Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn’t violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn’t tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant.
It is a dangerous decision — one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who dissented from this month’s decision refusing to reconsider the case, pointed out whose homes are not open to strangers: rich people’s. The court’s ruling, he said, means that people who protect their homes with electric gates, fences and security booths have a large protected zone of privacy around their homes. People who cannot afford such barriers have to put up with the government sneaking around at night.
Here’s a cheap way to block the GPS tracking, at least until they figure out a way around it.
HEY YOU FEDS! GET OFF MY LAWN!
What if they come onto my driveway and the security light goes off and I see it from my bedroom. I jump up grab my nightstand 9mm and run our there. They draw on me and I shoot them, since my gun is already out. Clear advantage. How many years in fed prison will I get for that shit?
I don’t like it but I have gaps in my thinking.
I agree:
1. No expectation of privacy in my driveway.
2. No expectation of privacy while driving on highway.
That leaves a gap: I do have an expectation that “no one” has a right to place anything in/on my car. Thats trespass to property.
Good to know I’m wrong on that point of law.
Just use this device: http://technologylk.com/convex-inspection-mirror-with-8-face-and-35-handle-lk-DM-8C.htm?src=froogle It will detect a GPS that the cops place under your vehicle.
I am not sure what the legalities are if you find a GPS. Is it interference with a police investigation to remove or tamper with it. Your best bet, drive to a railroad track, stop on the tracks, and dislodge the device. Drive on. The cops will think it fell off when you went over the tracks. For bonus points, put the GPS on the underside of a passing train. In any case, don’t brag about what you did.
“It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.”
Average net worth of Legislative Branch members:
1 million+
Average net worth of Executive Branch members:
1 million+
Average net worth of Judicial Branch members:
1 million+
The fox is guarding the hen house.
Cursor_
#4: Benjamin.
And wear gloves when you remove the piece of crap. Bonus points for attaching it to a rabid badger.
Some states have laws that consider your vehicle an extension of your home, that is the case where I live. I wonder if that will be taken into consideration.
Privacy in our high tech society is an illusion. Inexpensive ($68 shipped in this case), highly sophisticated tracking devices are available to anyone:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Spy-Mini-GPS-Tracking-Real-Time-Live-Vehicle-Tracker-/270613022234?pt=GPS_Devices
However, on the “I’ve got nothing to hide, so I don’t worry about it” topic:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
It’s nice to see conservative Chief Judge Kozinski defending our freedom and right to privacy from ever increasing Democrap big goverment intrusion.
That makes no legal sense. So if I put up a physical fence or shrub line…it’s now “my private” property and they can’t climb over or break in to my property to get to my car? But if I don’t have a physical fence they can just walk onto my property to get to my car?
Since when does a fence have ANY LEGAL definition to defining private vs public space legally? Just because a fence makes it HARDER to get onto your private land doesn’t have anything to do with the legality and scope of authority for public intrusion onto your land. A fence is just decoration legally speaking. If you have a 5 foot fence and I climb over it to get onto your yard, I’m not more or less guilty of intrusion than if I just stepped over a flower row. WTF!???
#9–MixedUp==I was going to comment just to the opposite: that the rap on the Ninth District was that it is the “most liberal” and “most overturned” Fed Court Jurisdiction yet here they are allowing the State to Trespass on our private property.
Either you have it completely backwards, or your effort at sarcasm is a total fail.
Looks to me like the court got it wrong but no need to read the court case to spot the logic fail since thats the way it is no matter what else.
Also worrisome that its “illegal” to put a jammer to cover your own “space.” Also worrisome that if you find unpermitted property on your car you can’t simply detach it and leave it where you find it.
Multiple intrusions on a free person going on here. Police state indeed.
Remember they hate us for our freedom.
Wait until all cars just like all phones will have GPS. The cars will need it so the miles driven by a car can be taxed. (Why not use odometers?)
@9 I’d be careful about that. The biggest backers of the police and military are the right wing conservatives. Sure they don’t want them hassling THEM (just minorities or ‘others’). But the endless call for “more police” and “tough on crime” laws comes just as much (or more) from the right.
Keep in mind the left wants to “protect” me via law…and the right wants to “control” me via law.
The left wants the EPA to control my air (for my health) and the right wants the government to tell me what I can drugs I can legally use, who I can marry, when I can die (they get to kill me via death penalty but I can’t end my own life at my choosing via euthanasia), they decide if my wife can have an abortion…and my favorite, the right thinks the government should be able to have a list on some bureaucrats desk of government allowed sexual positions you and your (legal age) partner(s) can engage in your own house in the middle of the night with your curtains drawn (Lawrence v Texas). Think about that. The Republican party supported the idea that government law can be used to control your LITERAL SEX life to the actual control of a list of allowable government santioned sexual positions. There is NO MORE POSSIBLE THEORETICAL control of our lives than the very physical control of our lives by government than our actual bodies in our own homes in private. That was just F**KING nuts that they thought any law should potentially cover that. I get conservatives think the government should never regulate business/commerce, but they have NO problems regulating my marriage, life/death, sex life, and actual body…and remember Terri Shivo? The right had no problem with the government coming in and telling a family what they can do with a life decision just because they didn’t like what the husband (legally) wanted.
So when you’re looking out for the “grab” of your privacy and freedom, look left AND right before crossing the metaphorical street.
Ha, Ha. So, Glass Half Full at Post #14==was your glass half full? And assuming so, then at #15–your glass become more than half full?
You are starting to throw a chicken little fit there though. To their “credit” in Shivo–other family members wanted government intrusion, not like the midnight sex scenario.
And regulating the environment for clean air is something we should all want the government to do for us as we can’t do it by ourselves: The Freedom to Breath Clean Air. Something the Chinese will start agitating for soon.
So, yes, look both ways but not everything in either direction is automatically bad.
#9–Mextli==I apologize. I failed to remember Judge Kozinkski was dissenting, so your characterization is correct. Its the rest of the liberal court members that is letting us down.
Why worry?
Fastrak.
Navistar in every GM car.
Remote auto shutdown electonics.
Cellphones with GPS.
RF IDs in your underwear and jeans.
Credit card location abilities.
Store bargain card location and purchase tracking abilities.
Satellite cameras showing your backyard to anyone.
Fucking google shit everywhere. (I avoid using anything google)
ISP subpoenas.
Passports with RF IDs inside them.
But, remember, it’s illegal to photograph cops on the sidewalk in many states.
#11 bobo
He wrote the dissenting opinion.
RTFA
#17 bobbo
Accepted and I owe you one as well for #19 and replying without reading.
If this gets any nicer I will puke