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.

 

California court say NO WARRANT is required to look through your cell phones or laptops

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   
NO WARRANT NEEDED TO CONDUCT A SEARCH

Title speaks for itself, it seems like every week we see examples of people losing their rights and courts not standing up for rights. Truely sad...
edit on 6-1-2011 by iSHRED because: typo




posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
We never had those rights to begin with. The phone's been tapped for decades. Since the 70's at LEAST.

The NSA never needed nor asked for a warrant. They merely just tapped it. Nothing was stopping them.

Last I checked, nothing changed.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
And I do believe something exactly the same occurred somewhere in the east coast if I'm not mistaken.

I guess the 4th Amendment is just a catchy phrase?



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Actually, only yhr US Supreme Court can issue such a warrant.

Perhaps some of you need to look up Dr Shirley Moore, you'll find her on Youtube and she'll explain why the California courts are illegal.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
The powers that be are having troubles letting go.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


Thats the problem, warrants are NOT being issued. Which would suggest a breach in the 4th Amendment.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.



Last time I checked, anything on your persons was protected under this right.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Correct however keep in mind the California court system is a private entity



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


or should I say a private corporation



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Just put a password on your phone or computer. While it's certainly only a rudimentary form of protection, it does delay the snooping process:
Cop: "I need to look at your phone or laptop...the courts say I have the right to"
CA citizen: "Certainly officer, here you go."
Cop: "It's asking me for a password, what's the password?"
CA citizen: "I forget...I have it stored in the phone or computer though"

Pretty ridiculous...next it'll be random checks of your house for illegal products or activities:
Cop: "I'm sorry Mrs. Jones, we have to search your house...a neighbor called in a report of suspicious activity"
Mrs.Jones: "Who called it in and what suspicious activity?"
Cop: "I can't tell you that. We have probable cause though, now let us in or we'll call in SWAT"

Don't forget...this is all in the name of security.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
i need to get my survival packing started. anarchy should be coming sometime, i think it should at least



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
We don't actually have any rights anymore. There is no more "We The People". Or didn't you get the memo. They can do what every they want. And they do.

So the question really becomes "What are we prepared to do about it?".



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Only Federal (NSA, DHS, Secret Service) has the legal authourity to conduct a search without a warrant as they are the vital infastructure that keeps the giant Governmental spiderweb intact and whole.

Local all the way up to State requires a warrant.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
We don't actually have any rights anymore. There is no more "We The People". Or didn't you get the memo. They can do what every they want. And they do.

So the question really becomes "What are we prepared to do about it?".


Apparently someone in Arizona is on to a solution to the problem. Apparently, that is. I could be wrong. Too bad I slept all day. I missed all the hoopla.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
California; the state of and for idiots.
All with no money, no ambition, and no future are welcomed.
We'll go bankrupt together.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Just one more reason to keep things on your computer encrypted.

I even found a new way to make a very secure password that you could even give them and they still would not be able to get it to work.
ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ pɹoʍssɐd ɹnoʎ ɹǝʇuǝ ʇsnɾ
www.typeupsidedown.com...



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Keep in mind:

This ruling applies if you are arrested for a crime. Prior to this, the police could look at/read/search everything in your pockets when you were arrested. This just adds the requirement for you to surrender your cell phone data. Police can't (yet) just walk up and ask to see your cell phone data, even if you are suspected of a crime. They have to place you under arrest. This may seem like a minor distinction. In some cases it is. But an arrest carries a whole different set of rules.

If you "forget" your passcode for your phone, you could easily be charged with obstruction, so that's not the solution.

I do not support this ruling, or anything that takes away our privacy. I am just trying to understand it.




top topics



 
2

log in

join