Secret GPS device on vehicle? Government overstepping its bounds?

[Immanuel]

Oil change reignites debate over GPS trackers - Yahoo! News

SAN FRANCISCO – Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community college student, took his car in for an oil change earlier this month and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage.

The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.

Two days later, FBI agents arrived at Afifi's Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property — a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights.

One federal judge wrote that the widespread use of the device was straight out of George Orwell's novel, "1984".

"By holding that this kind of surveillance doesn't impair an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, the panel hands the government the power to track the movements of every one of us, every day of our lives," wrote Alex Kozinski, the chief judge of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a blistering dissent in which a three-judge panel from his court ruled that search warrants weren't necessary for GPS tracking.

The USA Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republican Party. It is things like the above story that have made me feel like we no longer live in a land governed by a government, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

How do you all feel about this particular case? Does the fact that the student (I should identify him as "the victim") has an Arabic sounding name and is apparently Arabic make a difference to you?

Immie

 

[Baruch Menachem]

The arab name shouldn't make a difference.

You can't do this kind of thing without a warrant. Period.

 

[ConHog]

Why did they do it? dumb. If the guy owns a cell phone, and who doesn't, they have a GPS on him.

 

[Immanuel]

The arab name shouldn't make a difference.

You can't do this kind of thing without a warrant. Period.

Not according to the article and evidently a court ruling that says that the government can do this. The court opinion was that the FBI could do this and it was not a violation of the right to privacy.

I wonder how pissed the FBI agent would have been if the victim had thrown the device on the floor and stomped on it in front of him.

Immie

 

[blu]

this case is actually good in the long run. now the ACLU has something to challenge it on and will once again protect our civil liberties from the hands of neocons who want to place us into a police state

 

[ConHog]

this case is actually good in the long run. now the ACLU has something to challenge it on and will once again protect our civil liberties from the hands of neocons who want to place us into a police state

You don't even know what it means.

 

[Immanuel]

this case is actually good in the long run. now the ACLU has something to challenge it on and will once again protect our civil liberties from the hands of neocons who want to place us into a police state

Yeah, right, that is if the courts could be convinced to see the light. I'm somewhat skeptical on that outcome.

Immie

 

[syrenn]

Oil change reignites debate over GPS trackers - Yahoo! News

SAN FRANCISCO – Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community college student, took his car in for an oil change earlier this month and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage.

The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.

Two days later, FBI agents arrived at Afifi's Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property — a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights.

One federal judge wrote that the widespread use of the device was straight out of George Orwell's novel, "1984".

"By holding that this kind of surveillance doesn't impair an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, the panel hands the government the power to track the movements of every one of us, every day of our lives," wrote Alex Kozinski, the chief judge of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a blistering dissent in which a three-judge panel from his court ruled that search warrants weren't necessary for GPS tracking.

The USA Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republican Party. It is things like the above story that have made me feel like we no longer live in a land governed by a government, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

How do you all feel about this particular case? Does the fact that the student (I should identify him as "the victim") has an Arabic sounding name and is apparently Arabic make a difference to you?

Immie

The FBI has been using trackers for a very long time...and long before the patriot act.

 

[Immanuel]

Oil change reignites debate over GPS trackers - Yahoo! News

SAN FRANCISCO – Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community college student, took his car in for an oil change earlier this month and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage.

The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.

Two days later, FBI agents arrived at Afifi's Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property — a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights.

One federal judge wrote that the widespread use of the device was straight out of George Orwell's novel, "1984".

"By holding that this kind of surveillance doesn't impair an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, the panel hands the government the power to track the movements of every one of us, every day of our lives," wrote Alex Kozinski, the chief judge of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a blistering dissent in which a three-judge panel from his court ruled that search warrants weren't necessary for GPS tracking.

The USA Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republican Party. It is things like the above story that have made me feel like we no longer live in a land governed by a government, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

How do you all feel about this particular case? Does the fact that the student (I should identify him as "the victim") has an Arabic sounding name and is apparently Arabic make a difference to you?

Immie

The FBI has been using trackers for a very long time...and long before the patriot act.

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

 

[blu]

this case is actually good in the long run. now the ACLU has something to challenge it on and will once again protect our civil liberties from the hands of neocons who want to place us into a police state

You don't even know what it means.

yes I do as we have gone over a number of times, but I am glad to see you have no rebuttal as usual

 

[syrenn]

Oil change reignites debate over GPS trackers - Yahoo! News



The USA Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republican Party. It is things like the above story that have made me feel like we no longer live in a land governed by a government, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

How do you all feel about this particular case? Does the fact that the student (I should identify him as "the victim") has an Arabic sounding name and is apparently Arabic make a difference to you?

Immie

The FBI has been using trackers for a very long time...and long before the patriot act.

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

It sounded to me as if you felt that this person was tracked just because he was arab.

I am just saying that the FBI has been tracking people like this (car installed tracker) for a very long time.

Do i think its right. For the right people sure.

 

[Immanuel]

The FBI has been using trackers for a very long time...and long before the patriot act.

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

It sounded to me as if you felt that this person was tracked just because he was arab.

I am just saying that the FBI has been tracking people like this (car installed tracker) for a very long time.

Do i think its right. For the right people sure.

No, I asked everyone if the fact that he had an Arabic name made a difference to them.

For me, it does not. I do not believe that the government should be doing this kind of a thing without probable cause and without a warrant regardless of who the suspect is or what race he/she belongs to. The requirement of a warrant is designed to protect citizens of the U.S. from the abuse of power. Without the requirement of a warrant in this case, we have no protection from the abuse of power.

What do you mean for the right people and do you really think the government should be able to do this without warrants? How about tapping your phones without a warrant?

My personal opinion is no they should not be able to do this without a warrant. The warrant is an oversight to keep an LEO from overstepping his bounds.

Immie

 

[syrenn]

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

It sounded to me as if you felt that this person was tracked just because he was arab.

I am just saying that the FBI has been tracking people like this (car installed tracker) for a very long time.

Do i think its right. For the right people sure.

No, I asked everyone if the fact that he had an Arabic name made a difference to them.

For me, it does not. I do not believe that the government should be doing this kind of a thing without probable cause and without a warrant regardless of who the suspect is or what race he/she belongs to. The requirement of a warrant is designed to protect citizens of the U.S. from the abuse of power. Without the requirement of a warrant in this case, we have no protection from the abuse of power.

What do you mean for the right people and do you really think the government should be able to do this without warrants? How about tapping your phones without a warrant?

My personal opinion is no they should not be able to do this without a warrant. The warrant is an oversight to keep an LEO from overstepping his bounds.

Immie

I am sure they need the warrants but as with everything sometimes that does not happen.

I mean exactly what i said. Tracking some people over others. Your run of the mill drug user, then no. Tracking a drug dealer, sure. Tracking someone with terrorists ties, sure. Tracking your average muslim, no.

 

[Immanuel]

It sounded to me as if you felt that this person was tracked just because he was arab.

I am just saying that the FBI has been tracking people like this (car installed tracker) for a very long time.

Do i think its right. For the right people sure.

No, I asked everyone if the fact that he had an Arabic name made a difference to them.

For me, it does not. I do not believe that the government should be doing this kind of a thing without probable cause and without a warrant regardless of who the suspect is or what race he/she belongs to. The requirement of a warrant is designed to protect citizens of the U.S. from the abuse of power. Without the requirement of a warrant in this case, we have no protection from the abuse of power.

What do you mean for the right people and do you really think the government should be able to do this without warrants? How about tapping your phones without a warrant?

My personal opinion is no they should not be able to do this without a warrant. The warrant is an oversight to keep an LEO from overstepping his bounds.

Immie

I am sure they need the warrants but as with everything sometimes that does not happen.

I mean exactly what i said. Tracking some people over others. Your run of the mill drug user, then no. Tracking a drug dealer, sure. Tracking someone with terrorists ties, sure. Tracking your average muslim, no.

I'm going to bed shortly, so I may not answer tonight, but I must disagree with you.

One, I got the impression from the article that warrants were not needed.

Two, Don't you think that innocent until proven guilty is an ideal that we here in America still want to live by?

Immie

 

[syrenn]

No, I asked everyone if the fact that he had an Arabic name made a difference to them.

For me, it does not. I do not believe that the government should be doing this kind of a thing without probable cause and without a warrant regardless of who the suspect is or what race he/she belongs to. The requirement of a warrant is designed to protect citizens of the U.S. from the abuse of power. Without the requirement of a warrant in this case, we have no protection from the abuse of power.

What do you mean for the right people and do you really think the government should be able to do this without warrants? How about tapping your phones without a warrant?

My personal opinion is no they should not be able to do this without a warrant. The warrant is an oversight to keep an LEO from overstepping his bounds.

Immie

I am sure they need the warrants but as with everything sometimes that does not happen.

I mean exactly what i said. Tracking some people over others. Your run of the mill drug user, then no. Tracking a drug dealer, sure. Tracking someone with terrorists ties, sure. Tracking your average muslim, no.

I'm going to bed shortly, so I may not answer tonight, but I must disagree with you.

One, I got the impression from the article that warrants were not needed.

Two, Don't you think that innocent until proven guilty is an ideal that we here in America still want to live by?

Immie

My understanding is that warrants are needed to track. Warrants are needed to listen in on phones.

Yes, i believe in innocent until proven guilty. Why do you think they are being tracked or listened in on?

Night Immie

 

[Charles_Main]

I am sure they need the warrants but as with everything sometimes that does not happen.

I mean exactly what i said. Tracking some people over others. Your run of the mill drug user, then no. Tracking a drug dealer, sure. Tracking someone with terrorists ties, sure. Tracking your average muslim, no.

I'm going to bed shortly, so I may not answer tonight, but I must disagree with you.

One, I got the impression from the article that warrants were not needed.

Two, Don't you think that innocent until proven guilty is an ideal that we here in America still want to live by?

Immie

My understanding is that warrants are needed to track. Warrants are needed to listen in on phones.

Yes, i believe in innocent until proven guilty. Why do you think they are being tracked or listened in on?

Night Immie

To Try and gather evidence to prove them Guilty of course

 

[syrenn]

I'm going to bed shortly, so I may not answer tonight, but I must disagree with you.

One, I got the impression from the article that warrants were not needed.

Two, Don't you think that innocent until proven guilty is an ideal that we here in America still want to live by?

Immie

My understanding is that warrants are needed to track. Warrants are needed to listen in on phones.

Yes, i believe in innocent until proven guilty. Why do you think they are being tracked or listened in on?

Night Immie

To Try and gather evidence to prove them Guilty of course

Yes.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The arab name shouldn't make a difference.

You can't do this kind of thing without a warrant. Period.

Courts disagree. And I am glad. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a tracking device on a car. After all it just means a cop does not have to waste gas and time following them around 24/7. And that is why the Courts that agree with this say so. It is no different then if they were followed. It is simply using available technology to make a cops job easier.

Further NO ONE has an expectation of privacy as to WHERE they drive on public roads.

This will go to the Supreme Court and I am betting they agree it is completely legal.

Or are you going to contend that in order to trail someone in a car 24/7 a warrant is required?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Oil change reignites debate over GPS trackers - Yahoo! News



The USA Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republican Party. It is things like the above story that have made me feel like we no longer live in a land governed by a government, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

How do you all feel about this particular case? Does the fact that the student (I should identify him as "the victim") has an Arabic sounding name and is apparently Arabic make a difference to you?

Immie

The FBI has been using trackers for a very long time...and long before the patriot act.

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

So now you must hate those despicable Democrats and Obama, after all they have not only kept the Patriot act but sought to broaden Government powers. I guess you can not vote for anyone.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

But, I did not say that tracking began because of the Patriot Act. I said, that the Patriot Act was one of the things that turned me against the Republicans. When tracking began has nothing to do with that. President Bush's deliberate attempts to shred the Constitution were what drove me out of the party. The Patriot Act was one of those attempts.

Immie

It sounded to me as if you felt that this person was tracked just because he was arab.

I am just saying that the FBI has been tracking people like this (car installed tracker) for a very long time.

Do i think its right. For the right people sure.

No, I asked everyone if the fact that he had an Arabic name made a difference to them.

For me, it does not. I do not believe that the government should be doing this kind of a thing without probable cause and without a warrant regardless of who the suspect is or what race he/she belongs to. The requirement of a warrant is designed to protect citizens of the U.S. from the abuse of power. Without the requirement of a warrant in this case, we have no protection from the abuse of power.

What do you mean for the right people and do you really think the government should be able to do this without warrants? How about tapping your phones without a warrant?

My personal opinion is no they should not be able to do this without a warrant. The warrant is an oversight to keep an LEO from overstepping his bounds.

Immie

One has a reasonable expectation of privacy on a phone. One does NOT have a reasonable expectation of privacy as to where they drive on PUBLIC ROADS.