If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   Court rules that police can put video cameras on private property without a warrant. So yeah, you aren't allowed to remove that cam you found in your bathroom. It's legal...stuff   (arstechnica.com) divider line 22
    More: Asinine, private property, Fourth Amendment, court ruling, expectation of privacy, Malaga, Katz, thermal imaging, lawsuits  
•       •       •

17618 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Oct 2012 at 5:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-30 09:22:38 PM
11 votes:

ladyfortuna: Maybe I can't move it, but I can damn well hang my panties on it so they can't see anything.

/come at me, bros-in-blue


i'd patch into the video feed and make the cops watch hours and hours of spongebob squarepants.
2012-10-30 09:19:42 PM
4 votes:
Maybe I can't move it, but I can damn well hang my panties on it so they can't see anything.

/come at me, bros-in-blue
2012-10-31 07:17:11 AM
3 votes:

fluffy2097: Yeah, they can put cameras in your bathroom.

If your bathroom is in the middle of an open field with no walls or ceiling...


It is Wisconsin.
2012-10-30 09:25:25 PM
3 votes:

Mrbogey: Oh you can best believe this will go to the USSC. Stuff like this is the meat and potatoes of USSC rulings. I personally think the read it too narrow. The decision will be interesting.


And the Republicans on the USSC will stand up for personal liberty and uphold the ruling.
2012-10-31 07:52:29 AM
2 votes:

Studson: This is a classic curtilage argument. It wasn't considered part of the protected area of the home. This doesn't mean that police can put cameras anywhere on your property in all cases, only on areas that don't fall under the umbrella of the 4th amendment. Nothing too surprising in light of 4th Amendment cases. See Dunn, Davis, Riley, etc.

It's weird law in general if you ask me, but this case is not a clear erosion of the 4th Amendment IMHO given the history of cases. More so, following in line with precedent.


We are TRYING to have a circlejerk of "THEYS TAKINS OUR FREEDAMS!" here.

We don't need nor want your intelligent commentary that actually reflects the reality of the situation.
2012-10-30 10:37:10 PM
2 votes:
"We've got bush!"

/obscure?
2012-10-30 09:24:40 PM
2 votes:

Weaver95: i'd patch into the video feed and make the cops watch hours and hours of spongebob squarepants.


Make it Barney instead.
2012-11-01 02:57:12 AM
1 votes:

Omahawg: pfft. they watch me fondle grapefruit now in the grocery store for my own safety

*waves at big brother*


i like to hold similar size grapefruit in front of my chest, hefting them for weight from underneath as i ask random shoppers passing by, "what do ya think, huh? nice? nice, or what, huh?". because i don't know much about picking produce but i want the best for my family.


--- people need to stop hoarding seeds and just plant everywhere. when the whole country turns into a wild farm we'll see who has the laff laff.
2012-10-31 10:24:59 AM
1 votes:

MyRandomName: TV's Vinnie: Mrbogey: Oh you can best believe this will go to the USSC. Stuff like this is the meat and potatoes of USSC rulings. I personally think the read it too narrow. The decision will be interesting.

Another reason to vote for Obama. If a President Rmoney appoints a couple of mini-Scalias, we'll soon be having cameras mounted in our bathrooms to report us if we fap.

Do liberals just blindly post conjecture, even when completely wrong? THERE WAS A 4TH AMENDMENT CASE JUST THIS YEAR. god people, take 5 seconds to look up what the USSC is doing. This makes you look blindly partisan.


LOL! You actually do think the Scalia is a decent and impartial human being, don't you. That's so CUTE!
2012-10-31 08:46:50 AM
1 votes:
As one of the commenters in TFA sums it up: Trespass should equal Unreasonable Search. Period.
The Open Fields doctrine is garbage, and should be overturned. Hopefully this case will proved an avenue for that.

Set up an unwarranted camera outside my fence? Fine.
Inside my fence? Now it's my camera. Get your bacon-scented ass off my property.
2012-10-31 08:39:52 AM
1 votes:
Before you lament the rise of the police state, won't you stop to ponder the considerable tangible benefits of living in a police state?
2012-10-31 08:07:26 AM
1 votes:

fluffy2097: We are TRYING to have a circlejerk of "THEYS TAKINS OUR FREEDAMS!" here.

We don't need nor want your intelligent commentary that actually reflects the reality of the situation.


This case runs against ever moral fabric of the Constitution and the Bible, the two very texts our country was founded upon. I will not sit here idly by and watch the erosion of our inalienable rights! Under a Republican administration, this case would have been tossed by the prosecutor long before first appearance.

Wake up sheeple!
2012-10-31 07:35:00 AM
1 votes:
I have a couple of friends who used to do somewhat low-budget special effects. I'm pretty sure if I found a camera in my house, I'd call one of them to make me a butcherable baby and put on a show.

Maybe even make it a weekly series.
2012-10-31 06:37:48 AM
1 votes:

ladyfortuna: Maybe I can't move it, but I can damn well hang my panties on it so they can't see anything.

/come at me, bros-in-blue


I figure I'd just smear the lens with used toilet paper.
2012-10-31 06:21:43 AM
1 votes:
d27fcql9yjk2c0.cloudfront.net
2012-10-31 06:04:38 AM
1 votes:
Nope, video patch should be either endless loop of Team America Puke Scene, F**k YEAH!! or severely amateurish p0rn0 where the participants are uh, unsavoury, and absolutely EVERYTHING that can possibly go wrong goes wrong.
2012-10-31 05:36:51 AM
1 votes:

TV's Vinnie: Mrbogey: Oh you can best believe this will go to the USSC. Stuff like this is the meat and potatoes of USSC rulings. I personally think the read it too narrow. The decision will be interesting.

Another reason to vote for Obama. If a President Rmoney appoints a couple of mini-Scalias, we'll soon be having cameras mounted in our bathrooms to report us if we fap.


What I love is none of you pay attention to how the judges vote, nothing will change if they appoint conservative judges, it would probably be better since they are more rational than judges appointed by dem presidents.

And the way I read that is nothing is protected if you do it on property you don't own or have legal right to be there, which they haven't proven. Its basically telling their lawyers to go back and get documentation that they had a contract to be there and they will listen to arguments again.

Subby is a nervous nellie.
2012-10-31 05:21:51 AM
1 votes:
In Texas, any evidence collected in violation of a law is excluded.
Entering gated property with a no-tresspassing sign (without consent) is a violation of the law.
Therefore, Texas is the best state.
2012-10-31 05:13:19 AM
1 votes:
pfft. they watch me fondle grapefruit now in the grocery store for my own safety

*waves at big brother*
2012-10-30 11:24:05 PM
1 votes:

GAT_00: Kelo had nothing to do with a police state. I'm not joining your apples to potatoes comparison.


GAT_00: Kelo was an atrocity and Republicans will uphold any police state regulations that come before the court.

2012-10-30 10:54:36 PM
1 votes:

Mrbogey: GAT_00: And the Republicans on the USSC will stand up for personal liberty and uphold the ruling.

Uh huh....Like they did with New London? Can you explain your reasoning?


Kelo was an atrocity and Republicans will uphold any police state regulations that come before the court.
2012-10-30 10:41:58 PM
1 votes:
Solution:
static.igossip.com
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report