[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

Figures.

Track ordinary Americans, but not terrorist cells.

Incompetent, freedom-hating boobs.

[bamahead]

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls...



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
View past Libertarian pings here

[carolinacrazy]

What is most interesting about this, and the author IMO intentionally left it out, is this question; Did the feds in past instances have a warrant to obtain this tracking information? Is the current administration seeking to avoid the warrant requirement through assuming that we have no right to privacy? It appears this is the actual intent of this entire argument, and would not surprise me one bit if this is the current administration's push.

[j_guru]

Note to bank robbers: use pay as you go. lol

[CholeraJoe]

Conversely, cell phone records have been ruled inadmissible in court to establish an alibi since such records only establish the device’s whereabouts not its owner’s.

[FrankR]

"In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts"

I was just last year obama was talking about bringing up charges against Bush for tapping TERRORIST phones...now he wants to do it to Americans...again, this photo says everything anyone would ever want to know about barack hussein obama...the muslim.

[b4its2late]

Rush leading off with this one.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

There are many Statist Freepers that agree with Obama’s ‘no expectation of privacy’ rationale. I get that line thrown at me constantly on threads dealing with privacy issues.

[Tublecane]

Haven’t drug dealers already solved this problem with throwaways? The feds are soon going to push for limited-use cell phones to be banned, thereby closing the “Throwaway Loophole”.

[dforest]

mmmm mmmmm mmmmmm!

[anonsquared]

There is a way to get those on the left to fight this.

California should announce that if the Feds can do it Cali can do it also.

California can then track the cell phones of all the Hollywood players who claim tax residence in no tax states - Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming - and prove they spend more than 50% of their time in their California residence. Then make them pay for all the liberal nonsense they push down the throats of other taxpayers.

[Paperdoll]

GIVE ‘EM AN INCH AND THEYY’LL TAKE A MILE EVERY TIME! WATCH OUT, AMERICA!

[Carry_Okie]

For all those who thought they would stop at the PATRIOT Act.

[theBuckwheat]

Part of this rests on the claim that we, the freeborn citizens of the “land of the (used to be) free”, don’t “enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy” when we use our cell phones.

In U.S. v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976), the Supreme Court ruled that we don’t have privacy in banking because he knows that the teller could see his account when he came in to make a deposit. (!!??)

So, this is just one more dot in the long line of dots that, when connected, allow government to erode and corrode the Fourth Amendment when it comes to the unalienable right to privacy in our persons and papers.

[Sir Gawain]

It’s pretty easy. The gang members figured it out long ago. You buy burners. You make one call. You toss it. Open the next burner. Make call. Toss it.

Or you take the chip and/or battery out of your cell. There are always ways around jackboot tactics.

[theBuckwheat]

Part of this rests on the claim that we, the freeborn citizens of the “land of the (used to be) free”, don’t “enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy” when we use our cell phones.

In U.S. v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976), the Supreme Court ruled that we don’t have privacy in banking because he knows that the teller could see his account when he came in to make a deposit. (!!??)

So, this is just one more dot in the long line of dots that, when connected, allow government to erode and corrode the Fourth Amendment when it comes to the unalienable right to privacy in our persons and papers.

[McGruff]

That's ok as long as he doesn't mimic that evil George Bush.

[KoRn]

I doubt we could expect them to do this in such a way to where our privacy is respected/protected.

Any day now, I’m SURE 0lberwoman will have a rant on his show about how 0bama is listening in on the phone calls of all Americans..... /not

[anonsquared]

Obama should have no “reasonable expectation of privacy” when it comes to his birth certificate, school records, etc, since he does claim to be eligible for the highest office in the land.

[The Comedian]

You let me audit your long form birth certificate, and I'll let you audit my phone records, Kenyan.

Until then:

High Power Portable Jammer

Introducing the most sophisticated digital cell phone jammer of its class; a mobile device to help circumvent disturbances or noise from cellular phone calls - a high-power hand-held cell phone jammer with an internal, high-capacity battery, universally compatible with UMTS / 3G / CDMA / GSM / PCS networks.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.