E5RANGER375
Shooter
^^^Reading that post was like trying to watch Sopranos on network TV.
you thought it was morse code at first glance didnt you?
^^^Reading that post was like trying to watch Sopranos on network TV.
I don't like the idea of warrantless GPS tracking, but that being said, "proof" has never been the standard, with or without a warrant. The standard is "probable cause," per the constitution.
Yeah, or they could just put in the man hours and do it the old-fashioned way too. The GPS is easier on the budget and possibly less susceptible to corruptive influences, but there's no real need to get the warrant because none of the information obtained is protected, only the manner in which is was obtained.Here's what I don't get: Why not just get a warrant? Is it that hard these days? From what I understand, it's pretty much of a rubber stamp - please correct me if I'm wrong LEOs, that's just the impression I get. Why not just clear this up with policy? Have a good reason to do it, get a warrant, no controversy.
Probable cause may be the standard, but there is absolutely no check on the validity of the probable cause information.
Example: "your honor, the probable cause was the smell of alcohol on his breath and an open container on the floor of the front passenger seat." (It's just an example, don't get hung up on the details and straw man the main point, please.)
This may meet the standard for acceptable probable cause to issue a warrant, but it completely disregards the factual nature of the claim. There is no burden of proof on the LEO claiming probable cause to show that the claim is BOTH factual AND meets the standard of probable cause. It is enough that he claims he smelled alcohol and saw the open container. Whether or not it is true is irrelevant....for the purposes of obtaining the warrant/conducting the search/etc. THough it may later affect the ability to prosecute the case, by then the violation has already occurred and a man's rights have been trampled.
The entire criminal justice system is based on trust in the executive branch to properly enforce the laws, and the judicial branch to properly interpret and apply the law. It is not possible for every enforcement action to be immediately reviewed by the judiciary. You can't have a judge riding around with every police officer to check the validity of every enforcement action, and even if you could, it's not exactly uncommon to see a judge abusing his authority. The system is inherently flawed, and always will be, because it involves humans.
What we've got is probably about the best that it can get, with regards to being fair to the accused while still serving the interests of justice and public safety. The key is to deal harshly with police or judicial abuses when they come to light.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams
May I ask why? 15 year olds know right from wrong.
More than likely I am just calling the popo if someone is breaking in to my car, but I certainly don't feel bad when I read stories of thieves getting shot and killed.
Is it illegal for them to install the device or does the law just bar them from using the info obtained in a trial?
Not only have many courts OK'ed this, but they have also upheld rulings that the device cannot be legally removed, disabled, or destroyed by the owner of the car. Evidently, the device still is .gov property, even though it is on your car.
Something like that shows up on my car, I'll slap some postage on it and send it to Antarctica.
Just said 15 because they have been caught on a few of the car break-ins that we've been fortunate enough to catch over the last year. We all know right from wrong so should we get shot when we lie? I said I hate thieves as much as anyone but we need to make sure our reactions fit the crime. If someone wants my stuff, make sure I'm not at home and you can come in and take it. If I'm at home, I have a duty to protect myself and my family.
I also don't feel bad when I hear about thieves being shot and killed but I'd rather not have to explain myself to LE, family, judge, and jury for being the one to get rid of a thief.
Is it illegal for them to install the device or does the law just bar them from using the info obtained in a trial? Trying to keep up with this.
Then you are in trouble for battery and/or assualt. The mere fact that somone (say me) goes up to your car and touches it or installes something on it is not (at that moment in time) a danger/threat to your life. So you can't use force on the person since no crime (to cause death) is occuring.
I don’t know if this is old news for some, but some of you may not be aware that the government is turning cell phones into listening devices. They can re-program your phone over the air and turn it into a bug. About the only way you can be sure your phone is not transmitting is to remove the battery. They can and have done this with phones that look like they are turned off, but are actually transmitting
The new smart phone technology also enables them to use the internal GPS feature of your phone to track your location to within 9 feet. They can track you and map your location wherever there is cell phone coverage.
If you have doubts, see the attached article. This took place in 2003 and 2004 and technology has leaped ahead since then.
FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool - CNET News
I will cut the things into 50 pieces and mail it to 50 different countries in the world.
Touch my car without a warrant and I catch you, you will probably get your azz shot.
INGunGuy
There is no semblance of that happening now.
Try putting one on the governor’s car or a police squad car some time.
.
The entire criminal justice system is based on trust in the executive branch to properly enforce the laws, and the judicial branch to properly interpret and apply the law. It is not possible for every enforcement action to be immediately reviewed by the judiciary. You can't have a judge riding around with every police officer to check the validity of every enforcement action, and even if you could, it's not exactly uncommon to see a judge abusing his authority. The system is inherently flawed, and always will be, because it involves humans.
What we've got is probably about the best that it can get, with regards to being fair to the accused while still serving the interests of justice and public safety. The key is to deal harshly with police or judicial abuses when they come to light.
yeah, I tried to warn people here about that before, but some said my tin foil hat was too tight. some people somehow cant fathom the fact that their own govt is in the business to screw them. This is America!!! they say " its could NEVER happen here" LMFAO
i still say the radiation is gonna be coming from japan.I can handle inherently flawed. What I can't handle is a system that encourages and fosters abuse and refuses to institute the proper checks on itself as well as sufficient oversight to see that the limitations under which it is supposed to operate are working properly.
Well, your tinfoil is on tight. But we wouldn't want it blowing away in a good stiff radiation breeze either.
Dredd is that you?hopefully they have enough evedence to put him away, even if the GPS gets overturned