Published June 1, 2016 by Christopher di Armani Filed Under: Privacy Rights, Rights, Warrantless Searches
I’m forever baffled by morons wearing robes who believe violating our Right to Privacy is perfectly okay. The latest morons in black robes to defecate on our rights is the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.
These robed dipshits ruled, by a vote of 12-3, that police do NOT require a warrant to access your cell phone’s location data. Wireless companies, of course, hold all kinds of location information about us. This data has very valid uses, such as determining how many towers to add and were to add them based on user load on existing cell phone towers.
Where you go and how long you are there is not information our police forces should ever be entitled to “just because” they want it. They must show an explicit reason why they want this information and that must satisfy judicial review before a search warrant is issued.
The enlightened ones of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or “our betters” as I like to taunt them, disagree.
Judge Diana Motz utterly misunderstands privacy and her own words. The key word in her blather is “voluntarily” and she utterly abuses the concept.
Tags: 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, cell phone location data, cell-site information, featured, Judge Diana Motz, no warrant required
Published June 1, 2016 by Christopher di Armani Filed Under: Privacy Rights, Rights, Warrantless Searches
I’m forever baffled by morons wearing robes who believe violating our Right to Privacy is perfectly okay. The latest morons in black robes to defecate on our rights is the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.
These robed dipshits ruled, by a vote of 12-3, that police do NOT require a warrant to access your cell phone’s location data. Wireless companies, of course, hold all kinds of location information about us. This data has very valid uses, such as determining how many towers to add and were to add them based on user load on existing cell phone
 towers.
Where you go and how long you are there is not information our police forces should ever be entitled to “just because” they want it. They must show an explicit reason why they want this information and that must satisfy judicial review before a search warrant is issued.
The enlightened ones of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or “our betters” as I like to taunt them, disagree.
Judge Diana Motz utterly misunderstands privacy and her own words. The key word in her blather is “voluntarily” and she utterly abuses the concept.
Tags: 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, cell phone location data, cell-site information, featured, Judge Diana Motz, no warrant required