US Government Agencies track citizens via warrantless GPS

[Bob Hubbard]

[h=2]Supreme Court Sees Shades of 1984 in Unchecked GPS Tracking[/h]

WASHINGTON — A number of Supreme Court justices invoked the specter of Big Brother while hearing arguments Tuesday over whether the police may secretly attach GPS devices on Americans’ cars without getting a probable-cause warrant.
While many justices said the concept was unsettling, the high court gave no clear indication on how it will rule in what is arguably one of the biggest Fourth Amendment cases in the computer age. The Obama administration maintains that Americans have no privacy rights when it comes to their movements in public.

[h=2]Busted! Two New Fed GPS Trackers Found on SUV[/h]

As the Supreme Court gets ready to hear oral arguments in a case Tuesday that could determine if authorities can track U.S. citizens with GPS vehicle trackers without a warrant, a young man in California has come forward to Wired to reveal that he found not one but two different devices on his vehicle recently. The 25-year-old resident of San Jose, California, says he found the first one about three weeks ago on his Volvo SUV while visiting his mother in Modesto, about 80 miles northeast of San Jose. After contacting Wired and allowing a photographer to snap pictures of the device, it was swapped out and replaced with a second tracking device. A witness also reported seeing a strange man looking beneath the vehicle of the young man’s girlfriend while her car was parked at work, suggesting that a tracking device may have been retrieved from her car.
Then things got really weird when police showed up during a Wired interview with the man.

With a warrant, ok.
Without, nope.

If I find something on/in my car it's mine, and I'll dissect it if I feel like it.

 

[ballen0351]

As of right now you don't need a warrant as long as you place the tracker on the car while its parked on public property. If I was going onto your property to place the tracker I would need a warrant to enter your property. As of right now the court looks at it as the same as if a cop was doing survelliance and folloiwing your around. I can see that changing soon but that's how its veiwed now. I use these almost daily. Mostly for instance ill get a tip that joe is running up to new york in the next few days to buy large amount of a drug. Ill put the tracker on and ill wait until I see it headding north. If it goes to NY ill track it back when it gets into my jurisdiction ill get a traffic stop done call a drug dog scan the car and hope to find the drugs. If its a long term track more then a few days then we have to get a cort order to keep it on. Truth is tho they are starting to be used less and less. If im going thru trouble to get a cort order im just going to get one to track your phone instead. Most dealers now rent cars because they know we have these so tracking his car is pointless but every dealer keeps his phone on him so we have better results tracking them

 

[jks9199]

Actually, it depends on where you are. MD and DC are currently requiring some sort of warrant or judicial authorization, as I understand it. Virginia does not.

Personally -- not a big deal. What's the difference between a tracker and putting a tail on someone? OK, the tracker works 24-7, unless the battery fails, or it goes into bad cell signal areas or loses the GPS satellites. (Yeah, from experience, they're not fool proof.) A tail can be made, lost, distracted, be out of place taking a leak at the key moment... (Yeah, again, experience.)

My guess, based on my recollection of the trends, is that the High Court will probably require some sort of documented articulation to support the use, but stop short of actually requiring a warrant. In other words -- can't slap one on a car unless you can support a reasonable belief that it is tied to criminal activity.

 

[ballen0351]

Actually, it depends on where you are. MD and DC are currently requiring some sort of warrant or judicial authorization, as I understand it. Virginia does not.

Personally -- not a big deal. What's the difference between a tracker and putting a tail on someone? OK, the tracker works 24-7, unless the battery fails, or it goes into bad cell signal areas or loses the GPS satellites. (Yeah, from experience, they're not fool proof.) A tail can be made, lost, distracted, be out of place taking a leak at the key moment... (Yeah, again, experience.)

My guess, based on my recollection of the trends, is that the High Court will probably require some sort of documented articulation to support the use, but stop short of actually requiring a warrant. In other words -- can't slap one on a car unless you can support a reasonable belief that it is tied to criminal activity.

Maryland does not require one yet.

 

[ballen0351]

.

Personally -- not a big deal. What's the difference between a tracker and putting a tail on someone? OK, the tracker works 24-7, unless the battery fails, or it goes into bad cell signal areas or loses the GPS satellites. (Yeah, from experience, they're not fool proof.) A tail can be made, lost, distracted, be out of place taking a leak at the key moment... (Yeah, again, experience.)

Or the target sells the car to a guy in Fla the day after you put the tracker on and you dont know and you get excited when you see it in Miami thinking hes getting the mother load and you wait for it to come back and well it never does and the battery dies and you now trying to tell your boss what happened to the tracker and why you dont have it any more. Not that thats ever happened to me lol

 

[billc]

The answer is fairly simple, just implant a tracking device on every American at birth.

 

[ballen0351]

I wouldnt care if they required a warrant for use since I have a reason to use them I dont just slap them on random cars for fun.

 

[ETinCYQX]

As of right now you don't need a warrant as long as you place the tracker on the car while its parked on public property. If I was going onto your property to place the tracker I would need a warrant to enter your property. As of right now the court looks at it as the same as if a cop was doing survelliance and folloiwing your around. I can see that changing soon but that's how its veiwed now. I use these almost daily. Mostly for instance ill get a tip that joe is running up to new york in the next few days to buy large amount of a drug. Ill put the tracker on and ill wait until I see it headding north. If it goes to NY ill track it back when it gets into my jurisdiction ill get a traffic stop done call a drug dog scan the car and hope to find the drugs. If its a long term track more then a few days then we have to get a cort order to keep it on. Truth is tho they are starting to be used less and less. If im going thru trouble to get a cort order im just going to get one to track your phone instead. Most dealers now rent cars because they know we have these so tracking his car is pointless but every dealer keeps his phone on him so we have better results tracking them

So can I ask what you'd use these to charge someone with?

dealing, sure. I'd be extremely upset if I got a speeding ticket from one of these things, for example.

 

[ballen0351]

So can I ask what you'd use these to charge someone with?

dealing, sure. I'd be extremely upset if I got a speeding ticket from one of these things, for example.

No Im a Narcotics Det. I have not written a speeding ticket in years.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

They are used to develop probable cause (PC). That's all.

They sound spooky, but break it down.

If a cop decides to follow you around, he can. If you do something illegal while he's following you around, that gives him PC for a stop. If he finds something else (legally) whilst he is making a legal stop, then that's a good bust too.

This is just the device reporting where you are. It's no secret, if he followed you in person, he'd know the same thing.

The concept of privacy generally involves personal privacy 'where a person would normally expect it'. That's kind of a funny way of saying that you have a right to expect people not spy on you in the bathroom, but if you walk down the street, they're allowed to look at you, whether you like it or not.

Privacy is an odd concept. We seem to want it when we want it, regardless of where we are. In other words, we don't try to stop someone from looking at us as we walk down the street, but we don't want them taking our picture. Cops in public don't like to be recorded, but they're public employees in public, so they don't have an expectation of privacy either.

I don't really like the idea of the police being able to put a GPS unit on my car without a warrant; it's creepy. On the other hand, I think it's a reasonable point that I don't have any expectation of privacy in public.

I also think Bob's point is correct. The cops may have the right to put the GPS tracker on my car. But if I find it, oh well. And frankly, I think I'd stick it to a local police car or a passing train or tie it to the tail of a feral cat, just for fun. Have fun retrieving that, boys.

 

[JohnEdward]

Tip of the ice berg. It is something the supreme court will be wrestling within the future. It would be one of the things I would look at when I vote in the future, who will be the new Supreme Court Judges.

At some point soon GPS systems and related technology will be way beyond being able to track everyone. The idea of "privacy" will be archaic. We complain now but within our life-times being tracked with a GPS, but it will be as outdated as tube TVs. Corporate government will be the driver behind it. Orwell will be a child's story.

 

[ETinCYQX]

No Im a Narcotics Det. I have not written a speeding ticket in years.

So chasing dope dealers and similar. Interesting.

 

[jks9199]

Maryland does not require one yet.

Interesting; I'd been told they did.

 

[jks9199]

So can I ask what you'd use these to charge someone with?

dealing, sure. I'd be extremely upset if I got a speeding ticket from one of these things, for example.

They're an investigative tool. They're used in a variety of cases when it might be helpful or practical to know where someone's taking a car. In my experience, this has ranged from gang members involved in murders to fraudulent paper mills to suspected bank robbers.

 

[ballen0351]

Interesting; I'd been told they did.

some counties are required by their county states atty office but its not a state requirement it will be at some point but not yet.