An Orwellian move by Obama's administration
 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

"...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. 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."

all i can say is someone will take this to the supreme court, where they'll rule against the administration.
lol another exaample of the executive over-stepping it's bounds. remember when dems complained about bush? yet they probably will support their leader for similar actions.

Depends on the composition of the Supreme Court at the time of the suit...

Listen to my conversations. I don't care.

that's your mistake.

Yes it is.

I definitely think that I should have a reasonable expectation that the government doesn't need to know where I am every second of the day.

Not true in my case.
I heartily disagree with the administration on this issue (and many others).

well,well,well!

I've ripped this administration numerous times on here over DADT, Afghanistan, etc.

John Titor was right after all..........:eek:

good! more openmindedness is a good thing. people who follow party line exclusively just bother me.

Me,too!:)

:rolleyes:

True story...yesterday I even read Rollingstone magaine!:p

I watched a Fox-owned news station to get the lottery numbers the other night. My impartiality is now untouchable.

I read the top stories from a couple different news sources, then check out Fox News for their take. It's astounding - the news is always completely different in that country. :rolleyes:

Anybody with a few bucks can buy simple monitors that readily pick up cell phone calls. I don't know anyone who considers cell phones "secure" in a privacy sense to start with.

No, I don't agree my cell phone company should reveal my records without my permission.

now or are you talking 1995? And 'monitors' LMAO

Must be an old article from the google search.

You are apparently completely unawares that "monitor" doesn't only mean a CRT or computer screen.

LMAO. Poor Dell ....

It's called a scanner and the scanner is used to monitor phone conversations.

Congrats tho as you now seem even more clueless than your original post. But then again I forget you, like Al Gore know everything. :tro:

If you want to use any excuse to insult somebody and call them names, at least don't be both ignorant and stupid about the subject matter.

I am with Miraja on this. I totally disagreed with Bush and Obama on this one. And I agree...Obama should get ripped for this like Bush did.

I agree. Part of the problem we grapple with when defending the individual liberties is what things can turn into, later, also. Even when Bush was proposing things in the Patriot Act to stop the terrorists -- the issue becomes, even if you believe that the proposed changes were made for just that reason -- what will some future leader do with those powers? Unfortunately, laws are manipulated in ways never intended by the original authors. Those authors may have had pure motives, but generations later, those powers that were used in a targeted way and sparingly can be used indiscriminately and in a sweeping manner.

Reasonable people can disagree on partisan issues, but I think most of us agree that individual rights are indispensible and that the government has too much power already.

show me the light then ole wise one. Here's a link to Uniden (the world's largest supplier). Show me their 'monitors' that pick up cell calls. :zz:

http://www.unidendirect.com/index.cfm?

You are really starting a fight over my use of the word, "monitor" to describe a device that can pick up cell phone calls? :D In a sentence whose point was about privacy?

Seriously? :D

Okay then - I just googled, "cell phone monitoring devices", and a whole bunch of items came up. And some of those devices are even called, and sold as, "monitors"

GASP!

But we can call them "scanners" if you insist.

Although not all devices I saw have the ability to continuously monitor different frequencies (thus are technically not "scanners").

And I suppose I could say, "What is this, 1995?" thinking that you are referring to a device that converts images to digital information.

But I'll leave all that to you :tro:

whether scanners or monitors, the issue is with the govt not bothering with a warrant before tracking a persons' movements via their cell phone. it's got to be considered unconstitutional as far as unreasonable search and seizure laws.

Patriot Act baby.. worst thing ever!! Thank god it has to be voted on after every couple years.. hopefully if this war on terror ever ends our wonderful congress with vote down the Patriot Act.

Yes, that is the point.

there is a very simple solution to avoid being tracked and that is to remove the battery from the cell phone prior to engaging in your covert activiites whatever they may be. I'm sure inventions are on the way to either block the signal or scramble it.

I think much more alarming is the ease in which a GPS pinging device can be attatched to virtually anything (it's about the size a AA battery) and then will send constant updates to a site that can be accessed by computer. They even have tracking for up to 2 weeks complete with maps and times and a whole array of other options. The cost is less than $100 for the pinger and about $30/month for the service. All you need is the cash. Nothing else.

that's not the point-the point is it is very disturbing that the executive keeps trying to push their luck on warrantless searches. the democrats howled when bush tried, and now obama is attempting to do the same. you must have probable cause-just the act of owning or using a cell phone is not probable cause!

you could say that but even in 1995 they were known as scanners.

Not sure this how this falls under a 'search'. As you drive from O'Hare to Chicago there are facial recognition cameras that scan each passing vehicle. There are parking enforcement trucks (boot patrol) that scan license plates searching for scofflaws. There are even corner cameras that watch and record everything. These don't bother me. What bothers me is this administration's misguided concern over the rights of terrorists.

Ever hear of Echelon or Carnivore software that basically monitors the entire Internet including email. That is a warrant less search whether done by machine or human. IMO

accessing your phone records is a search, isn't it? as for cameras at traffic lights, they aren't using those (as far as i know) to track your movements, are they? catching you for running a red light isn't the same as following and tracking your travels from point to point.
what bothers me is just how far the govt will take this-imo it's as far as we allow them.

They want to mark ammo so it becomes more expensive and more scarce. I am no more likely to use my gun in the commission of a crime than you are to use your cellphone. We have to stick up for all of our constitutional rights or we will lose them ALL.

i don't think there's any question this supreme court will come down on the side of both the bush and obama admin's that a retrospective search of phone records is constitutional.

the argument that no warrant is required to track who you might talk to tomorrow or where you were when you spoke to them is something else.

i'll make the same argument i made when the bush admin ignored fisa courts and tapped into all internet traffic without warrant.

you need to be comfortable not just that you trust the people making the decision today but that you trust whatever admin is in power 20 years from now.

and like randall i'm not concerned about anyone listening to my conversations.

but i do worry about someone that thinks they need to.

i know what you mean. i have nothing to hide. i laugh when people ask 'what are you worried about? you have something to hide?' they just don't get it.

There was recently a string of bank robberies in Texas that was solved using this method. I don't know all the facts of the case. From my understanding, there was a string of bank robberies that were perpetrated by a group over the course of several months. The police had no leads but they knew the group was very well organized. They believed that the members of the group were communicating with cell phones during the course of the robberies

The police decided they would go to the phone companies for help. They obviously knew the dates of all the robberies so they got the records of all the cell-phone activity in the area of each bank on the respective dates that each bank was robbed.

Sure enough, the police found that on each day that a bank was robbed, the exact same cell phone numbers were calling each other right in the respective areas of each bank that was robbed, right at the exact times that the banks were robbed. They tracked down the numbers and they caught the guys.

I just realized that the story linked at the beginning of this thread talks about this very case.

I have no problem with the way this case was solved.