It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hidden Microphones Exposed As Part of Government Surveillance Program In The Bay Area

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2016 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
If true,That's some creepy shi* Man...S&F.




posted on May, 14 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Not the first time, not the last, shouldn't be accepted at all.



Harp says that if you’re going to conduct criminal activity, do it in the privacy of your own home. He says that was the original intention of the Fourth Amendment, but it’s up to the judge to interpret it.
Op Source




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: OneGoal
a reply to: xuenchen

Doesn't surprise me.


There's more to this though. My buddy brought up the fact that other cities did the same to triangulate gun shot locations...could this be that?

www.sacbee.com...


Gunshot detectors place sensitive microphones high up on the top of buildings, or they have a cluster of microphones
that can do nearby gunshot detection with filters for backfiring cars, paper bags, popping balloons and falling furniture.

ohscurrent.org...



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

As part of a criminal investigation.
When random people are being arrested for having political conversations the state doesn't like, then there might be cause to worry, until then I don't see a problem with this.
They were targeting criminals to gather evidence about them, why is this considered any different to tapping their phones or monitoring their activities?

These are people suspected of committing a crime and being investigated for those crimes.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: dreamingawake
Not the first time, not the last, shouldn't be accepted at all.


So you think that terrorists plotting a mass killing shouldn't be spied on?
What about child abduction?
How about someone suspected of child abuse?
Drug running?
Gang activity?

I find this pretty bizarre, most of you would scream in support of everyone having guns and being able to carry them in public to "keep them safe from criminals", but you'll absolutely reject the notion that a suspect should be spied on because it's "creepy" in some way?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Misterlondon
I agree with you. The logistics to cover multiple microphones is vast. It's more like targeted small areas to pick up intel.
As for privacy, you must realise if you are in your own home that's private, but the information is in the title. When you leave home you ARE in a public space. Get the word "public". They do not need your permision to record in public, unless there is a by law against it.




top topics
 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join