I just read this article. Quite interesting. What are your opinions on the use for it and in regards to our rights?

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

 

I think it's a handy tool which, when used in conjunction with the proper warrants, could help law enforcement a ton. If they are using such an extraction device without warrants, though...I mean, if they pull me over for speeding, why do they need all the info from my phone?

 

Interesting article.....

Wondering......the picture in the upper right displays a devise and a cell phone CONNECTED to it. If this is the actual devise, and it is necessary for a physical connection, I would say it is a violation of ones 4th Amendment. How does the LEO gain access to the phone, which is located on your hip? It's not a weapon....seizure is not necessary for the protection of the officer.

Now if it removes the data from the phone through "air transmission"....MAYBE that would be allowable.....since they are free (accept where prohibited by law).

Maybe our resident attorney has a comment.

I remember way back, law enforcement had a 2 suit case devise, that could listen in on conversation of any room that had a land line telephone (great for drug enforcement). It just rang the phone once and without anyone picking up, the phone was turned into a microphone for the room.

Eventually, the courts found this illegal.

 

That's some crap. Why on earth would they possibly need to search a phone? The only reason I can think of, is checking for txt'ers. Check the time on the last txt to see if they were doing so while driving...

 

Doesn't effect me directly, because I don't and won't own a cell phone...... But this is an invasion of privacy unless there is a warrant. A warrant is impossible during a typical traffic stop. If they use this gadget on "Bob" because he has a burned out tail light, the cops are invading his privacy....... Last I checked that's illegal but they change those rules like most people change socks.

 

I don't know MI law or if texting while driving is legal or not, but I'm willing to bet this is exactly what it is used for.

It is illegial in GA to text and drive, a device like this would be handy when those are pulled over under suspect of texting while driving, and of course the driver denies it.

The rest of the complaint from the ACLU looks like tin hat matierial IMO. I find it hard to believe they would download my pics, and if they did, they would get a lot of various family shots and the occasional car shot.....

 

Well that Rob, and if they feed an excuse to the officer about not txting and driving, the onboard gps records location, time, and possibly speed, so he can get them with a lying to a LEO ticket too. Or Obstructing Justice..

 

Seems to me there would have to be limitations attached to the use of the device. Someone perhaps 'looking down' while driving as seen by a LEO could end up being simply a long glance at the stereo. I see the possibility of a lot of abuse of this device.

Don't get me wrong. I'm in auto insurance claims, and I know that texting while driving ("TWD") is a BIG problem. In fact, my own daughter caused an accident that resulted in injury and a total insurance expense of $28,000 or so, just by fiddling with her I-pod instead of paying attention to the traffic.

If the LEO suspects a driver has been TWD or on the phone, what other way is there for him to 'prove' his suspicions? Is his observation in and of itself 'probable cause' for use of the device?

Seems the courts would have to be able to give a blanket approval of the use of the device, but you can be sure there are going to be lawyers involved.

 

Texting while driving IS illegal in Michigan. I'm guessing this is just to catch texters......

 

I'm interested in knowing what would occur to those that deny the LEO their cell upon request.

Later
Allex