|
|
Post by JGRobinson on Apr 21, 2011 9:02:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Apr 21, 2011 10:16:14 GMT -5
It would seem like they need probable cause to get this info
Further, just because technology has advanced by leaps and bounds since the writing of the Constitution, why would this type of intrusion NOT be covered by the Fourth Amendment? It seems whatever is on one's cell phone device or even GPS is the same as landline phone records or even a personal computer. A warrant is needed to tap a phone, get phone records or even search a computer. Phones and GPS should be no different. They are personal devices not public.
|
|
|
|
Post by JGRobinson on Apr 21, 2011 11:10:48 GMT -5
Not since the Patriot Act...
|
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Apr 21, 2011 11:27:25 GMT -5
Not since the Patriot Act... Which was an overblown, far-reaching sidestep to the Constitution. Might as well paint it as Mac Carthyism, except peeking in windows looking for Muslims instead of Communists. The newer version of the same old story. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Apr 21, 2011 11:37:20 GMT -5
The legal standard is whether a personal has a reasonable expectation of privacy. But I am skeptical that the technology is not being abused if the MI SP are charging $500,000 for what should amount to only a couple hundred pages at $.25, not 2,000,000 pages worth of documents.
|
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Apr 21, 2011 19:44:07 GMT -5
The legal standard is whether a personal has a reasonable expectation of privacy. But I am skeptical that the technology is not being abused if the MI SP are charging $500,000 for what should amount to only a couple hundred pages at $.25, not 2,000,000 pages worth of documents. Yeah I balked at the pricetag they claimed for the FOILed docs also. All is not kosher in MI. Well, person would have some expectation of privacy between themselves and the person they are communicating with on a landline telephone, a cell phone, via a text message, even an email. Such communications are sent to a specific individual, or individuals, not broadcast in public for anybody to hear or read. Seems as though Big Brother got their hands on a new toy and can't resist but to play with it. Then we'll have those with the "well if you have nothing to hide..." That is not the point. I am not hiding anything, I am keeping MY personal business personal. The point of the 4th Amendment was to protect people from feeling they had to hide anything or worse yet, had no right to private information. I am no constitutional scholar nor an attorney by any stretch, but this appears to me, without probable cause to warrant such searches, a trampling of the 4th. |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Apr 21, 2011 19:52:18 GMT -5
Me, too, but in the years to come the public will be "educated" to accept it.
|
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Apr 21, 2011 21:00:53 GMT -5
On a side note, a few years back there were stories out there that the Feds were taping into the Onstar systems to eavesdrop and track people's whereabouts. You really have to wonder if there actually still exists any privacy anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Apr 21, 2011 21:28:16 GMT -5
Yup, here's an article from 2008: www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-parker/gm-and-onstar---pushing-o_b_132487.htmlAnd how about this quote: What if you give your friend a ride, lend or sell your car to anyone? Company policy states that it’s YOUR responsibility to advise all occupants of your car (including other drivers) how information about them may be collected, used or disclosed by OnStar - for research and analysis, to hand over to law enforcement, car dealers, as well as to protect OnStar’s own rights and property. What about your rights, property and privacy? Do you have a choice as to how your information is collected and shared by OnStar? Well, not really. As OnStar warns, “choice as to how your information will be used or shared may not always be possible”. From a page with quite a lot of info: www.citizenscommitteeforconstitutionalprotection.com/cccp_002.htm |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Apr 21, 2011 21:30:19 GMT -5
And get this! (From the above cited page at the citizenscommitteeforconstitutionalprotection:
"What other information does OnStar collect? According to the company’s privacy policy updated in 2009, they know your name and billing information, how fast you drive, if and when you apply the brakes, whether you’re wearing your seatbelt, oil life, tire pressure, and odometer reading. If your car is on or off, when your fuel is refilled and your vehicle’s location. OnStar can remotely unlock your doors, slow down your car or prevent it from starting altogether. They record and monitor conversations by you or others from your car, but if you ask for copies of your own records, you will find out that “OnStar is not required to release any audio or physical records…without a subpoena (unless otherwise required by law).”
|
|
|
|
Post by Ralph on Apr 22, 2011 1:08:05 GMT -5
“OnStar is not required to release any audio or physical records…without a subpoena (unless otherwise required by law).” And then there's the Patriot Act. Goddamn NSA!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Apr 22, 2011 6:22:43 GMT -5
Here's an interesting piece.(careful ... note the date ...) The Patriot Act: Key Controversiesby Larry Abramson and Maria Godoy Feb. 14, 2006 -- The USA Patriot Act seems headed for long-term renewal. Key senators have reached a deal with the White House that allays the civil liberties concerns of some critics of the law. Passed in the weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, the law expanded the government's powers in anti-terrorism investigations. Below, NPR examines the act's most controversial provisions: (in a pro/con format) www.npr.org/news/specials/patriotact/patriotactprovisions.html
|
|
|
|
Post by longtimer on Apr 22, 2011 6:22:36 GMT -5
There is nothing patriotic about the patriot act, talk about a damn sales job. They used peoples fear to trample their rights. It is the oldest and most effective method of controlling people.
I find it absolutely amazing how little American history they teach in schools any more. I really have come to believe they don't want the public to know the basics of the constitution.
I also have resigned myself to the fact that there really is no privacy any more. Basically someone is tracking everything you do and if big brother wants it he will get it one way or another, the constitution be damned.
The government has learned that if they keep us divided and fighting each other we don't focus on what is really important and who really needs watching, them. They also make people afraid of everything and get us to give them power so they can "protect" us and keep us "safe". We have become a nation of fraidy cats looking for the boogie man around every corner and they keep us that way.
I love this quote from Ben Franklin. He said "Those that give up basic liberties to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Apr 22, 2011 6:31:46 GMT -5
You're right, longtimer, it's all based on fear.
|
|
|
|
Post by JGRobinson on Apr 22, 2011 11:35:05 GMT -5
Amen, LT, Divide us, then stuff us like the Christmas Goose!
|
|
