RE: [IP] No expectation of privacy in public? In a pig's eye! (fwd from dave@farber.net)

2005-01-16 Thread Major Variola (ret)
At 10:07 AM 1/14/05 -0500, Trei, Peter wrote:
It would take some chutzpa, but tacking onto a cops
car would send a message

Too easy.
5 points for adding to cop's personal car
10 points for adding to cop's spouse's personal car
20 points for adding to cop's mistress' personal car

Not sure about point assignments for
adding to cop's offspring's car
adding to cop's offspring's teacher's car







Re: [IP] No expectation of privacy in public? In a pig's eye! (fwd from dave@farber.net)

2005-01-14 Thread Bill Stewart
At 12:30 PM 1/12/2005, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
Just out of curiosity, if the man doesn't need a warrent
to place a surveilance device, shouldn't it be within your rights
to tamper with, disable or remove such a device if you discover one?
Do you mean that if you discover an unsolicited gift of
consumer electronics attached to your car,
do you have the right to play with it just as you would if
it came in the mail?  I would certainly expect so...
On the other hand, if it appears to be a lost item,
you could be a good public citizen and take it to the police
to see if anybody claims it...
GPS tracker is an ambiguous description, though.
GPS devices detect where they are, but what next?
A device could record where it was, for later collection,
or it could transmit its position to a listener.
Tampering with existing recordings might have legal
implications, but putting a transmitter-based system
in your nearest garbage can or accidentally leaving it in a taxi
or mailing it to Medellin all seem like reasonable activities.



Bill Stewart  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



RE: [IP] No expectation of privacy in public? In a pig's eye! (fwd from dave@farber.net)

2005-01-14 Thread Trei, Peter
Bill Stewart wrote:

 At 12:30 PM 1/12/2005, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
 Just out of curiosity, if the man doesn't need a warrent
 to place a surveilance device, shouldn't it be within your rights
 to tamper with, disable or remove such a device if you discover one?
 
 Do you mean that if you discover an unsolicited gift of
 consumer electronics attached to your car,
 do you have the right to play with it just as you would if
 it came in the mail?  I would certainly expect so...

Attaching it to another car would seem a suitable prank -
someone who travels a lot, on an irregular path - a pizza
delivery guy, or a real estate agent. Or perhaps a long
distance truck.

It would take some chutzpa, but tacking onto a cops
car would send a message

Peter Trei




Re: [IP] No expectation of privacy in public? In a pig's eye! (fwd from dave@farber.net)

2005-01-12 Thread Roy M. Silvernail
Re: the embedded item:
http://timesunion.com/AspStories/storyprint.asp?StoryID=322152
Ruling gives cops leeway with GPS
Decision allows use of vehicle tracking device without a warrant
By BRENDAN LYONS, Staff writer
First published: Tuesday, January 11, 2005
In a decision that could dramatically affect criminal investigations
nationwide, a federal judge has ruled police didn't need a warrant when
they attached a satellite tracking device to the underbelly of a car
being driven by a suspected Hells Angels operative.
Just out of curiosity, if the man doesn't need a warrent to place a 
surveilance device, shouldn't it be within your rights to tamper with, 
disable or remove such a device if you discover one?  By extension, is 
there a business opportunity for bug-sweeping?  Either a storefront or a 
properly equipped pickup truck with bright signage.  (oh, yeah... I'm 
sure *that* would go over well with the Powers That Be)
--
Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not
It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFT
SpamAssassin-procmail-/dev/null-bliss
http://www.rant-central.com