| Nothing new Cellphone tracking seems like a very valuable tool for law enforcement for verifying alibis. They just need to verify who possessed the phone at the times in question. 
Lets just hope that cell phone tracking is limited to the investigation of serious crimes and is not used on whistleblowers, jealous spouses and reporters.
»www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/nyreg···one.html |
|
| I agree. The problem is that the standard of what constitutes "serious crimes" has been relaxed to the point that merely being suspected of doing some illegal is enough to authorize wiretaps and tracking. The threshold for getting tapped and tracked is a lot lower than people think.
--
Kilroy was here |
|
 NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to hoyleysox
In the case you're discussion, though, wouldn't a person be approached by law enforcement and then give his/her consent for them to view the GPS records? This seems a far cry from what appears to be happening now, where law enforcement can seemingly get this data without particularly good reason or customer consent.
I don't necessarily have a problem with Sprint obtaining this information or storing it, so long as customers are informed and agree. I have a problem with Sprint releasing it willy-nilly for nearly any purpose without informing the customer or obtaining any consent at all.
--
To all liberals: I am NOT one of your parents, so get the heck out of my wallet. It's time for you to grow up and take some personal responsibility for taking care of yourselves, which means not relying on the government to give it all to you. |
|
| said by NOVA_Guy:In the case you're discussion, though, wouldn't a person be approached by law enforcement and then give his/her consent for them to view the GPS records? This seems a far cry from what appears to be happening now, where law enforcement can seemingly get this data without particularly good reason or customer consent. I don't necessarily have a problem with Sprint obtaining this information or storing it, so long as customers are informed and agree. I have a problem with Sprint releasing it willy-nilly for nearly any purpose without informing the customer or obtaining any consent at all. I am not sure what hoops law enforcement has to jump through to get gps records, but I doubt that they need the subscriber's permission.
I agree with the willy nilly part, but I am willing to bet that the subscriber's permission is implied when they accept the privacy agreement. |
|
