|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
I think this is bad news. This basically skips the judicial process and allows the assassination of a citizen without trial. http://now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-is-first-drone-target-on-us-soilThe drone war has come home to America. Wanted fugitive Christopher Dorner, the homicidal former cop currently at war with the LAPD, has become the first known human target for airborne drones on U.S. soil. Their use was confirmed by Customs and Border Patrol spokesman Ralph DeSio, who revealed the government's fear that Dorner will make a dash for the Mexican border. The fugitive has already killed three people, according to police, and has a $1 million bounty on his head. Dorner, who has military training, is believed to be hiding in the wilderness of California's San Bernardino Mountains, where locating him without air support may be all but impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Hmm, it says the use of drones. Are they using them strictly for reconnaissance or are they going to fire at him? The "article" mentions it may be nearly impossible to spot him without air support. If it's reconnaissance only, then it's a non-issue to me... same as a helicopter. If they're planning on firing on him, then that is an entirely different, unacceptable story.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,812
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,812 |
I think it was a poorly worded topic title, more as a question. I don't see any way they can be used for more than recon unless we are deciding to throw away "due process" as defined in the constitution. On the other hand, with the seemingly daily attacks on our constitutional rights, who knows anymore? 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
I was my impression that they are already using drones for recon. Maybe I took this article the wrong way, but I wouldnt be surprised in the least if it happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Air support is fine ....... but if they use these things on US soil, against a US citizen, to kill said citizen, then we should revolt immediately.
If they are merely using the drones to provide surveillance on an area to be followed up by police, then that would be OK.
If a local police force, or even a state or domestic federal agency, subject to judicial oversight, were in control of such a device that could be used as a weapon, then maybe that might be OK ..... but for the federal government to simply decide that they will kill off a US citizen without any judicial review would be unacceptable.
And I say this as someone who hopes that this lunatic pulls a gun on 40 police and gets torn to pieces in a hail of bullets.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
JC..
Ahhh yes, leave it to the media to be vague allow emotions to run.
Regardless of evidence and perceptions, he still has his 6th Amendemnt, Right to a fair trial, and civilian authories don't have access to armed drones.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
The use of Drones is old news, and they have never been used on US soil to kill anyone........
The person starting this thread is being less then honest via a poorly worded title.
BTTB
BTTB
AKA Upbeat Dawg
Can't believe I am in a group that is comprised of the best NOT just fans but people on the planet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
The use of Drones is old news, and they have never been used on US soil to kill anyone........
The person starting this thread is being less then honest via a poorly worded title.
BTTB
thus the "1st" and the "?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
(CBS News) - Unmanned aerial vehicles, a key weapon in the hunt for terrorists overseas, are coming to America. In February, President Barack Obama signed m bill that opens U.S. airspace to thousands of these unmanned aircraft.
The drones come in just about any size you want - as large as a passenger plane - or as small as a hummingbird.
"There's no stopping this technology," said Peter Singer, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and perhaps the country's foremost authority on drones. "Anybody who thinks they can put this genie back in the box - that's silliness."
Singer watched them dramatically alter the American battlefield overseas, and says they're about to become the next big thing at home.
"They're technologies that not only give you capabilities that you couldn't have imagined a generation earlier," Singer said. "But they're also technologies that cause questions that you weren't asking yourself a generation earlier."
Sparsely populated Lakota, N.D., is the first known site where a drone was used domestically to help arrest a U.S. citizen. It was the case of Rodney Brossart, a rancher accused of refusing to return a herd of cows that wandered onto his land. When police tried to move in, the family allegedly greeted them with loaded weapons.
Sgt. Bill Macki, who runs the SWAT team in nearby Grand Forks, called in the reinforcements: a Department of Homeland Security Predator drone - a massive aircraft that until now most people associate with Hellfire missiles and strikes against terrorists.
"I can't really get into what the dispute was over," Macki said. "What I can tell you is the SWAT team wasn't there over a property dispute. The SWAT team was called out to render assistance reference to armed subjects. ... And using the unmanned aerial vehicle seemed appropriate in this instance."
Brossart's lawyer is looking at challenging the drone use. It's a potential test case for the country, because the rest of the country's getting a lot more of them. Everyone wants an eye in the sky: real estate agents to view properties; farmers to find thirsty crops; energy companies to build pipelines; local police departments want to launch neighborhood surveillance flights, or find hard to catch criminals.
Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, thinks the FAA was dragging its feet on allowing domestic drones. "No question about it. And that's why we acted," Mica said. The committee just passed legislation that the FAA estimates will put 10,000 drones in the sky by 2017.
Singer expressed concerns over safety, saying that while legislation did put in place rules to prevent drones from colliding with passenger planes, it did little to clarify who can operate them and who it can watch.
"That drone is not just picking up information on what's happening at that specific scene, it's picking up everything else that's going on," Singer said. "Basically it's recording footage from a lot of different people that it didn't have their approval to record footage.
Should people be worried that Big Brother is coming to watch them? "Well, there's always that concern," Mica said. "But there are means of tracking folks through cell phones, their computer usage. We live in a new age."
Ninety percent of the military's small drones are made at AeroVironment. CBS News needed clearance from the Defense Department to enter the factory floor. The next big market for AeroVironment? Small drones for local police.
"The average person probably doesn't even realize that these small, back-packable systems are used as extensively as they have been," said AeroVironment vice president Steve Gitlin.
Gitlin gave CBS News a tour, and rare, in-field demonstration. One drone, the Raven is four feet wide. What it likes in size, it makes up for in camera quality.
"People are going to use it for both good and bad," Singer said. "It's going to raise incredible new opportunities but also new challenges."
Singer believes that for every local police department trying to keep people safe, a less well-intentioned operator may be tempted to use drones for no good. And right now, there's little preventing either side from doing whatever they want.
"Like it or not, unmanned systems are the future," Singer said. "Unfortunately we're not ready for them - everything from our policy to our laws to the deep, deep ethical questions."
---------------------
This piece is from last April..... But there are many others....
BTTB
AKA Upbeat Dawg
Can't believe I am in a group that is comprised of the best NOT just fans but people on the planet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The use of Drones is old news, and they have never been used on US soil to kill anyone........
Therefore they never will be? Problem solved I guess... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276 |
As long as he doesn't get a missile fired at him I don't see the harm. They use helicopters and planes for recon on fugitives already. Don't worry about the hype. No one is going to shoot missiles at you 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
As long as he doesn't get a missile fired at him I don't see the harm. They use helicopters and planes for recon on fugitives already.
That's pretty much my take on it ... they already do this with manned-aircraft, and they haven't fired any missiles at anybody. So the government actually decides to save a buck by going with smaller, unmanned planes and now people have an issue with it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
They say a man that kills a cop is a dead man walking, so chances are, even if drones weren't used, this guy probably wouldn't see due process anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
..... but for the federal government to simply decide that they will kill off a US citizen without any judicial review would be unacceptable.
What differentiates this case from Anwar al-Awlaki?
When we killed him, most of the board, you included, was OK with it ... and he didn't even kill anyone. This guy has a string of bodies on him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Quote:
Quote:
..... but for the federal government to simply decide that they will kill off a US citizen without any judicial review would be unacceptable.
What differentiates this case from Anwar al-Awlaki?
When we killed him, most of the board, you included, was OK with it ... and he didn't even kill anyone. This guy has a string of bodies on him.
Not a US citizen, on US soil, protected by the Constitution. He is a leader of an enemy of the US, an organization which had declared war on the US.
You are trying to create moral equivalence where none exists.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,076
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,076 |
I kinda read it to mean they were going to use it for Recon.
Did I read that wrong?
Anyway, if it's recon, whats the difference between a drone or a helicopter?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
He was an American citizen I believe.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882 |
Quote:
They say a man that kills a cop is a dead man walking, so chances are, even if drones weren't used, this guy probably wouldn't see due process anyway.
Exactly. No matter what, this guy will get captured via a firefight which will result in his death. It's just the way things work.
I'm not saying it's then ok to start dropping bombs on his arse....but, he'll most likely not see a courtroom anyway.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif) “...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Yeah, dual US and Yemeni.
I forgot about that.
That troubles me as well ...... though he was actively working against the US, and our military in what had become a military conflict between the US and the organization he then led. I can easier excuse something like that than an attack on a citizen on US territory.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Count me as one that does not want drone use.
Can you imagine having tens or hundreds of these on patrol in your city.
This country moves further and further from what our forefathers intended seemingly daily.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
I can see more and more drones being used in ordinary local police patrols as opposed to having officers trying to patrol an entire city on foot, or by car. When it becomes cost effective, you can bet that a department somewhere will start using the technology.
A fire department could also benefit with reduced costs from false alarms. Imagine being able to patrol a city with a couple of drones, able to immediately respond to a fire alarm. The fore department could immediately get a report of the actual situation, instead of calling out 5 trucks for a false alarm.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
Quote:
Count me as one that does not want drone use.
Can you imagine having tens or hundreds of these on patrol in your city.
This country moves further and further from what our forefathers intended seemingly daily.
It's a scary thought.
I don't mind them in certain spots, if they are looking for a terrorist, but to have them in every neighborhood, people would be terrified to go outside.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
They might be useful on the borders.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
I don't mind them in certain spots, if they are looking for a terrorist, but to have them in every neighborhood, people would be terrified to go outside.
if they were only equipped with cameras, then people wouldn't be terrified to go outside.
i do not want to get to that point in our society as I think it is crazy to even think about getting into that much of a controlled state (imagine getting a ticket EVERY time you speed or jaywalk, etc.). but, we do seem to be moving in that direction.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
(imagine getting a ticket EVERY time you speed or jaywalk, etc.).
But if you don't break the law, then you don't have anything to worry about.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641 |
OK, this HAS to be set straight here. The title of this thread is very misleading.
Nowhere did they say that there's going to be an MQ-1 or MQ-9 with loaded hellfires waiting to blow this guy into smitherines.
Look, UAVs can fly longer and have much better vision and detection than people in a helicopter. That's what I'm sure they're using this for, but the media is going all nutso with it and so are a few of the people on this thread.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
I agree.
It is par for the course with recent events though, especially under the current administration.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
As long as he doesn't get a missile fired at him I don't see the harm. They use helicopters and planes for recon on fugitives already.
That's pretty much my take on it ... they already do this with manned-aircraft, and they haven't fired any missiles at anybody. So the government actually decides to save a buck by going with smaller, unmanned planes and now people have an issue with it?
Except that they're doing this without a warrant. Who's to say that they do this without the consent of the person's land who is being searched?
This country is doomed folks. We've surrendered everything that this country was founded on for the flimsiest of reasons.
That so many Americans accept this would have bothered me at one time but it no longer does. Anymore, I care less and less with each new attempt to infringe upon my inherent freedoms by the government. The reason for my login name is sadly becoming more real to me by the day and I fear that it could be worse than I had initially felt it had to be before the country returned to it's founding principles. I no longer think that it will ever return there.
Constitutionally-conscious Americans in 2013 to Ben Franklin: We're sorry to inform you Mr. Franklin that we could not keep the republic. Your efforts and those of your countrymen was all in vain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
where does it say that they are doing it without a warrant?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
where does it say that they are doing it without a warrant?
So, are you contending that they are using drones only to search for the suspect in public property and are not capable of viewing anything on someone else's property who hasn't been served with a warrant. Or does the warrant cover the entire boundary of the United States and any and all places whether they are public or private property?
I find it not only disturbing and troubling but I find it sinister to the core.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641 |
There is at least one Supreme Court case I believe discussing plain view where you don't need a warrant to look onto someone's property from an aerial vehicle. It's been around.
Now, if they were using some type of advanced sensor on a UAV to search through walls or ceilings then, yes, they would need a warrant.
Edit: the court case is Florida v. Riley.
Last edited by dawglover05; 02/12/13 12:44 AM.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
There is at least one Supreme Court case I believe discussing plain view where you don't need a warrant to look onto someone's property from an aerial vehicle. It's been around.
Now, if they were using some type of advanced sensor on a UAV to search through walls or ceilings then, yes, they would need a warrant.
Edit: the court case is Florida v. Riley.
The Supreme Court? They declared Obamacare constitutional as a tax when the lawyers arguing for the law weren't even making that argument.
I don't even dare to bring up Dredd Scott case.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
google maps is searching your home right now  seriously, I don't like where this can lead, but you were suggesting it was sinister now (no warrants) and that does not seem to be the case.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
where does it say that they are doing it without a warrant?
So, are you contending that they are using drones only to search for the suspect in public property and are not capable of viewing anything on someone else's property who hasn't been served with a warrant. Or does the warrant cover the entire boundary of the United States and any and all places whether they are public or private property?
I find it not only disturbing and troubling but I find it sinister to the core.
Sorry but looking in on your yard from the sky is no different than me standing at your property line. Like it or not it's legal and there's nothing you can do.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Sorry but looking in on your yard from the sky is no different than me standing at your property line. Like it or not it's legal and there's nothing you can do.
Yea, well if I have 5 acres and a privacy fence, you can't.. but they still can. I can honestly say that I'm a bit shocked at the number of people who are not the least bit concerned about this.... I am also surprised at the number of people who seem to be more concerned about the accuracy of the thread title than the issue...
I don't consider myself a tin foil hat kind of guy but the fact that they estimate that there will be thousands of these things in the sky in the not too distant future.... and they are virtually unrestricted in their ability to see anything and everything that goes on on your property, that they have very sensitive video equipment and what they see can and likely will be recorded for all time is a bit unnerving... It's not just unnerving what is happening now because I will admit, it's fairly benign... I mean what are they going to see? Some folks having sex on the deck or growing pot in the back of their yard? What is more unnerving is where it goes from here....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,641 |
Quote:
Quote:
There is at least one Supreme Court case I believe discussing plain view where you don't need a warrant to look onto someone's property from an aerial vehicle. It's been around.
Now, if they were using some type of advanced sensor on a UAV to search through walls or ceilings then, yes, they would need a warrant.
Edit: the court case is Florida v. Riley.
The Supreme Court? They declared Obamacare constitutional as a tax when the lawyers arguing for the law weren't even making that argument.
I don't even dare to bring up Dredd Scott case.
Yeah, because Dredd Scott wasn't overruled...
But you're skewing your own point. The ability of law enforcement to look into your yard from above has been around for a while.
If non-state actors have a legal right to view your yard from the air space, so does the government.
I'm not arguing ideology with you. I'm just stating the facts.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Sorry but looking in on your yard from the sky is no different than me standing at your property line. Like it or not it's legal and there's nothing you can do.
Yea, well if I have 5 acres and a privacy fence, you can't.. but they still can. I can honestly say that I'm a bit shocked at the number of people who are not the least bit concerned about this.... I am also surprised at the number of people who seem to be more concerned about the accuracy of the thread title than the issue...
I don't consider myself a tin foil hat kind of guy but the fact that they estimate that there will be thousands of these things in the sky in the not too distant future.... and they are virtually unrestricted in their ability to see anything and everything that goes on on your property, that they have very sensitive video equipment and what they see can and likely will be recorded for all time is a bit unnerving... It's not just unnerving what is happening now because I will admit, it's fairly benign... I mean what are they going to see? Some folks having sex on the deck or growing pot in the back of their yard? What is more unnerving is where it goes from here....
Maybe because being in IT, I already see technology that will most definitely erode any sense of privacy outdoors, if it isn't already. And I have never really expected full privacy when I am in my yard, it was always more of an implied courtesy from passers-by and neighbors rather than a right.
A set of binoculars and I can see most of your 5 acres. Most cities have restrictions on fence height and at 6'2" I can see over most fences rather easily if I choose too.
I don't think the laws of privacy include your yard, and never have. They refer to inside your house.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
A set of binoculars and I can see most of your 5 acres.
Which, in a lot of states, is illegal.
Quote:
Most cities have restrictions on fence height and at 6'2" I can see over most fences rather easily if I choose too.
Which in a lot of states, is also illegal. So I will plant trees and bushes inside my fence that grow to at least 8'... you seem to be missing the point.
If I'm in my backyard, around which I have a 6' privacy fence and bushes, if you are using binoculars or standing on your tippy toes or a ladder to look at me... in a lot of states, that's illegal under a variety of peeping tom laws.. I'm not going to get into debating actual laws because each state varies but in many states, if you have the expectation of privacy, then you looking, is illegal.
Quote:
Maybe because being in IT, I already see technology that will most definitely erode any sense of privacy outdoors, if it isn't already.
What we can do and what we should do are 2 different things. I will openly admit that technology is 10 years ahead of our laws and it's not going to catch up because technology keeps moving faster and government and laws.. well no chance they can keep up.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
You left out these parts.  "And I have never really expected full privacy when I am in my yard, it was always more of an implied courtesy from passers-by and neighbors rather than a right." and "I don't think the laws of privacy include your yard, and never have. They refer to inside your house. " The Fourth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has said, “the zone of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment is most clearly defined when bounded by the unambiguous physical dimensions of an individual’s home". Therefore, the Fourth Amendment has drawn a firm line at the entrance to the house.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
google maps is searching your home right now
seriously, I don't like where this can lead, but you were suggesting it was sinister now (no warrants) and that does not seem to be the case.
Oh, it does seem to be the case.
And as for Google Maps, nothing on Google Maps is live and doesn't have someone controlling the mechanism. If you're viewing something on street view, it's nothing that would not be viewable publicly at that instant anyway.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... 1st Drone strike on US soil?
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)