Obama Administration: We Need Warrantless Tracking of You By Cell-Phone Signal, and There's No Fourth Amendment Right to Be Free of Government Tracking

Unbelievable.

Truly, unbelievable.

Note that he seeks warrantless access to cell-tower triangulation which pinpoints your every move.

I have no problem with getting this information with a warrant.

But warrantless? He thinks the government should be able to compel a service provider to turn over its records of your every movement, as figured (within 50 meters, and surely that will only get more precise) by triangulation, with no warrant whatsoever?

Just because a government investigator wants that information?

Bear in mind this is the same crew that screams about the Patriot Act -- and now they want to follow every citizen in real-time without a warrant?

Are you kidding me?

I have a right to not have my property rifled through, but I have no right to expect I can walk around freely without constant government monitoring? That's a right I don't have?

Thanks to Curtis, with more here.

That site notes that Barack Obama was, supposedly, a constitutional law lecturer at one time. (I say "supposedly" just because the gig was set up, I'm sure, by his friends in high places, and I doubt he was actually talking about the real American Constitution much, except inadvertently.)

Posted by: Ace at 04:42 PM



Comments

1 Yeah, I find this appalling.

What's so onerous about requesting a warrant?

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 04:45 PM (sey23)

2 Screw you, I won.

Posted by: Barry Hussein Dunham Soetero Obama at February 12, 2010 04:46 PM (DrWcr)

3 As long as they aren't tracking terrorists calls, we're good.
'Cause that would be wrong.

Posted by: Every single hypocritical leftard on the planet at February 12, 2010 04:46 PM (tWf3S)

4 There's not enough duct tape in the world to keep my head attached to my shoulders. Where are all the squealing libtards who always accused Boooshitler of eavesdropping on all their calls?

Hey, Barry. Are your goons monitoring the blogs? Yeah, I thought so. Bite me.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 04:47 PM (UOM48)

5 Step 2:

All your IP addresses are belong to us.

Posted by: Barack, Lord of the Flyswatters at February 12, 2010 04:48 PM (AZGON)

6 Any sort of hack that can foil this type of thing?

Posted by: lauraw at February 12, 2010 04:48 PM (GgWdw)

7 Wasn't there something in the news a few years ago about NSA warrantless wiretapping of AQ phone calls ? Oh wait, they just looked for calls from known terrorist cell numbers didn't actually listen to anything. But that was the end of the world cause BOOSH ! Darth Cheney ! Rumsfeld ! eleventy !!11!! Takin our liberties man ! Police State !! Where's my bong ?

Posted by: Wm. Murderface at February 12, 2010 04:49 PM (pZEar)

8 I can't even say I'm surprised because NOTHING this clown does surprises me anymore.

Posted by: Jewells at February 12, 2010 04:49 PM (l/N7H)

9 His friends in high places ? Do you think SOROS might have been behind it ?

Posted by: Noah at February 12, 2010 04:49 PM (mhD2v)

10 This sounds reasonable in this time of economic woes, and terrorism.

Posted by: John Smith at February 12, 2010 04:49 PM (q177U)

11 @6
Any sort of hack that can foil this type of thing?

Pay as you go. Pick up a new phone every month. Also, turning off you phone works.

Register your phone in a different name...

Posted by: Mike H at February 12, 2010 04:51 PM (PWj+8)

12 Are they even pretending this is part of the War on Terror?

In the case that's before the Third Circuit on Friday, the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, said it needed
historical (meaning stored, not future) phone location information
because a set of suspects "use their wireless telephones to arrange
meetings and transactions in furtherance of their drug trafficking
activities.

Looks like no. They just want convenience for the sake of convenience. I'll go on living without a cell phone, thank you very much.

Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 04:51 PM (Xsi7M)

13 Damn those penumbrae.

Where are they when you need them?

Posted by: William O. Douglas at February 12, 2010 04:51 PM (xmjMj)

14
"6
Any sort of hack that can foil this type of thing?"

Take the battery out.



Posted by: right at February 12, 2010 04:52 PM (EquV1)

15 The only way to defeat this is to pull the battery out of your phone. Even with your phone turned off, Obambi and his gubermint goons will still be able to track your whereabouts.

Posted by: bound4er at February 12, 2010 04:53 PM (RjUC6)

16 I don't carry a cell though I have and might again.Tracking me would be pretty boring but I welcome them to do iit.

Posted by: steevy at February 12, 2010 04:53 PM (H89UI)

17 Jack booted goose stepping natzi pricks. This really is off the charts. Can't wait to hear some of the bleeding heart liberal fucksticks try to defend this horseshit. DingleBarry Ovomit is nothing but a tin horned tyrant.

Posted by: Sparky at February 12, 2010 04:53 PM (r0u40)

18 "That site notes that Barack Obama was, supposedly, a constitutional law lecturer at one time. "
Can you say, read my lips - (ultimate, to date) affirmative action (POS)

Posted by: Barrett at February 12, 2010 04:54 PM (ucq49)

19 SQUEEEEEEEEEEALLL!!!
This is just the most awesomest idea EVER!!! I may have simply thought President Obama was smart before but now, OMG, is it possible to love this man any more than I already do?
See, you silly faux conservatives? THIS is what a real President does.

Posted by: Andi with a ¢¾ over the i at February 12, 2010 04:54 PM (IHbof)

20 At least we, the consumer, are paying both parties to do this, both the phone provider and the government get paid by us.

I dunno. May just go land line and email.

Posted by: rawmuse at February 12, 2010 04:55 PM (WWB6x)

21 It's about time for Lord Cheney to make another statement about The Jug-Eared Fuckstick.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 04:55 PM (UOM48)

22 Hey! Who took my heart off??
I HAD A HEART ON, DAMMIT, AND I WANT IT BACK!!!

Posted by: Andi with a heart, not a ¢¾, over the i at February 12, 2010 04:55 PM (wWwJR)

23 As a lifelong Republican who voted for McCain, I would like to know why nobody complained when Bush tried the exact same thing.

Posted by: John Smith at February 12, 2010 04:56 PM (Rr99p)

24 When one gets old, one forgets, minor things like sock puppets.
Sheesh.

Posted by: Mdr whatever at February 12, 2010 04:56 PM (ucq49)

25 feces hitting blades = my cell ph going into a zip-loc baggy filled with air and tossed into the river. They can track me all the way to the gulf while I head the other direction.

Posted by: teej at February 12, 2010 04:56 PM (c459z)

26 6 Any sort of hack that can foil this type of thing?
Posted by: lauraw at February 12, 2010 04:48 PM (GgWdw)
I have the ultimate hack for that. I don't own a cell phone. Not because I'm a paranoid, but simply because I don't have the need for one that outweighs my aversion to having another bill. Heck, I don't evenwear a watch anymore.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at February 12, 2010 04:57 PM (F09Uo)

27 i'm enthused about
dicks and bums
bums and dicks
that's my enthusiasm

Posted by: Roger Swaigehole at February 12, 2010 04:58 PM (AK1t7)

28 Is this a big deal? EU withholds banking data from U.S. intelligence agencies

Posted by: toby928 at February 12, 2010 04:58 PM (PD1tk)

29 So who'll bring this up at Gibbsy's next presser? Tapper? Major? I just so want to see Baghdad Bob spin this.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 04:58 PM (UOM48)

30 Bush wants warrantless wiretapping of non-citizens making overseas calls= second coming of the 3rd Reich.

Obama wants to track everyone's cell phone, citizens or not, making phone calls or not= reasonable anti-terrorist man made disaster protection.

See how easy it is, wingnutz?

Posted by: Another Stupid Typical Fucking Moonbat at February 12, 2010 04:58 PM (YmPwQ)

31 I HAD A HEART ON, DAMMIT, AND I WANT IT BACK!!!

Posted by: Andi with a heart, not a ¢¾, over the i at February 12, 2010 04:55 PM (wWwJR)
Stay away from me dude.

Posted by: The Chicken at February 12, 2010 04:58 PM (7BU4a)

32 So, apparently, the Obama administration gets its ideas for laws from Law and Order: SVU. Perfect. I await with bated breath the No Prostitute Ever Arrested, Just Questioned In Regards to "Real" Crimes Act.

Posted by: chris at February 12, 2010 04:59 PM (SiJV8)

33 I see. Conservatives don't want Obama to track their every move. So, you racists all have a problem with a black man following you?

Posted by: John Smith at February 12, 2010 04:59 PM (Rr99p)

34 I think we should make a point of bringing this up in conversation with every liberal we know for the next 72 hours. Make sure they know about it, and then bore in: do they approve? Isn't this what they were screaming about when Bush did it? Are they going to complain or demonstrate against it? Why not?

Make them admit they're hypocrites. Keep doing it.

Posted by: Trimegistus at February 12, 2010 04:59 PM (8s0ZC)

35 I can't wait for Olbermann to blow the whole lid on this thing tonight!
wait...wut?

Posted by: Bosk at February 12, 2010 04:59 PM (pUO5u)

36 I don't know. We can always protest at the next tea party by burning our cell phones. We could simultaneously piss of the environuts, too. Though we might want to keep the pile of Obama's ears downwind.

Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 04:59 PM (Xsi7M)

37 If I get lost, can I call the government for directions?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 12, 2010 05:00 PM (0FiCa)

38 I'll bet Morning Joe will be all over this Monday. Or not.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 05:01 PM (UOM48)

39
Is this a big deal? EU withholds banking data from U.S. intelligence agencies


Posted by: toby928

No, no. It's just a little matter. Pay it no mind.

Posted by: Al Qaeda and Co. at February 12, 2010 05:01 PM (/o58C)

40 And I'm with Jim here..got rid of my cell phone years ago. Best decision ever.

Posted by: Bosk at February 12, 2010 05:01 PM (pUO5u)

41 *yawn*

We know he and Janet are only going to track veterans, right wing bloggers, and other non-muslin subversives. The rethuglicans are gone, like forever, never to take office again.

Posted by: Typical Lefty Reaction at February 12, 2010 05:01 PM (IhHdM)

42
This is not an issue for law abiding citizens*.
You are a law abiding citizen, aren't you?


*To be determined by Janet Napolitano on a day by day and wholly non-political basis.

No, really.

Posted by: B. Jonah Obama at February 12, 2010 05:02 PM (iQhMj)

43 So, apparently, the Obama administration gets its ideas for laws from Law and Order: SVU.

Remember the 'reset'/'overcharge' button? That was a schtick from the 'easy' button ad campaign Office Max (or someone) ran.

Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 05:02 PM (Xsi7M)

44 Hee. Beck is ripping Meggy Mac apart.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (UOM48)

45 The US Constitution? Never heard of it.

Posted by: Charles Gibson at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (2sciv)

46 if I get lost, can I call the government for directions?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 12, 2010 05:00 PM (0FiCa)

Sure. If you like being directed up your own ass.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (Rr99p)

47 So, apparently, the Obama administration gets its ideas for laws from Law and Order: SVU.
Who would have thought that it should have beena Batman/Obama caricatureon that poster instead of the Joker?

Posted by: David Axelrod's Combover at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (/Pw+r)

48 40
And I'm with Jim here..got rid of my cell phone years ago.
I'm surprised anyone in SoCal goes without a cell phone between the traffic, fires, earthquakes, etc. I never go anywhere without my phone. Heck, I even take it on walks 'cause of all the coyotes and pumas.

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (sey23)

49 #37

If you've got a couple of hours to kill while waiting on hold for directions - sure, give 'em a call.

Posted by: bound4er at February 12, 2010 05:04 PM (RjUC6)

50 Beck is ripping Meggy Mac apart.


That's gonna take a long time.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at February 12, 2010 05:04 PM (Rr99p)

51 Don't have a cell phone, but I know they encourage military folks to have one now.

Posted by: unknown jane at February 12, 2010 05:04 PM (5/yRG)

52 It's the only way to make sure all you racist teabaggers don't try to overthrow the government and kill all the black people in this country.

Posted by: Warden at February 12, 2010 05:05 PM (QoR4a)

53 "So, you racists all have a problem with a black man following you?"
Not at all. Unless. It's Teh Won. Closing on my 6. With a heat moisture seeking missle.

Posted by: Mdr whatever at February 12, 2010 05:07 PM (ucq49)

54 There's been some wee-weeing about this cell phone security program by those who say we should do nothing about terrorism.
As I've said before, I reject the idea that we should allow terrorists to roam freely in our country, planting bombs wherever they wish.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 12, 2010 05:08 PM (QoR4a)

55 One half of me is for it and the other half is against it. The lefties howled when Ashcroft wanted to do this with terrorist communication internationally. Where is the left now????

Posted by: sTevo at February 12, 2010 05:08 PM (brLQD)

56 His study of the Constitution was purely so that he could deconstruct and circumvent it.

Posted by: California Red at February 12, 2010 05:08 PM (IpT4E)

57 48 40 And I'm with Jim here..got rid of my cell phone years ago.I'm surprised anyone in SoCal goes without a cell phone between the traffic, fires, earthquakes, etc. I never go anywhere without my phone. Heck, I even take it on walks 'cause of all the coyotes and pumas.
Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:03 PM (sey23)
I don't drive during rush hour, I live on a burn-proof sand bar, andcell phonesnever reliably work after a sizable quake anyways. After you make up your mind to do without it's no big deal and everyone that matters knows you don't have a cell phone and they adjust. It's great to be able to disappear whenever you feel like it.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at February 12, 2010 05:10 PM (F09Uo)

58 O/T
The Olympics haven't even started yet and someone has died.

http://tiny.pl/hm8sh

Posted by: TEE866 at February 12, 2010 05:11 PM (74lR/)

59 He'll claim you have no expectation of privacy if you're walking around with a cell phone. Bank on it.
And a few lefties will make a token stink and then drop it; the rest will lap it up like bacon gravy.

Posted by: spongeworthy at February 12, 2010 05:11 PM (rplL3)

60 The Mullahs are oppressing the Iranian people's right to free communication!

Wait, what?

Oh. Bite me.

Posted by: Joe Plugs at February 12, 2010 05:11 PM (YCVBL)

61 My cellphone lives in whatever purse I'm carrying. I use the land line at home. Mr. D'oh, on the other hand, is unable to function with his damned crackberry. If people need to reach me, they know to call the damned land line or e-mail me. My cell is for the rare emergency. I could live without it if I had to.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 05:12 PM (UOM48)

62 I had a cell phone for a short time when my niece was pregnant. Other than that I have done without them, and usually need one about once a month maybe. Not a big deal to do without them. My niece thinks I am a Luddite, but always calls me to fix her computer when it goes down.

Posted by: sharrukin at February 12, 2010 05:14 PM (593B8)

63 Bet dollars to donuts the lamestream media ignores this story. Doesn't fit the template - Boosh was the one who violated the Constitution, not beloved Obambi.

Posted by: real joe at February 12, 2010 05:14 PM (IAOAn)

64 And a few lefties will make a token stink and then drop it; the rest will lap it up like bacon toad stool gravy.

FTFY

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at February 12, 2010 05:15 PM (ucq49)

65 I am troubled by the amount of outrage being expressed on this blog over what is essentially a non-issue.

Posted by: Moby Concern Troll at February 12, 2010 05:15 PM (Rr99p)

66 Patriot Act!

Library Records!

Ashcroft!

Trampling my rights!!!!!!

Oh wait, it's Obama? Well, I'm sure he has a good reason.

Posted by: Typical Lib at February 12, 2010 05:16 PM (W5NBA)

67 BTW, that's an outstanding piece at CNET. Balanced, sourced, informed and informative. With history, too. Good find.

Posted by: spongeworthy at February 12, 2010 05:17 PM (rplL3)

68 Staples. That was easy!

Posted by: Mangas Colorados at February 12, 2010 05:18 PM (OhSP7)

69 As the last gin-soaked tear rolls from my eyes, I'll hand over my cell and admit I love Big Brother.

Posted by: Winston at February 12, 2010 05:18 PM (IhHdM)

70 The Librarians. The fecking Librarians! THEY will save us. The ultimate guardians of the right to privacy.They squeeel likeNed Beatty evry time the FBI drives by. We.are.safe.

Posted by: Mac at February 12, 2010 05:19 PM (0J18b)

71 So, I suppose we can expect outrage from Gleen, Sully and the other members of the Hee Haw gang at any moment, right?

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 12, 2010 05:20 PM (B+qrE)

72 A new study finds that the government wastes $300,000,000,000 a year just trying to track people down. I thought you were all supposed to be deficit hawks.

Posted by: John Smith at February 12, 2010 05:21 PM (Rr99p)

73 Someone needs to tell this autocratic cretin how that Mussolini biography he's got stashed next to the Oval Office crapper ends.

Posted by: VJay at February 12, 2010 05:23 PM (gQ+XA)

74 12

As a lifelong conservative I think we should have Interpol keep track of all these records.

Posted by: John Smith at February 12, 2010 05:24 PM (8zQxF)

75 Okay, as long as they provide a service that I can call to tell me where the damn thing is when I lose it or when it's stolen.

Posted by: mikey at February 12, 2010 05:26 PM (xfRfG)

76 Hey, sorry, but he's right for once in his life. This isn't info about anything you say or do - just about where you go. That is, where you walk, drive, or take some sort of conveyance, where anybody and everybody can see you doing it.
That's not an invasion of privacy. It's just not.

Posted by: J. Moses Browning at February 12, 2010 05:27 PM (b5s2f)

77 "A new study finds that the government wastes $300,000,000,000 a year just trying to track people down. "
About a buck, two nintey eight, is earmarked for illegals. But hey. They're solid Dim votes.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at February 12, 2010 05:27 PM (ucq49)

78 I think the important thing here is that the claim is the government has the right to know where a person is whenever it wants. The cell phone is secondary and merely a palatable smokescreen for that concept.

Posted by: Usful Ijit at February 12, 2010 05:29 PM (ySEBp)

79 I assume my Universal Access Fee is providing phone to the suspects.

Posted by: toby928 at February 12, 2010 05:29 PM (PD1tk)

80 That is, where you walk, drive, or take some sort of conveyance, where anybody and everybody can see you doing it.

Really? Everybody can see - and track - me at all times? In the pitch dark? Through walls? In cars zipping along at 70 mph?

Ask yourself what sorts of governments have gotten into the business of tracking their people.

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:32 PM (sey23)

81 Ha ha.

Posted by: Nelson Sheikh Mohammed at February 12, 2010 05:33 PM (Rr99p)

82 Ask yourself what sorts of governments have gotten into the business of tracking their people.

Governments that care?

Posted by: Barry at February 12, 2010 05:35 PM (Rr99p)

83 Ask yourself what sorts of governments have gotten into the business of tracking their people.



Governments that love you?

Posted by: Barry at February 12, 2010 05:35 PM (Rr99p)

84 Hey, sorry, but he's right for once in his life. This isn't info about anything you say or do - just about where you go. That is, where you walk, drive, or take some sort of conveyance, where anybody and everybody can see you doing it.
That's not an invasion of privacy. It's just not.
This has to be a sock, right. Because if not, you are an idiot.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 12, 2010 05:35 PM (B+qrE)

85 Call me paranoid..but I have a very bad feeling about what Obama's got in store for us in the next couple years.

Posted by: beerologist at February 12, 2010 05:36 PM (tgXx6)

86 Unfortunately, the President is probably right on this one.Fourth Amendmentis an area of the law I don't know very well, but my understanding is that because the records are in the hands of a third party, you have no constitutional right to demand that the government get a warrant. Most people don't realize this, but the government doesn't actually need a warrant to get bank records, for example, under the same principle.
I don't agree with this principle, but it's my understanding that this is pretty well-settled law. I am therefore more offended by the rank hypocrisy this demonstrates, given that the President and his compatriots screamed bloody murder at the slightest (perfectly legal) invasions of privacy by the Bush Administration.
(Yes, I am an attorney. Yes, I have a background in constitutional law. No, I am not your attorney, nor does this post constitute legal advice or a professional opinion.)

Posted by: MikeJ at February 12, 2010 05:36 PM (Xg3TS)

87 I think this is an excellent idea.

Posted by: Josef Stalin at February 12, 2010 05:36 PM (sey23)

88 But data mining is verboten and an assault on your privacy.

Posted by: nickless at February 12, 2010 05:37 PM (MMC8r)

89 87

I seriously hate attorneys..

Posted by: beerologist at February 12, 2010 05:38 PM (tgXx6)

90 We're just following orders!

Posted by: Verizon at February 12, 2010 05:38 PM (MMC8r)

91 @92

Maybe it's time to get that cell phone. At least then I'd be harder to find.

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:39 PM (sey23)

92 I don't agree with this principle, but it's my understanding that this is pretty well-settled law.
Maybe so, Mike--but I would think (as a non-lawyer) that technological changes have to count for something here.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 12, 2010 05:40 PM (B+qrE)

93 @92

Maybe it's time to get that ATT cell phone. At least then I'd be harder to find.

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:40 PM (sey23)

94 As for the constitutionality of this, I'll wait to read what the Volokh guys have to say.

Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2010 05:41 PM (sey23)

95 The LSM had photos of Bush on the phone like he was listening in on Aunt Mable's conversation about apple pie recipes. Now Obama can violate the 4th amendment and nobody on the left gives a shit?

Posted by: scrubjay at February 12, 2010 05:42 PM (irUqN)

96 Where's erg and seattle slough and the rest of the Obama-loving superstars to tell us how this time, it's different?

Posted by: wiserbud at February 12, 2010 05:48 PM (EW49d)

97 Warrantless what?

Oh, this is nothing.

Moving on.

Posted by: New York Times at February 12, 2010 05:48 PM (EW49d)

98 There you racist teabaggers go again, trying to make it more difficult for Me to round you up.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 12, 2010 05:51 PM (VmtE9)

99 Where's erg and seattle slough and the rest of the Obama-loving superstars to tell us how this time, it's different?

JEA's trolling the Stevens thread, 'cause, you know, he's fearless like that.

Posted by: nickless at February 12, 2010 05:51 PM (MMC8r)

100 @mikeJ

All of our records are in the hands of a third party: education, employment, medical, etc.

Posted by: Usful Ijit at February 12, 2010 05:52 PM (ySEBp)

101 I thought i remembered the senate screaming at Google for giving up info to China about chinese citizens? do i mis-remember?

Posted by: willow at February 12, 2010 05:54 PM (7FgWm)

102 When Bush wiretapped calls going to possible terrorists, the leftists screamed that he was shitting on the Constitution.

Following Americans everywhere on their cellphone? Let Statism ring!

Posted by: kbdabear at February 12, 2010 05:54 PM (sYxEE)

103 As a conservative Christian lifelong Republican, I believe that the smartest President ever should have no restrictions in tracking down teabaggers who won't unite behind our Chocolate Jesus.

Posted by: John Smith, Lifelong Republican at February 12, 2010 05:57 PM (sYxEE)

104 We would be against this if it was Bush, but its not, so we're ok with it.

Posted by: ACLU at February 12, 2010 06:03 PM (cpuvG)

105 Of course they want to track you by your cell phone.
It makes zeroing in a Predator drone missile strike that much easier....

Posted by: w'evver at February 12, 2010 06:07 PM (GkYyh)

106 I'm for it, as long as the whereabouts of every elected official is broadcast on the web in real time.

I expect leaders to lead. They certainly have no expectations of privacy. We can't get away from them, and I think the converse is only fitting.

Posted by: MarkD at February 12, 2010 06:13 PM (0FVgz)

107 Not a problem. The only people they'll catch will be the dumb ones - Obama voters.

Lessons for criminals

1) when doing a crime, don't take a cell phone
2) if you must, use prepaid phones
3) if you gotta have yours, then take the battery out until after doing the, you know, crime - and don't put it back in until well away from the scene
4) consider a small faraday cage carrying pouch

At the height of its power, the Stasi had 10% of of the east Krauts informing on the other 90%. This is clearly a superior system as can be seen by the longevity of the GDR. It appears O wants to emulate their success - and his DOT secretary, former school teacher Ray LaHood, wants auto logging of the position of your auto for purposes of a road use tax. That data would never be used for any other purpose, right? Right?

Yes, we can!

Posted by: chuckR at February 12, 2010 06:16 PM (XLu7l)

108 107 The ACLU is actually on the right side on this one. Does this mean the apocalypse is nigh?

Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at February 12, 2010 06:19 PM (cniXs)

109 The problem with the Constitution, Obama went on to say, is that it is merely “a charter of negative liberties”: it only tells you what the state and federal government “can’t do to you.” Hence the tragedy of the civil-rights movement and its focus on merely “formal” rights: it lost “track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.”
---
I guess the other problem with the Constitution is that it neglects to mention the government's need to keep track of its citizens at all times. Hey, if this cellphone thing doesn't work out, maybe he can just require anyone who receives any benefits, direct or indirect, from the Federal Government to wear one of those monitor things they strap to the ankles of convicted sex offenders.

Posted by: OCBill at February 12, 2010 06:20 PM (WGXy4)

110 76

Hey, sorry, but he's right for once in his life. This isn't info
about anything you say or do - just about where you go. That is, where
you walk, drive, or take some sort of conveyance, where anybody and
everybody can see you doing it.

That's not an invasion of privacy. It's just not.

Posted by: J. Moses Browning at February 12, 2010 05:27 PM (b5s2f)

you are an imbecile. go kill yourself.

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at February 12, 2010 06:25 PM (erIg9)

111 http://howto.wired.com/wiki/Make_a_Faraday_Cage_Wallet

How to make a faraday wallet using duct tape & tinfoil

Posted by: jmb at February 12, 2010 06:42 PM (PcNSJ)

112 Don't think we ain't keepin' score , brah .

Posted by: awkward davies at February 12, 2010 06:43 PM (wb68R)

113 AP...........
This was an Obama high level committe decision. The panel of high level officials includingHugo Chavez,Kim Jung II, Fidel Castro, Hu Jintao, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, formulated this plan for Obama to track nearly every American. CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS all endorse this well thoughtout yet provocative plan.

Posted by: Sparky at February 12, 2010 06:48 PM (r0u40)

114 That is messed up. One more reason to "oops forget the cell"

Posted by: NotAMolly at February 12, 2010 07:02 PM (ADJFU)

115 @Circa: You make a fair point, and the Supreme Court has in fact held that new and more intrusive technology (IR sensors that could see where you are in your house through walls, etc.) is violative of the Fourth Amendment. It's worth an argument, but in that case, the technology is being used by the government specifically to spy on you. Here, the technology is a byproduct of a contractual relationship you voluntarily requested with the cell company. It just so happens that the records produced by that voluntary relationship are then available for government subpoena. I think this is likely to be found constitutional (though, again, I don't agree with it.)
@polynikes: Yes, although the federal government has set strong statutory privacy measures for medical records through HIPAA, which is likely why the low constitutional bar is not usually an issue for such records.
@Usful ijit: Yes, the fact that all of our records are inthe hand of third-parties would be one of the reasons I don't agree with this principle.

Posted by: MikeJ at February 12, 2010 07:34 PM (Xg3TS)

116
6 Any sort of hack that can foil this type of thing?
Posted by: lauraw at February 12, 2010 04:48 PM (GgWdw)
Faraday cage.
Remember "Enemy of the State", with Gene Hackman and Will Smith, and how they shut down one of the transmitters?
A small metal toolbox behind the passenger seat might make a nice storage place for your cellphone when it’s in the car. Just make certain that the lid has some overlap with the base. This isn’t quite a Faraday cage, but given the power levels involved, this should be enough. Just be very careful when you reach for your phone.
Alternatively, check an electronics supply for small metal project boxes. Choose the box-with-lid type over the 2-C’s-that-fit-together style. If you see these items in real life, you’ll understand.
Covering an 8x10 manila envelope with aluminum foil, then slipping the result in a slightly larger envelope is another option. But the seal must include the aluminum foil touching and being folded over, and aluminum foil isn’t very durable …
If you really need this sort of thing, this is a cheap way to do it.
When your cell phone is on and you are talking, "they" will know where you are, and when. No easy way around this. But a Faraday cage will block essentially all signals when your phone is in it. Being tracked in real-time then requires a different method.

Posted by: Arbalest at February 12, 2010 07:50 PM (JnWYr)

117 His study of the Constitution was purely so that he could deconstruct and circumvent it.

Posted by: California Red at February 12, 2010 05:08 PM (IpT4E)
Am beginning to think that's quite literally true.

Posted by: Barry can have my location when he pries it from my cold dead hands at February 12, 2010 08:19 PM (b0sdZ)

118 torabora doesn't do 'effin cell phones.

Posted by: torabora at February 12, 2010 08:38 PM (zR4gN)

119 #105 Terrorists will not be required to have GPS devices in their cell phones.

Posted by: AGOUS Eric Holder at February 12, 2010 08:40 PM (zR4gN)

120 The only reason Obama took Constitutional law was to look for loopholes.

Posted by: Nemo from Erewhon at February 12, 2010 08:59 PM (57N+j)

121 16
I don't carry a cell though I have and might again.Tracking me would be
pretty boring but I welcome them to do iit.

Posted by: steevy at February 12, 2010 04:53 PM (H89UI)

steevy, we've noticed you're making more dentist appointments than normal, we're wondering if you're planning on switching jobs and using up your insurance limit before that, or if we have to cut back on your sugar allotment... you know, for your own good.Big Brother in a Nanny state isn't just intrusive and scary, he's an obnoxious little bitch who gets into every aspect of your damned life.

Posted by: Gekkobear at February 12, 2010 09:30 PM (5/nmR)

122 'beyond conspiracy police state america.'

Google it. Look at all of the references and resources in the 'bibliography.'

Republican or Democrat, you voted for the people who made it a reality.

...but you still think that conservative Republicans in politics will save us all! ...just as the Democrats thought that Obama and a Democrat-controlled House and Senate would save us all...

Free men save themselves....and spend every minute and every penny trying to save themselves...or they die trying.

America is a police state. Get used to it...or fight for your freedom. There are no other choices.

(Last time I voted for a president was in 1976. Carter got a buncha Marines killed and didn't accomplish the mission - and didn't care to accomplish the mission. Reagan got a bunch of Marines killed by allowing the UN to give them suicidal RoE's...and didn't allow them to accomplish the mission.)

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at February 12, 2010 09:33 PM (oeESr)

123 Can you imagine having someone that stupid trying to teach you con-lawwith the Socratic Method?
Jeezus. You can't teach law unless you're brilliant. And he aint. Weird that he could be president and a shitty con-law teacher. Makes me think back fondly on ol' Mr. Hardass Brilliant Fuck You Over Man. That dude knew his shit.

Posted by: Dashing Man Who Is Erudite at February 12, 2010 10:05 PM (3IT4k)

124 That site notes that Barack Obama was, supposedly, a constitutional law
lecturer at one time. (I say "supposedly" just because the gig was set
up, I'm sure, by his friends in high places, and I doubt he was
actually talking about the real American Constitution much, except
inadvertently.)

He was talking about our "fundamentally flawed" Constitution, and how he was going to replace it with the All-New, Improved and Ayers-Approved Version.

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at February 12, 2010 10:21 PM (orMqj)

125 Just an issue of the stopped clock. How can you expect an electronic signal that is unrelated to your life have privacy? Just like from the original SC decision on privacy that established the "reasonable expectation" standard. Do you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public phone booth?

Posted by: Federale at February 12, 2010 10:50 PM (AJHkc)

126 It is to laugh. You're just like those nuts in Virginia who claim that govt wants to track people.
AGW induced insanity.

Posted by: Charles Johnson at February 13, 2010 12:21 AM (d7Px0)

127 This has NOTHING whatsoever like The Patriot Act. So there!

Posted by: Liberals everywhere at February 13, 2010 12:22 AM (d7Px0)

128 What MikeJ said. It is long-settled law that there is no privacy right in telephone records. To use a wireline phone, the phone must be known to the service provider, and identify the phone it is calling. That is information is voluntarily given to a third party for its use, which that party has no obligation to keep confidential.

To use cell phone, the phone must give its location to the service provider by contacting the nearest tower. Again, information is voluntarily given to a third party for its use, which that party has no obligation to keep confidential.

In neither case is the content of the call exposed: that still requires a warrant.

Consider the mail. The government cannot open an envelope to read your mail. But it must read the address on the envelope to deliver the mail - and it can take notice of the address.

Yes, there is a degree of privacy exposure. But that exposure is intrinsic to the service.

Posted by: Rich Rostrom at February 13, 2010 01:12 AM (lfIMg)

129 On the good side, Sean "Jim Treacher" Medlock can now request the State Dept. employee's phone records, and use the GPS info from the call he made at the scene of the "accident" to place him to within 50 meters at the time of the call.

Sorry BamBam, but if there's no expectation of privacy for us, there's none for your folks either.

Posted by: NavyspyII at February 13, 2010 07:04 AM (1jSiQ)

130 As it always is with liberal demacrats they belive the constitution dont appy to them becuase their a bunch of eletists wanks

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at February 13, 2010 12:27 PM (UPe/i)

131 Can't wait to hear what Thomas Ellers, Rick Ellensburg and Dan Douchewald have to say about this.

Posted by: Xrlq at February 13, 2010 01:09 PM (IOf/Z)

132 I dunno about the fourth amendment..but we all know will be free of you very soon. Vote em all out!!

Posted by: SPIKE at February 14, 2010 06:40 PM (0BbV0)

133 [url=http://www.discount-kicks.com/nike-air-max-2009-c-59.html]Air max 2009[/url] shoes are great: Great fit, support, cushion and look.
his Nike [url=http://www.discount-kicks.com/nike-air-max-2009-c-59.html]air max 2009 [/url]is like a soft leather gloves that fit smoothly in your feet. It is very comfortable.

Posted by: Jane at August 14, 2010 02:21 AM (W6X+q)

134 I highly recommended <a href=http://www.discount-kicks.com/nike-air-max-2009-c-59.html>air max 2009</a> running shoe to because it was built for the neutral to under-pronator who requires lightweight cushioning and lots of likes to wear <a href=http://www.discount-kicks.com/nike-air-max-2009-c-59.html>nike air max</a> for running, hiking, working and so on.

Posted by: Jane at August 14, 2010 02:21 AM (W6X+q)

135 The Air Max 2009 comes with high-end technology combines with streamlined to deliver maximum comfort.

Posted by: Jenny at August 14, 2010 02:25 AM (W6X+q)

136 porno izle
sikis izle
anal
sibelkekilli
utangac
sex izle
bosalma
porno izle
antalyadanenerede
antalya ilaçlama
endoras
bayanlar
televizyon
evcildostum
area18
foto

Posted by: porno izle at December 30, 2010 10:22 AM (+YsZ7)

137 It’s Del! omg omg omg! Please get Charley involved in some way — some
weird DNA test which shows Del was impregnated just by setting foot in
Charley’s bachelor pad! Get one of those CSI lights!

Posted by: SIM Dual móviles at May 26, 2011 10:26 PM (L1j+b)






Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0522 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0273 seconds, 146 records returned.
Page size 76 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat