Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 73

Thread: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

  1. #51
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    I believed they used infrared to find that Boston terrorist under a boat in a backyard.
    Indeed. Already in use, I'm sure they use every spectrum available to them to peer into places they shouldn't be.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #52
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,185

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Jango View Post
    FBI says it doesn't need warrant to use drones - Washington Times

    Though Senator Paul is ostracisized for his contrarian views, we, as a people need more members of the Congress and Senate to stick their heads up and raise their voices for us and the Constitution, and not just shimmy along being a Yes Man to the system.

    Drones in America is a terrible idea. We don't need 20,000 of them flying around in a decade or two, let alone, being operated by the government and police in our skies. Vote 'no' if you're ever given the chance about drones.
    I don't agree with the Obama drone program in other countries, some ostensibly allies of America, where drones are used to murder people and often innocent bystanders.

    That said, this is entirely different and I would agree that a warrant should not be necessary. It's not necessary for the police to have a warrant for every household in a jurisdiction when they send up a police helicopter to survey the area. Why should a drone be different? I'm quite sure, however, that if they noticed you had pot plants growing in your backyard they'd have to get a warrant before entering the property.

    People seem to revel in the ability to use their smartphones to film or take pics of everybody they see on the street doing whatever, and especially if they catch the police in some action, and posting it up on youtube or whatever for the world to see. Personally, I no longer have any expectation of privacy of my person when I'm out on the street or anywhere not surrounded by four walls and a roof. Since I'm not doing anything illegal, I'd much rather a drone pass by than a nosy neighbor with a smartphone pointed over the fence.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    you should probably buff up on a little case law and not rely on that. you might be surprised at what you find is not considered private.
    I have always seen "reasonable expectation of privacy" used for determining privacy rights. That should apply to outdoors away from public view. I know that they have already allowed exceptions for aerial surveillance finding pot plants (for example). I have never heard of anyone being busted for acts spotted from the air that would require flying very low or using extreme magnification to detect. Have you?

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    I have always seen "reasonable expectation of privacy" used for determining privacy rights. That should apply to outdoors away from public view. I know that they have already allowed exceptions for aerial surveillance finding pot plants (for example). I have never heard of anyone being busted for acts spotted from the air that would require flying very low or using extreme magnification to detect. Have you?
    santa.jpg
    He knows if you are sleeping,
    He knows if your awake.
    he knows if you've been bad or good
    You better be good for goodness sake...

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    And they get in a whole lot of trouble for doing so without a warrant.

    Look, they're probably correct, under current law, and since we've been too damn lazy to set a privacy amendment to the Constitution, they don't need a warrant. But they should and we should make it so they should.
    The constitution already establishes a clear right to privacy. Unfortunately, the courts have been very inconsistent in applying it, but they did apply it in Row v. Wade and Lawrence, among other cases. Since they have been so inconsistent, and the general trend is to erode our privacy, I support a constitutional amendment for privacy. Enacting amendments on the state level will probably be more practical. California already has explicit privacy protection in its constitution.

  6. #56
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    I have no problem with drones equipped with STANDARD REGULAR camera's. But when they start using specialized equipment without warrants, thats a whole 'nother ball game. That specialized equipment is being used to look at things that the normal eye cannot. IE it is looking beyond what can normally be seen. Those things need a requirement of a warrant as it is searching beyond what is publicly available.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  7. #57
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    The constitution already establishes a clear right to privacy. Unfortunately, the courts have been very inconsistent in applying it, but they did apply it in Row v. Wade and Lawrence, among other cases. Since they have been so inconsistent, and the general trend is to erode our privacy, I support a constitutional amendment for privacy. Enacting amendments on the state level will probably be more practical. California already has explicit privacy protection in its constitution.
    I disagree entirely. The fourth does not protect privacy, it simply requires the government to have a warrant in order to use your papers against you in court. Yes, yes, I know the courts, even the SCOTUS, have said there's nothing to see here, move along. But we need real constitutional privacy rights. Otherwise, it's always going to revolve around whatever legislation passes muster that year.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    I have always seen "reasonable expectation of privacy" used for determining privacy rights. That should apply to outdoors away from public view. I know that they have already allowed exceptions for aerial surveillance finding pot plants (for example). I have never heard of anyone being busted for acts spotted from the air that would require flying very low or using extreme magnification to detect. Have you?
    Back a long time ago when i studied this sort of case law it seems they pretty much need some sort of physical barrier because even when cops walked around private property they were able to use plain sight rules. I am pretty sure if it is visible while out in public you are screwed. The places where you actually have privacy in a legally protected sense are very small.

  9. #59
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,146

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Then I guess I don't need permission to HUNT them. 8)

  10. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: F.B.I. says it doesn't need warrant to use drones

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    I disagree entirely. The fourth does not protect privacy, it simply requires the government to have a warrant in order to use your papers against you in court. Yes, yes, I know the courts, even the SCOTUS, have said there's nothing to see here, move along. But we need real constitutional privacy rights. Otherwise, it's always going to revolve around whatever legislation passes muster that year.
    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
    effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall ...

    "Be secure" means you have a right to be protected from searches and seizures without probable cause (case law) or warrant. "Persons" means your body and the clothes you are wearing, "effects" means possessions or property. If the government can not search your body and clothes, your home, your papers or your possessions without probable cause or a warrant, then you have a right to privacy. I don't think that is ambiguous.
    Last edited by Hard Truth; 07-30-13 at 04:21 PM.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •