Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1 Police Given Direct Line To Cell Phone Searches 
    PORCUS STAPHUS ADMIN Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    54,313
    DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – Think about all the personal information we keep in our cell phones: It’s something to consider after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ruled it is now legal for police to search cell phones without a warrant.

    Former Dallas FBI Agent Danny Defenbaugh said the ruling gives law enforcement a leg up. “I think not only will it help them, but it could be life saving,” said the former Special Agent, who was based in Dallas.

    The decision stems from an Indiana case where police arrested a man for dealing drugs. An officer searched the suspect’s cell phone without warrant.

    The judge in the appeal case, Judge Richard Posner, agreed that the officer had to search the phone immediately or risk losing valuable evidence. Judge Posner ruled it was a matter of urgency, arguing it was possible for an accomplice to wipe the phone clean using a computer or other remote device.

    Defenbaugh says the ruling takes into account exigent or time-sensitive circumstances that could be life saving in more urgent cases, such as child abduction. ”If the child is alive and you’re only minutes behind, that could be critical to recovering that child alive,” added Defenbaugh.

    Judge Posner ruled that the search was legal because the officer conducted a limited search and only looked for phone numbers associated with the alleged drug deal. The judge argued it was similar to flipping through a diary to search for basic information such as addresses and phone numbers.

    Paul Coggins is the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Coggins says the court’s ruling pushes the envelope on privacy issues and wonders if it opens the door to more extensive searches down the road. “Does that mean officers now have the right to search through your phone, search through your search history, your photographs, your e-mails and the rest, because it could all be wiped clean,” Coggins asked.

    Many critics are asking the same question. They call the ruling an invasion of privacy that far outweighs the needs of law enforcement.

    Both Defenbaugh and Coggins agree that the case is likely to go to the U.S. Supreme court.
    http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/03/06/p...hone-searches/


    Last edited by Rockntractor; 03-08-2012 at 02:33 AM.

    Revelation 15:1
    And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    No you're deviating from the party line here. This type of this is okay because it's the police doing it to put people in jail instead of giving health care or something evil like that.

    If you've got nothing to hide you should have no problem with this. After all, the FBI supports it.

    Conservatives know as a fact that the government is absolutely incapable, inefficient, corrupt, and abuse their power.....EXCEPT when it's police work or 'national security'. In those cases they are right 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    PORCUS STAPHUS ADMIN Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    54,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    No you're deviating from the party line here. This type of this is okay because it's the police doing it to put people in jail instead of giving health care or something evil like that.

    If you've got nothing to hide you should have no problem with this. After all, the FBI supports it.

    Conservatives know as a fact that the government is absolutely incapable, inefficient, corrupt, and abuse their power.....EXCEPT when it's police work or 'national security'. In those cases they are right 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time.
    What party line, I'm a libertarian.

    Revelation 15:1
    And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Apache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Tree rats are watching you
    Posts
    7,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    .
    those evil cons...
    Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
    Ronald Reagan

    We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
    Ronald Reagan

    R.I.P. Crockspot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    22,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    No you're deviating from the party line here. This type of this is okay because it's the police doing it to put people in jail instead of giving health care or something evil like that.

    If you've got nothing to hide you should have no problem with this. After all, the FBI supports it.

    Conservatives know as a fact that the government is absolutely incapable, inefficient, corrupt, and abuse their power.....EXCEPT when it's police work or 'national security'. In those cases they are right 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time.
    Uh, no dick face. See, this is where your ilk differs from actual conservatism. See, if it looks like tyranny, we don't like it. And unlike your ilk, we speak out even if it's someone we basically agree with doing it. Case in point, Bush and the prescription drug entitlement. Many, many conservatives voiced their displeasure. However, you and your ilk jump on every bandwagon that comes your way and you back it because to you, the ends justifies the means.

    That said, speaking as a member of the law enforcement community, this goes too far.
    Leftism is a bottomless pit of absurdity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    PORCUS STAPHUS ADMIN Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    54,313
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    Uh, no dick face. See, this is where your ilk differs from actual conservatism. See, if it looks like tyranny, we don't like it. And unlike your ilk, we speak out even if it's someone we basically agree with doing it. Case in point, Bush and the prescription drug entitlement. Many, many conservatives voiced their displeasure. However, you and your ilk jump on every bandwagon that comes your way and you back it because to you, the ends justifies the means.

    That said, speaking as a member of the law enforcement community, this goes too far.
    Well said!

    Revelation 15:1
    And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    PORCUS STAPHUS ADMIN Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    54,313
    This is one thing liberals fail to understand, conservatives are for the individual while they take the uniqueness of each of us away and pack us into categories or groups whether we fit or not.

    Revelation 15:1
    And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    What party line, I'm a libertarian.
    A libertarian who supports Romney? hahaha nice one
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    CU Royalty JB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    8,444
    How is this any different from what cops already do after you've been cuffed and Mirandized? Don't they search your person, your car, rifle your pockets, etc? Beyond just a safety search.

    OT but if you really care about what is happening with your phone, data and privacy, get outraged at CarrierIQ.
    Be Not Afraid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    PORCUS STAPHUS ADMIN Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    54,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    A libertarian who supports Romney? hahaha nice one
    I will support whoever is the alternative to Obama come November, that will likely be Romney. At present I support Santorum.

    Revelation 15:1
    And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •