ronpaulhawaii
Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 11,874
9th Circuit Court rules Gov can secretly track with GPS
- Thread starter ronpaulhawaii
- Start date
Seems there's going to be a showdown on GPS tracking soon at the SCOTUS level.
DC Appeals Court ruled GPS is unconstitutional without a warrant.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/8/gps-use-voids-conviction/
DC Appeals Court ruled GPS is unconstitutional without a warrant.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/8/gps-use-voids-conviction/
I suspect this is already being done.
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,702
Yeah, that.
I'll be flabbergasted if the SCROTUS rules that warrants are required for GPS tracking.
You're already being GPS tracked in your phones.
Reason
Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2008
- Messages
- 8,674
ronpaulhawaii
Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 11,874
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,702
Silence, mundane!
LoL, yeah, that would go over like a turd in punch bowl.
They are arresting people for filming cops.
I don't see all the surveillance cameras that cops film us with, a thousand times a day, coming down.
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,702
FreedomSearcher
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3
Gizmodo the best 
According to Gismodo all I need to secure myself from being tracked is to equip my car with http://www.jammer-store.com/gj6-all-civil-gps-signal-jammer-blocker.html
Have any one tried such devices already? I just can't understand how one small gadget can provide me with total protection.
According to Gismodo all I need to secure myself from being tracked is to equip my car with http://www.jammer-store.com/gj6-all-civil-gps-signal-jammer-blocker.htmlHave any one tried such devices already? I just can't understand how one small gadget can provide me with total protection.
Rael
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,524
I think I would rather have a way of detecting the GPS tracking than just merely blocking it. I would like to know if I am being tracked so I can take further action to protect myself. Rather than just blocking the GPS, remove it and attach it to a taxi cab or city bus. Make them waste their time.
DamianTV
Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 20,677
(Techy Post)
GPS actually comes in TWO flavors. Listening devices, and Transmitting Devices.
The Garmin you bought at Wal Mart falls under the category of Listening. It has an antenna that listens to multiple GPS satellites, and to avoid all the techy stuff, calculates your position and displays it on screen. This means that you do NOT need to pay a monthly service fee for the use of a GPS, and why I am getting irritated with GPS services on cell phones. They want money to know where you are. They are already built it, but try to use it as a means to extort even more money from you, and they didnt exactly pay for the satellites. Those are government owned satellites. So before I go completely off topic, I will sum this all up that paying for GPS Service just to know where you are currently at is Bullshit.
On the opposite side of the coin is the Transmitting devices. The ones that you use a big heavy magnet to slap on the underside of your car and secretly tell everyone else where you are at and how much time you spent parked in front of Victorias Secret, followed by your local bar. Those need to transmit information back to a central communication facility where by you can get information on where your car is currently at. This is the one that is pissing me off with the invasion of privacy. The technology itself is neither good or bad, it is all in how it is used. Before the days of GPS we had another kind of technology to find your car in the event it was stolen. It was called Lowjack, and was pretty expensive. But as it required a monthly service fee, once you paid for it, you continued to pay for it. It was still a form of GPS, but it needed to phone home to tell you where you (well at least the device) was at. If you have your GPS calculator in the palm of your hand, and it is not transmitting, you dont need to pay a monthly service fee as their is no centralized facility collecting this information. You know that you are hiking, but dont have a clue which trail you are on, and have the device in your hand. But if you lose that device, there is no one you can call to help you find your lost device. You lose your car with OnStar, their GPS can tell you exactly where it is at.
The point here was that people really need to know the difference between the two so they dont get taken for a ride. More and more commonly people are being charged monthly service fees for the non transmitting GPS devices they purchase, and they dont need to. If Garmin charged a monthly service fee, and you dont pay your bill, there is no possible way that the device can be shut off remotely. They dont have that kind of power. Cell phones are a little different. They want to know where you physically are, and they are charging even more money for it.
The technology can be used either way, but the privacy invasive one that we are all concerned to some extent about is the one that phones home. It wouldnt do a cop a whole hell of a lot of good to stick a Garmin in your car to monitor your location, unless they had intentions of coming back for it later. Read: Pain in the ass. Solution: Spend more money. If your car gets stolen, it can be very useful to a lot of places to know where the car is at. This is a potential benefit. You find your car missing, find it is at your sons friends house, probably not worth calling the cops over. You find it half way to Mexico going 90, you can call the cops, the cops can arrest the thief, so insurance companies are happy over this also. But allowing Wal Mart to know that as soon as you leave their store, you head next door to get your pet food from Petsmart or whatever, well that is marketing and where I flat out draw the line. If a company wants to know where I am at for the sake of profiteering, I believe that company needs to appear before a Judge and provide a reason better than "I want to make money off of this schmuck".
I sincerely believe that 4th Amendment Rights should be enforced against companies and corporations as well as the government. Problem is the law needs to be applied, period. And lets face it, shit, we have a hard enough time trying to get the government to do anything that is legal.
GPS actually comes in TWO flavors. Listening devices, and Transmitting Devices.
The Garmin you bought at Wal Mart falls under the category of Listening. It has an antenna that listens to multiple GPS satellites, and to avoid all the techy stuff, calculates your position and displays it on screen. This means that you do NOT need to pay a monthly service fee for the use of a GPS, and why I am getting irritated with GPS services on cell phones. They want money to know where you are. They are already built it, but try to use it as a means to extort even more money from you, and they didnt exactly pay for the satellites. Those are government owned satellites. So before I go completely off topic, I will sum this all up that paying for GPS Service just to know where you are currently at is Bullshit.
On the opposite side of the coin is the Transmitting devices. The ones that you use a big heavy magnet to slap on the underside of your car and secretly tell everyone else where you are at and how much time you spent parked in front of Victorias Secret, followed by your local bar. Those need to transmit information back to a central communication facility where by you can get information on where your car is currently at. This is the one that is pissing me off with the invasion of privacy. The technology itself is neither good or bad, it is all in how it is used. Before the days of GPS we had another kind of technology to find your car in the event it was stolen. It was called Lowjack, and was pretty expensive. But as it required a monthly service fee, once you paid for it, you continued to pay for it. It was still a form of GPS, but it needed to phone home to tell you where you (well at least the device) was at. If you have your GPS calculator in the palm of your hand, and it is not transmitting, you dont need to pay a monthly service fee as their is no centralized facility collecting this information. You know that you are hiking, but dont have a clue which trail you are on, and have the device in your hand. But if you lose that device, there is no one you can call to help you find your lost device. You lose your car with OnStar, their GPS can tell you exactly where it is at.
The point here was that people really need to know the difference between the two so they dont get taken for a ride. More and more commonly people are being charged monthly service fees for the non transmitting GPS devices they purchase, and they dont need to. If Garmin charged a monthly service fee, and you dont pay your bill, there is no possible way that the device can be shut off remotely. They dont have that kind of power. Cell phones are a little different. They want to know where you physically are, and they are charging even more money for it.
The technology can be used either way, but the privacy invasive one that we are all concerned to some extent about is the one that phones home. It wouldnt do a cop a whole hell of a lot of good to stick a Garmin in your car to monitor your location, unless they had intentions of coming back for it later. Read: Pain in the ass. Solution: Spend more money. If your car gets stolen, it can be very useful to a lot of places to know where the car is at. This is a potential benefit. You find your car missing, find it is at your sons friends house, probably not worth calling the cops over. You find it half way to Mexico going 90, you can call the cops, the cops can arrest the thief, so insurance companies are happy over this also. But allowing Wal Mart to know that as soon as you leave their store, you head next door to get your pet food from Petsmart or whatever, well that is marketing and where I flat out draw the line. If a company wants to know where I am at for the sake of profiteering, I believe that company needs to appear before a Judge and provide a reason better than "I want to make money off of this schmuck".
I sincerely believe that 4th Amendment Rights should be enforced against companies and corporations as well as the government. Problem is the law needs to be applied, period. And lets face it, shit, we have a hard enough time trying to get the government to do anything that is legal.
Similar threads
