Cameras in Public

[beeker]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/2641418,daley-homeland-security-cameras-082619.article

Remember when all the liberals, on here, were up in arms over the cameras aimed at Central Park?

[redcap]

Public places are not private and one has no reason to assume that they have privacy there.

Last Saturday night there was a riot by over 400 here (college town that put on a major music fest) The police are searching all security camera and identifying those who cause property damage, burned thing, and threw two folks through a store window.

I am sure there are some nervous young folk around hoping they were not on Candid Camera.

[yoyo]

You can get your car bugged without a warrant now

[redcap]

If they track me I would be facing a murder charge. They would die of boredom.

[beeker]

You can get your car bugged without a warrant now

Yet something else inherited from Bush and that damned Patriot Act......

[Wiener]

Yes it is Beeker and yet we haven't lost any freedoms under either Bush or Obama, yep we are in dream land now.

[redcap]

I guess I am a little confused. I don't necessarily agree with everything in the patriot act, but I understand why so of it was needed.

But, my confusion is how does putting a gps on my car restrict my freedom. I still have the freedom to go anywhere I want to. the only thing that changes is if I am going places for illegal activity it is easier to catch me and to prove what I have been doing.

In my opinion my privacy may be compromised but unless that compromise is used to harm me there has been no harmful effects.

I have always thought that when evidence exists it does not become nonexistent just because it was discovered illegally or because someone made a mistake in handling it. Way to often guilty people go free because someone did not dot the i or cross the t.

[pbal]

"Bugged" was probably an unfortunate choice of words in the previous post. No one is being "bugged." You car is being tailed electronically. There's a big difference. It also has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.. Nor do security cameras in public places. They've been out there for decades.

[Alfred E. Neuman]

there is an application out there where you put in a cell phone number and it pinpoints your location..........

[redcap]

Yep, been there for some time. 911 centers can pinpoint your phone as long as it is turned on and the gps function is enabled. We had two die in the Omaha area because they got lost and did not have it on. They froze to death.

[WDVE]

Yep, been there for some time. 911 centers can pinpoint your phone as long as it is turned on and the gps function is enabled. We had two die in the Omaha area because they got lost and did not have it on. They froze to death.

You're correct...it has been around for quite some time at 911 centers.  First as enhanced 911 w/hardwired phone systems and many areas have the systems in place with cell phones...any emergency provider/dispatcher would not want to be without the technology.

[yoyo]

I guess I am a little confused. I don't necessarily agree with everything in the patriot act, but I understand why so of it was needed.

But, my confusion is how does putting a gps on my car restrict my freedom. I still have the freedom to go anywhere I want to. the only thing that changes is if I am going places for illegal activity it is easier to catch me and to prove what I have been doing.

In my opinion my privacy may be compromised but unless that compromise is used to harm me there has been no harmful effects.

I have always thought that when evidence exists it does not become nonexistent just because it was discovered illegally or because someone made a mistake in handling it. Way to often guilty people go free because someone did not dot the i or cross the t.

All about where you draw the line isn’t it?  

You no longer have to physically step onto somebody’s property to bug (Think I am got it correctly here) a phone yet it still requires a warrant to do so.  If you reasonably suspected somebody was growing weed somewhere, would it be that hard to get a warrant so that you could tail me electronically (Think I am got it correctly here)?

Would it be accepted if all ammunition had a serial numbers and it was linked to your name every time you purchased it?  Would there be complaints if the rifling of your fire arms was recorded and linked the owner to make it easier to track guns used in crimes?  Put GPS trackers on guns, if you use them legally you will not have a problem.
If there was suspicion or good intelligence that terrorist groups were going to use automatic assault weapons to shoot up crowds of people, would gun language have been added to the patriot act?

[pbal]

You're off the mark Yoyo. Following you in public and eavesdropping on your private conversations are two very different things. The second requires a warrant, the first, whether done visually or electronically, doesn't.

[redcap]

For many years one did not have to step on ones property to listen to phone conversations. Now one only needs a device that can pick up the radio signal of the cordless phone. Do the police need a warrent to listen to a cordless phone conversation? I do not know. I do know the thief does not.

Again, to me, what is in question is do you have the right to break the law and get away with it if the police make a mistake in how evidence is obtained or in how they handle it.

That, to me, is not a question of freedom, but only of burden of proof for the thief's misuse of freedom.

[yoyo]

Other courts ruling on this have had a different opinion (USA vs LAWRENCE MAYNARD).  People smarter than me (and more interested) will probably battle this out for a long time. 

I think in both cases the device was installed on private property which was also the main argument for expectation of privacy.