Another assault on our privacy from the 9th Circuit

[Guest]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the 9th Circuit used to be where the 'looney left' decision came from...

Get this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599201315000

In short, the government doesn't need a warrant to attach a GPS device to your car and track your movements.

This is OUTRAGEOUS.

I was alerted to this via Slashdot. Here are a couple of the comments in response to the story:


So then, it must also be legal for me to put one of these devices on my wife's car, or on the local squad cars, without their knowledge? Why do different rules apply to government employees than apply to the rest of us?



U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has also ruled that a warrant is required. Reported [slashdot.org] less than 20 days ago.

This decision is bound for the SCOTUS because you can not have different laws in one part of the country as compared to another part due to the Equal Protection Clause.

The Ninth is the most over-ruled circuit in the entire country. Stay tuned.


This is another example of trampling on our right like warrantless wiretapping. In this case, there's no "ticking time bomb" excuse since they have to know where your vehicle is in order to attach the device and 'tracking your movements' inherently takes time.

[Guest]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the 9th Circuit used to be where the 'looney left' decision came from...

Get this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599201315000

In short, the government doesn't need a warrant to attach a GPS device to your car and track your movements.

This is OUTRAGEOUS.

I was alerted to this via Slashdot. Here are a couple of the comments in response to the story:





This is another example of trampling on our right like warrantless wiretapping. In this case, there's no "ticking time bomb" excuse since they have to know where your vehicle is in order to attach the device and 'tracking your movements' inherently takes time.

I always fall back on IF YOUR NOT DOING SOMETHING WRONG THEN WHY WORRY ABOUT IT.

I am not paranoid about BIG BROTHER WATCHING ME. If they watch me, it would be a boring watch. Now if they attach a GPS on someones car, it is most likely because they suspect the owner of wrong doing and use this tool to catch the law breaker.

In these times of THE BAD GUYS ARE PROTECTED MORE THAN THE GOOD GUY, I say go for it. Like Bait cars, go get-um. Like Police Officers posing as crooks/hookers/fences, to help catch the guilty, go get-um.

[Guest]

Lou, as politely as I can say it, you could NOT be more wrong.

We are innocent until proven guilty and the Constitution is VERY clear on search and seizure in the Fourth Ammendment:


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.


It's none of the government's BUSINESS where I go unless they have a warrant. If I can't attach a GPS to my (now ex-) wife's car to track her movement because it's an invasion of privacy, why can the government do it?

Now, if they have a warrant - fine, no problem.

[Guest]

Lou, as politely as I can say it, you could NOT be more wrong.

We are innocent until proven guilty and the Constitution is VERY clear on search and seizure in the Fourth Ammendment:



It's none of the government's BUSINESS where I go unless they have a warrant. If I can't attach a GPS to my (now ex-) wife's car to track her movement because it's an invasion of privacy, why can the government do it?

Now, if they have a warrant - fine, no problem.

I'm sure your right, I just keep my nose clean and am not going to let paranoia about BIG BROTHER run my life. As a matter of fact, I would like to see more monitoring of suspicious activity. I think the Government gives too many freedoms to known criminals.

[Guest]

What would America's founders think of this?

[Guest]

This is going before the Supreme Court so it can be reversed as are many, many decisions by the 9th Circuit; isn't it?

[Guest]

Just wonder how many people have OnStar. That's pretty much the same thing, except you're paying someone to track you.

[Guest]

The Supremes will hopefully overturn this liberal idiocy and assault on our Constitution.

But to your point getdul981. A cellphone can be a tracking device if the police get a warrant and use it for a Constitutional and legal purpose. They can use your telephone call records and pinpoint locations based on cell towers your phone uses. A GPS can be a tracking device.

I watched a case on Court TV a few years back when a woman's EZ Pass records were subpoenaed and used to prove she driven into a certain state the night her husband was murdered.

Did you know all "modern" vehicles are equipped with a device called an vehicle speed sensor or VSS that gathers information about the rotation of your wheels? It is used for anti-lock braking systems. The police can use the info from the VSS to tell the speed you were traveling at impact if your car is in an accident.

My daughter works for a utility locating company in Baltimore. The company uses, not only GPS devices on all vehicles, they use cameras inside the vehicles to record the drivers and a camera shooting footage in the front and back of the vehicle.

We are being tracked with this forum with the Google Ad thingies in a sense. It is the subtle erosion of our liberties and freedoms that makes people gradual seem to accept that it is okay for the police come on your private property and put a a tracking devise on your personal property without a warrant.

It's that little probable cause thing that is the stickler. I remember a while back, one of my first posts in political was a reply about our rights being taken away and how shocked I was to watch COPS and see searches of vehicles without warrants and people put in handcuffs while the police searched your vehicle without putting you under arrest.

djplong was the first to say how that was okay and didn't bother him. That snowball effect folks. It is like a law of gravity. You can't see it but it is there all the same.

Big Brother is watching us that is why it is so very important to assure our Constitutional rights are protected and upheld.

[Guest]

Just to clarify, I said *if they have a warrant*, I have no problem. That's what's in the Constitution - they have to have a warrant and probable cause. They can't just go on a fishing trip. That's the way it's been since the 1780s - at least in theory. I most certainly DO have a problem with a government agency attaching something to my car without a warrant OR my express permission (in this case a GPS).

Just for the record, I *do* have an EZ-Pass in my car. HOWEVER - if the cops want to use any information from that in a case, they have to get a warrant and present it to NH's Department of Transportation.

[Guest]

it is really called the 9th circus

[Guest]

dp, It is still the 'loony left'. Unfortunately both parties have worked to increase the power of the Federal Government and its control of our lives. This decision and Obamacare are simply two of the latest manifestations of trend. The rights of the States and the individual have been under attack for a long time.

[Guest]

What is the ninth circuit? Is it a court jurisdiction area? Is it a publication?

I know. I am in here and showing my stupidity.

Everytime I see this thread come up I wonder what the ninth circuit is.


Just added. I looked it up on Wikipedia. It is an area of states all under one court of appeals? The area is based in California...which already tells me SOMETHING. lol

[Guest]

That is a good question Gracie. I'll try to answer and please, someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Look at it like a pyramid with the the US Supreme Court, the highest court in the federal judicial system, being at the very top. Then comes the US Courts of Appeals and the US District Courts on the next level.

Beneath the US Supreme Court there are 94 federal judicial districts. There is at least one district in each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.

The federal judicial courts are divided into two levels of federal courts. These courts are the trial courts (for civil and criminal cases) and the appellate courts. There's also US bankruptcy courts and others but I won't go into that now.

The 94 appellate courts districts are organized into 12 regional circuits. The court of appeals hears appeals on cases from their respective district courts.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals covers the states of Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, California and Arizona. If you have an appeal on a federal district case in any of these states, it goes to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Ohio is part of the sixth circuit on the federal level. And my home state of Virginia is in the fourth circuit.

Under this you have your state court systems and then other lower courts like magistrate courts or whatever system is set by individual states and jurisdictions with that state.