Orwellian for sure…

[Rustic]

How is this for overbearing... Lol

The government wants your fingerprint to unlock your phone. Should that be allowed?

 

[The Irish Ram]

They want your phone to collect your information for your NICS dossier.

Getting to know you, getting to know all about you...

 

[Auld Phart]

What next?

Finger prints to start up your computer?

 

[The Great Goose]

This is the kind of thing Germans would protest over.

 

[SwimExpert]

With a search warrant, perfectly fine.

Now, if we're talking about some kind of "just in case" database, they can go suck their own balls in a deep pit in Hell.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If they only wanted Muslim fingerprints the RWnuts would give it standing ovation.

 

[skye]

What next?

Finger prints to start up your computer?

One step closer to the micro implant chip.

And yes, it all sounds apocalyptic.

You can think what you wish.

 

[Alex.]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

 

[SwimExpert]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

 

[Alex.]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

There is no possible way all that is contained in a device of this nature could be considered for the purpose of the search warrant. For example what does a discussion about the perp's health have to do with the evidentiary nature of a a discussion with a florist or calling for reservations at a restaurant or the personal nature of the subjects relatives?

 

[SwimExpert]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

There is no possible way all that is contained in a device of this nature could be considered for the purpose of the search warrant. For example what does a discussion about the perp's health have to do with the evidentiary nature of a a discussion with a florist or calling for reservations at a restaurant or the personal nature of the subjects relatives?

What are you even talking about? Do you think a search warrant has to list every peculiar detail of every little thing that might happen to be discovered in the execution of a search?

A search warrant can be issued to search your house for a set of bloody clothes. Of course, your house has a shitload of other things in it which might be discovered. They might discover your silverware. They'll undoubtedly discover your furniture. They might discover your pot plants growing in the basement. And they'll probably arrest you for them.

 

[Alex.]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

There is no possible way all that is contained in a device of this nature could be considered for the purpose of the search warrant. For example what does a discussion about the perp's health have to do with the evidentiary nature of a a discussion with a florist or calling for reservations at a restaurant or the personal nature of the subjects relatives?

What are you even talking about? Do you think a search warrant has to list every peculiar detail of every little thing that might happen to be discovered in the execution of a search?

A search warrant can be issued to search your house for a set of bloody clothes. Of course, your house has a shitload of other things in it which might be discovered. They might discover your silverware. They'll undoubtedly discover your furniture. They might discover your pot plants growing in the basement. And they'll probably arrest you for them.

Link?

 

[SwimExpert]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

There is no possible way all that is contained in a device of this nature could be considered for the purpose of the search warrant. For example what does a discussion about the perp's health have to do with the evidentiary nature of a a discussion with a florist or calling for reservations at a restaurant or the personal nature of the subjects relatives?

What are you even talking about? Do you think a search warrant has to list every peculiar detail of every little thing that might happen to be discovered in the execution of a search?

A search warrant can be issued to search your house for a set of bloody clothes. Of course, your house has a shitload of other things in it which might be discovered. They might discover your silverware. They'll undoubtedly discover your furniture. They might discover your pot plants growing in the basement. And they'll probably arrest you for them.

Link?

There's your link. I'm not going to even bother trying to sit here and indulge your idiocy as if it's a valid demand for evidence. Go back to 8th grade civics class. And in the meantime, try to dream of a way that police could possibly execute a search warrant of your house without happening to find everything that happens to be in your house.

In the meantime, this whole story is nothing but a media fabricated crisis. There's nothing here that hasn't been the true pretty much forever. The media are just trying to spin it like it's some kind of new circumstance, because they know it will generate ratings.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Orwellian for sure…
How is this for overbearing... Lol

The government wants your fingerprint to unlock your phone. Should that be allowed?

Nonsense.

This is a gross oversimplification of the issue.

Did you bother to read the linked article?

‘Law enforcement routinely obtains search warrants to examine property or monitor telecommunications, even swab inside an inmate's mouth for DNA. But fingerprints have long remained in the class of evidence that doesn't require a warrant, along with providing handwriting samples or standing in a lineup. Courts have categorized fingerprints as "real or physical evidence" sourced from the body, unlike communications or knowledge, which cannot be compelled without violating the 5th Amendment.


George M. Dery III, a lawyer and criminal justice professor at California State University, Fullerton, likened the warrant to the government's request for a key.


"Before cell phones, much of this information would be found in a person's home," Dery said, noting that search warrants commonly authorize police to march into a home and seize evidence. "This has a warrant. Even though it is a big deal having someone open up their phone, they've gone to a judge and it means there's a likelihood of criminal activity."’

Correct.

Searches pursuant to a warrant are Constitutional, no Fourth or Fifth Amendment violations have taken place.

So it’s not a matter of ‘government wanting your fingerprint’ for some nefarious ‘Orwellian’ purpose – the notion is baseless demagoguery.

Absent a warrant, no citizen can be compelled to allow authorities to search his phone.

 

[Alex.]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that police can search phones with a valid warrant and compel a person in custody to provide physical evidence such as fingerprints without a judge's permission."

Unfortunately, the phone or computer carries a great deal more information than what a search warrant would cover. Once the information has been harvested from the device no matter what legal barriers there are to using the info it is out there.

That's not true. A search warrant can easily cover the search of a person's computer. How can a cell phone be any different?

There is no possible way all that is contained in a device of this nature could be considered for the purpose of the search warrant. For example what does a discussion about the perp's health have to do with the evidentiary nature of a a discussion with a florist or calling for reservations at a restaurant or the personal nature of the subjects relatives?

What are you even talking about? Do you think a search warrant has to list every peculiar detail of every little thing that might happen to be discovered in the execution of a search?

A search warrant can be issued to search your house for a set of bloody clothes. Of course, your house has a shitload of other things in it which might be discovered. They might discover your silverware. They'll undoubtedly discover your furniture. They might discover your pot plants growing in the basement. And they'll probably arrest you for them.

Link?

There's your link. I'm not going to even bother trying to sit here and indulge your idiocy as if it's a valid demand for evidence. Go back to 8th grade civics class. And in the meantime, try to dream of a way that police could possibly execute a search warrant of your house without happening to find everything that happens to be in your house.

In the meantime, this whole story is nothing but a media fabricated crisis. There's nothing here that hasn't been the true pretty much forever. The media are just trying to spin it like it's some kind of new circumstance, because they know it will generate ratings.

So you have nothing. ok.

 

[GHook93]

With a search warrant, perfectly fine.

Now, if we're talking about some kind of "just in case" database, they can go suck their own balls in a deep pit in Hell.

I agree. They have probable cause and a warrant.

 

[Alex.]

With a search warrant, perfectly fine.

Now, if we're talking about some kind of "just in case" database, they can go suck their own balls in a deep pit in Hell.

I agree. They have probable cause and a warrant.

Would it not depend on the scope of the warrant?

 

[Rustic]

Only fool trusts the federal government to do the right thing... That's not their job. Lol

 

[GHook93]

Only fool trusts the federal government to do the right thing... That's not their job. Lol

The Fed is still held to the law. If they have probable cause and obtain a warrant the. It fits within the constitution. If they just randomly monitor or search people's phone then I do not support it.

Getting a warrant is not an easy or quick process. There are many steps one must undertake.