Pulled over and disarmed in Fishers.

[dsom2006]

Folks, let's walk this back a bit, shall we? We're getting into the Twilight Zone here.

The use of the term "very interesting information" was perhaps ill-advised. I said this before but it bears repeating: LEOs have access to information that is public record. And I can assure you that there is precious little about it that is in any way interesting.

They don't have access to credit reports, or medical records, or any other personal, private information. Certainly everyone here is savvy enough to know that such a suggestion is absurd.

IF a LEO is conducting an investigation in which he needs to see anything along those lines he must convince a judge to give him a search warrant.

No matter how much people opine here about 4th Amendment rights it is a well-established legal fact that you have no privacy rights where your license plate is concerned. It is a public record and it is publicly displayed for a reason. When a LEO runs your license plate your privacy has not been invaded because it is not a private subject. Also, that LEO has not harmed you or your rights in the slightest degree. You have privacy rights in some subjects and not in others. If you're standing on a public street and another citizen takes your picture, your privacy has not been violated.

Liberty, I haven't disagreed with much that you have commented on this topic. I have tried to be open and point out that there is a difference in the viewpoints of the LEO and the majority of civilians on this topic.

I guess the synopsis for me is that yes this it is legal for an LEO to run my info and pry (which is what they are doing) into my background. How ever it is not mandated that it be done. Leo's has a choice and I would hope that individual LEO's might make an ethical decision based on how they would feel if another government agency decided it was legal to invade their personal information just because they wanted to.

 

[j706]

It is probably safe to say that the interesting information would only be interesting to those in the business of locating criminals. That is the business that I am in. I have no idea where this medical records ect. stuff came from. It sure wasn't from me. But in this information age, if you happen to be a criminal, the world is a much smaller place. I often wonder how LE did their job before.

 

[dsom2006]

It is probably safe to say that the interesting information would only be interesting to those in the business of locating criminals. That is the business that I am in. I have no idea where this medical records ect. stuff came from. It sure wasn't from me. But in this information age, if you happen to be a criminal, the world is a much smaller place. I often wonder how LE did their job before.

Back peddle and vague. Post #208 you were very adament about finding "very interesting information" on all those that you run through 3 different systems. Now it is only interesting for LEO's. Makes it sound like LE is one big fraternity with many "very interesting" secrets that they keep from us civilians. I hope that is not the views of all LEO's. I don't think it is.

 

[CathyInBlue]

If IDACS only draws from "public records", then for what possible purpose would a police station refuse to run checks on people who thoroughly ID themselves in their request to see the same things the police see should THEY run her info?

I could see refusal to run checks on other people, even your own teenaged drivers, but yourself?

 

[Denny347]

If IDACS only draws from "public records", then for what possible purpose would a police station refuse to run checks on people who thoroughly ID themselves in their request to see the same things the police see should THEY run her info?

I could see refusal to run checks on other people, even your own teenaged drivers, but yourself?

Not our rule. State IDACS law says we cannot. BMV info in their property and they dictate who we can give it to and why. BMV can release that info to ANYONE they want...we cannot.

 

[GBuck]

Back peddle and vague. Post #208 you were very adament about finding "very interesting information" on all those that you run through 3 different systems. Now it is only interesting for LEO's. Makes it sound like LE is one big fraternity with many "very interesting" secrets that they keep from us civilians. I hope that is not the views of all LEO's. I don't think it is.

Dear God...

 

[Bunnykid68]

Folks, let's walk this back a bit, shall we? We're getting into the Twilight Zone here.

The use of the term "very interesting information" was perhaps ill-advised. I said this before but it bears repeating: LEOs have access to information that is public record. And I can assure you that there is precious little about it that is in any way interesting.

They don't have access to credit reports, or medical records, or any other personal, private information. Certainly everyone here is savvy enough to know that such a suggestion is absurd.


IF a LEO is conducting an investigation in which he needs to see anything along those lines he must convince a judge to give him a search warrant.

No matter how much people opine here about 4th Amendment rights it is a well-established legal fact that you have no privacy rights where your license plate is concerned. It is a public record and it is publicly displayed for a reason. When a LEO runs your license plate your privacy has not been invaded because it is not a private subject. Also, that LEO has not harmed you or your rights in the slightest degree. You have privacy rights in some subjects and not in others. If you're standing on a public street and another citizen takes your picture, your privacy has not been violated.

Maybe this is a good reason we should not have to have a license plate on our vehicles at all then.

 

[DragonGunner]

It is probably safe to say that the interesting information would only be interesting to those in the business of locating criminals. That is the business that I am in. I have no idea where this medical records ect. stuff came from. It sure wasn't from me. But in this information age, if you happen to be a criminal, the world is a much smaller place. I often wonder how LE did their job before.

On lighter note.....here in Indiana many yrs. ago I believe it was a bank that got robbed. This was before they even had radios in the police cars, they called my great uncle at his house an told him to go to a certain intersection an put up a block. A couple days later ISP officer Joe Tucker didn't show up for work......then they remembered that they forgot to go tell him it was over.....he stayed there the whole time.

I've heard some amazing, sad, an incrediable stories about him. He passed away in 1986 I believe, his wife just passed away this year at the age of 103.

 

[jbombelli]

Folks, let's walk this back a bit, shall we? We're getting into the Twilight Zone here.

The use of the term "very interesting information" was perhaps ill-advised. I said this before but it bears repeating: LEOs have access to information that is public record. And I can assure you that there is precious little about it that is in any way interesting.

They don't have access to credit reports, or medical records, or any other personal, private information. Certainly everyone here is savvy enough to know that such a suggestion is absurd.

IF a LEO is conducting an investigation in which he needs to see anything along those lines he must convince a judge to give him a search warrant.

No matter how much people opine here about 4th Amendment rights it is a well-established legal fact that you have no privacy rights where your license plate is concerned. It is a public record and it is publicly displayed for a reason. When a LEO runs your license plate your privacy has not been invaded because it is not a private subject. Also, that LEO has not harmed you or your rights in the slightest degree. You have privacy rights in some subjects and not in others. If you're standing on a public street and another citizen takes your picture, your privacy has not been violated.

I'll agree the term "very interesting information" was ill-advised. Even more ill-advised was refusing to clarify it, by saying, basically, "figure it out on your own." My reply was specifically in regard to "figure it out on your own", with examples as to what people who don't trust the police, and don't have any idea what the police *actually* have access to and what they don't will come up with when told "figure it out on your own."

I liken it to the officer that says "open carry is illegal in Indiana; I can arrest you for that." He may believe that, he may know better. In fact, he probably DOES know better, but that knowledge doesn't stop him from running his piehole and making people distrust him, anymore than it stops him from using ill-advised terms that I personally think were chosen specifically to troll and inflame people's emotions.

 

[j706]

On lighter note.....here in Indiana many yrs. ago I believe it was a bank that got robbed. This was before they even had radios in the police cars, they called my great uncle at his house an told him to go to a certain intersection an put up a block. A couple days later ISP officer Joe Tucker didn't show up for work......then they remembered that they forgot to go tell him it was over.....he stayed there the whole time.

I've heard some amazing, sad, an incrediable stories about him. He passed away in 1986 I believe, his wife just passed away this year at the age of 103.

That is some big time dedication right there. Many of those from that generation were hard core to the bone.

 

[j706]

I'll agree the term "very interesting information" was ill-advised. Even more ill-advised was refusing to clarify it, by saying, basically, "figure it out on your own." My reply was specifically in regard to "figure it out on your own", with examples as to what people who don't trust the police, and don't have any idea what the police *actually* have access to and what they don't will come up with when told "figure it out on your own."

I liken it to the officer that says "open carry is illegal in Indiana; I can arrest you for that." He may believe that, he may know better. In fact, he probably DOES know better, but that knowledge doesn't stop him from running his piehole and making people distrust him, anymore than it stops him from using ill-advised terms that I personally think were chosen specifically to troll and inflame people's emotions.

Yea maybe "very interesting information" was not the best choice of words. As far as anything else on the subject, that guy doesn't seem to understand anything except what he wants to understand.

 

[dsom2006]

I'll agree the term "very interesting information" was ill-advised. Even more ill-advised was refusing to clarify it, by saying, basically, "figure it out on your own." My reply was specifically in regard to "figure it out on your own", with examples as to what people who don't trust the police, and don't have any idea what the police *actually* have access to and what they don't will come up with when told "figure it out on your own."

I liken it to the officer that says "open carry is illegal in Indiana; I can arrest you for that." He may believe that, he may know better. In fact, he probably DOES know better, but that knowledge doesn't stop him from running his piehole and making people distrust him, anymore than it stops him from using ill-advised terms that I personally think were chosen specifically to troll and inflame people's emotions.

j706 has no answer. After 6 people say it's a bad choice of words he "maybe" agrees. He's the LEO everyone hopes they don't run into. He feels that he answers to no one and has no limitations to his authority. What he says is gospel.

I apoligize to each of you for beating this into the ground, but I wanted to see if he would eventually apologize for the misrepresentation and the appearence of his no consequence attitude. It pained him to say "maybe."

For all you LEO's out there I appreciate your service and I do not envy your job with all the nuts out there, but when one of your own displays this type of attitude in a private forum to someone just seeking knowledge it contributes negtively to each of your preceptions in the real world.

 

[j706]

j706 has no answer. After 6 people say it's a bad choice of words he "maybe" agrees. He's the LEO everyone hopes they don't run into. He feels that he answers to no one and has no limitations to his authority. What he says is gospel.

I apoligize to each of you for beating this into the ground, but I wanted to see if he would eventually apologize for the misrepresentation and the appearence of his no consequence attitude. It pained him to say "maybe."

For all you LEO's out there I appreciate your service and I do not envy your job with all the nuts out there, but when one of your own displays this type of attitude in a private forum to someone just seeking knowledge it contributes negtively to each of your preceptions in the real world.

Yea OK..whatever you think.

 

[dsom2006]

Often times when a poster has no rebuttal and really can't argue the point that was made, they simply attack the poster by saying his post is amusing and adding a funny little icon.

Ditto.