (drug sniffing dog, looking into windows, other BS)
It does you best to move out of liberal states that do not care about individual's unalienable freedoms/rights.
Refusing consent is NOT in and of it self probable cause.
however
If he is able to develop probable cause independant of your refusal, he will be able to obtain a search warrant. (drug sniffing dog, looking into windows, other BS)
It does you best to move out of liberal states that do not care about individual's unalienable freedoms/rights.
"we need to search your car. is that ok?"
-"no. i've done nothing wrong and have nothing illegal in there"
-"ok buddy, here's the deal: you either let us search your car or we impound it for a week and let you deal with the fees in addition to whatever we find"
They searched his car. Didn't find jack ****. "let him off" with a fix-it ticket for some completely random bullshit.
**** the police.
I ******* hate 99.99% of them and hope they die in a fiery crash while rotting in ****.
Reply
0
0
04-26-2011, 06:44 PM
#26
http://gizmodo.com/#!5795369/the-han...rom-your-phone
This article explains what they are getting.
The short of it is, everything you've ever done with your phone.
texts, pictures, calls, emails, browser history, etc.
I'm surprised that this is being attempted, this is a massive invasion of privacy and under any judicial scrutiny should be ruled unconstitutional. The people responsible for instituting this policy should be immediately removed from office or terminated whichever the case may be.
I've seen some people say "I have no problem with Police looking at my information." The problem is you keep stretching the line of privacy and personal rights every time a policy like this is allowed to continue. Soon enough you get to a point where there is no right to personal privacy and people can be steamrolled by corrupt law enforcement with no defense. I know it borders on a slippery slope argument but that doesn't make it any less valid.
This article explains what they are getting.
The short of it is, everything you've ever done with your phone.
texts, pictures, calls, emails, browser history, etc.
I'm surprised that this is being attempted, this is a massive invasion of privacy and under any judicial scrutiny should be ruled unconstitutional. The people responsible for instituting this policy should be immediately removed from office or terminated whichever the case may be.
I've seen some people say "I have no problem with Police looking at my information." The problem is you keep stretching the line of privacy and personal rights every time a policy like this is allowed to continue. Soon enough you get to a point where there is no right to personal privacy and people can be steamrolled by corrupt law enforcement with no defense. I know it borders on a slippery slope argument but that doesn't make it any less valid.
Reply
0
0
04-26-2011, 06:57 PM
#27
The search of digital devices without a warrant is an ongoing area but I wouldn't hold out hope that the 4th amendment will be useful here.
The most recent decision is I believe from the california supreme court but they held that text messages etc were not protected during arrest. I think the pennsylvania supreme court had a ruling that said that messages could be read if they had probable cause. This is the CA supreme court decision
THE PEOPLE, ) ) Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) v. ) ) GREGORY DIAZ, ) ) Defendant and Appellant. ) ____________________________________)
S166600 Ct.App. 2/6 B203034
Ventura County Super. Ct. No. 2007015733
My wife also knows someone working on similar case going before the Oregon supreme court later this week
For now your best defense if you have anything you consider sensitive on your phone is password encryption or some have advocated programs to wipe your phone, I think some programs like mobile me or something have remote wipes of your phone as well.
The most recent decision is I believe from the california supreme court but they held that text messages etc were not protected during arrest. I think the pennsylvania supreme court had a ruling that said that messages could be read if they had probable cause. This is the CA supreme court decision
THE PEOPLE, ) ) Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) v. ) ) GREGORY DIAZ, ) ) Defendant and Appellant. ) ____________________________________)
S166600 Ct.App. 2/6 B203034
Ventura County Super. Ct. No. 2007015733
My wife also knows someone working on similar case going before the Oregon supreme court later this week
For now your best defense if you have anything you consider sensitive on your phone is password encryption or some have advocated programs to wipe your phone, I think some programs like mobile me or something have remote wipes of your phone as well.
Last edited by kaisersoze; 04-26-2011 at 09:13 PM.
Reply
0
0
04-26-2011, 10:08 PM
#29
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
http://gizmodo.com/#!5795369/the-han...rom-your-phone
This article explains what they are getting.
The short of it is, everything you've ever done with your phone.
texts, pictures, calls, emails, browser history, etc.
I'm surprised that this is being attempted, this is a massive invasion of privacy and under any judicial scrutiny should be ruled unconstitutional. The people responsible for instituting this policy should be immediately removed from office or terminated whichever the case may be.
I've seen some people say "I have no problem with Police looking at my information." The problem is you keep stretching the line of privacy and personal rights every time a policy like this is allowed to continue. Soon enough you get to a point where there is no right to personal privacy and people can be steamrolled by corrupt law enforcement with no defense. I know it borders on a slippery slope argument but that doesn't make it any less valid.
This article explains what they are getting.
The short of it is, everything you've ever done with your phone.
texts, pictures, calls, emails, browser history, etc.
I'm surprised that this is being attempted, this is a massive invasion of privacy and under any judicial scrutiny should be ruled unconstitutional. The people responsible for instituting this policy should be immediately removed from office or terminated whichever the case may be.
I've seen some people say "I have no problem with Police looking at my information." The problem is you keep stretching the line of privacy and personal rights every time a policy like this is allowed to continue. Soon enough you get to a point where there is no right to personal privacy and people can be steamrolled by corrupt law enforcement with no defense. I know it borders on a slippery slope argument but that doesn't make it any less valid.
Stealth97, it was for the Cali plates
Reply
0
0
04-27-2011, 10:23 AM
#30
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,080
IM SO PISSED!
The ACLU got me to say something positive about them.
UGHHHHHH.
turns out this program has been in effect since 2006. An officer needs a warrant signed by a judge to use the device, or by consent. There has never been one complaint and/or lawsuit since its introduction 5 years ago.
The ACLU got me to say something positive about them.
UGHHHHHH.
turns out this program has been in effect since 2006. An officer needs a warrant signed by a judge to use the device, or by consent. There has never been one complaint and/or lawsuit since its introduction 5 years ago.
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Zaphod
MEGAsquirt
47
10-26-2018 11:00 PM
