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.

 

Court Says No Warrant Needed for Cellphone Search

page: 2
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
How is land line data any different from cell phone data? Couldn't the same argument be made that your land line provider owns your call data.

If this is in any way legit, why didn't they do this years ago to stop from needing to jump through all the legal hoops to get your land line call information?

I wish i could change the rules when i get busted breaking them.

DC




posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 


why should the consumers be forced to take EXTRA steps to protect their 'reasonably expected privacy' based on all telecommunicative activities to date ?
Apparently the judges interpret the law to say that it is the provider which owns the call data. So the law must be changed or the practices of the providers must change.



every contract includes a "Privacy Statement" and expresses a reasonable expectation of privacy BEFORE the contract is signed.
Your cell phone contract does?



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by xDeadcowx
 


How is land line data any different from cell phone data? Couldn't the same argument be made that your land line provider owns your call data.
Other than long distance calls, I'm not sure that data is stored. Of course, they know where your land line is so they don't really have to ask the phone company that. It seems that it was the location of the calls that they were after.
 


If this is in any way legit, why didn't they do this years ago to stop from needing to jump through all the legal hoops to get your land line call information?
Precedent? From 1979...regarding a device used to record dialed numbers.

The installation and use of the pen register was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required. Pp. 739-746.

Re:privacy

Although petitioner's conduct may have been calculated to keep the contents of his conversation private, his conduct was not and could not have been calculated to preserve the privacy of the number he dialed. Regardless of his location, petitioner had to convey that number to the telephone company in precisely the same way if he wished to complete his call.

www.freerepublic.com...

Dollars to donuts this Supreme Court case was used in the decision we're talking about.
edit on 7/31/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I wonder if this has anything to do with people using cell phones to document illegal police activity? Can police now confiscate your cell phone if you film them committing a crime?



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 727Sky
I used to believe the Judicial Branch was our insurance policy against a government gone wild...Something has changed in America...... or maybe it never was the place many fought and died for?


never was my friend, never was. any nation that starts by decimating the native population, has probably gotten off to a poor start.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
well i have said this many times before since the NSA leaks started,
the perve on the other end gets their gibliets emptied by listen to my
conversations or txts,. well then have at it.

Im a born and bread dedicated to american life usual.
and if my info is interesting,. well it is a lot of wasted tax cash at work

Although
some of the conversations between the girlfriend and I can
be enough to make Mr. flint smile
edit on 31-7-2013 by Lil Drummerboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 727Sky
I used to believe the Judicial Branch was our insurance policy against a government gone wild...Something has changed in America...... or maybe it never was the place many fought and died for?


A common and dangerous misconception among Americans is that the judicial system is untainted by lobbyism and politics. The reality of the situation is that it is COMPLETELY controlled by those two things.

Judges much like the rest of politicians are driven by mandate. Mandates comes down from those that have helped them achieve their current position and stand to further their career. Uphold the mandate and prosper, question, fight or slight the mandate and your guaranteed a watchful eye, a cynical critique of performance and if you go far enough away from that which you are "suggested" to do, skies the limit.

In the wake of the NSA revelations, it's almost hard to not think that every public figure head isn't some form of puppet kneeling in the wake of their own personal scandals those who hold true power flaunt over them. God only knows how much they actually know or can collect, do you honestly believe it stops with average, private citizens?

Why would it when so much can be accomplished by pushing it too people who really matter in the game of legislation and policy?


edit on 31-7-2013 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Our government acts like other criminal operations exploiting gaps instead of protecting its peoples rights. They are doing this because Americans have become asleep, divided and distracted. Something weird and frightening is happening to the people of my country...beyond just what I stated above.

I even see it here on ATS the past few years. Flat out passive and *yawns* just doesn't give a damn if it is not entertainment.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MountainLaurel
 

There have been multiple cases of the police confiscating cell phones in the area of an arrest...."for evidence."



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 

As many suspected since CJ Roberts changed his mind on Obamacare it appears that justices can and are being blackmailed to influence their decisions.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
lol


I teach everyone to NOT call me.


Like I said....100 yards is sufficient.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Helious
 

As many suspected since CJ Roberts changed his mind on Obamacare it appears that justices can and are being blackmailed to influence their decisions.


The problem in this country is that of the notion that you can "beat the rap" but you can't "beat the ride". There is zero accountability in current law enforcement to compel officers to abide by the Constitutional guidelines. If you step out of line, anger them, say the wrong thing, you are simply arrested on false charges and even though you will get the charges dropped, dismissed, etc. You will still need to post bail, hire a lawyer and endure the long process of having that arrest expunged from your record because even arrests show up on background checks.

All of this and the arresting officer has absolutely no reason not to continue to falsely arrest another 50 people that same week. There is no oversight unless multiple lawsuits are levied of which are rare because compiling evidence to present such a case are difficult because in states such as I live in you can get life in prison for videotaping a police officer to begin with.

Accountability needs to demanded. No crime, no arrest. If you do make an arrest and it comes out later you had no basis, evidence or cause, you need to be held criminally liable for dereliction of duty, gross negligence or violation of civil rights. In the most extreme cases, kidnapping, false arrest and blackmail.

You wan't a more responsible America? Start from the top down.
edit on 31-7-2013 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by xDeadcowx
 


How is land line data any different from cell phone data? Couldn't the same argument be made that your land line provider owns your call data.
Other than long distance calls, I'm not sure that data is stored. Of course, they know where your land line is so they don't really have to ask the phone company that. It seems that it was the location of the calls that they were after.


I know this one! A long time ago, I had this weird guy calling me...a lot. Talked to the phone company about what could be done about it and they advised me to either a. change my number or b. call the police department. If the police department were called, then the phone company would set up what was called a phone trap. See, the phone company up until that point couldn't tell me who called me because they didn't keep the records. After the phone trap would be placed on my line, then they would start logging the number of every call made to my line. In order to do this, I had to call the police, file a formal complaint and they had to get a warrant. Just to get the phone number of the person calling me. So that was mid 90's and technically the same information.

Unless things have changed (god knows, they might have since it's been about 20 years) but it used to be that the phone companies did not store that information and only stored long distance call information for billing purposes.

P.S. and yes, the creeper got jail time, mandatory psychiatric counseling, a restraining order and a whole hell of a lot of community service. turned out he was a total nut.
edit on 31/7/13 by WhiteAlice because: added the ps



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by superluminal11
 




I teach everyone to NOT call me.

Prudent.

Now if the bad guys were as prudent the cops would have nothing to gain by using such measures.



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 

One of these days we will see citizens do what the one cop did - take the law into their own hands and mete out retribution against bad cops that are not held accountable by the system.



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   
pre-paid cell phone under an assumed name. what i'm more worried about are some of the comments ive made here about the federal government.



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Why not Ask the phone company who the info belongs to?

No ware in the contract does it say,
that they have all rights on your info!

guess who's giving the judge his orders?



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
While you might own the phone, you do not own the companies servers or cell towers, or even their database.
That's the simple fact there.

The same goes for the servers where you email or cloud data might live.

You are only protected by a narrowly worded agreement between you, and those companies.
You, do not own anything that is on another corporations servers. You do not own their hardware. They are letting you borrow part of their hardware. Should you die, any data on their hardware, unless someone in your family is smart enough to remove it, will belong to them as well. So that means if you are for example an author, and you do all of your work in the cloud, using cloud based applications. That when you die, any lasting works that you have created will likely fall into the black hole and vanish only to turn up later on as part of some 'ghost writers' works. Any revenues that might have gone to your family, just vanished. Good luck getting it back, should that be the case.

You only control or own any data (email, credit information, files, texts) that resides on the hard drive or memory of computers, when it is physically under your control in your house. Or hands, as it may be the case with laptops, cell phones and tablets.

If you thought otherwise, you really fooled yourself.
Maybe you should consider finding out how to move that data off their systems and into your own (constitutionally protected) property.

M.



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Get a cheap tablet download a free VOIP app like magicjack or some other.

Most of them have cameras too.

Just a gripe but if you can get a generic tablet that does everything that a phone does for under 100 bucks how to the service providers justify pricing the new phones at half a grand or more if you don't want their 2 year contract.







edit on 1-8-2013 by VforVendettea because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Earlier this year, both Maine and Montana passed legislation requiring authorities to obtain a search warrant to get location information from a person’s cellphone.



Yay, us!

I don't see how anyone could doubt that our freedoms no longer exist. If we want freedoms again we will have to re-create them.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join