|
Posted by on August 28, 2007, 9:57 pm
Please log in for more thread options
if the officer spots marijuana plants growing to get a search warrant?
Of course it is.
* "The Right To Privacy", ISBN 0-679-74434-7, 1997
* By Attorneys Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy
*
* ...then the Supreme Court ruled that if the yard was big enough that "An
* individual may not legitimately demand privacy for activities conducted
* out of doors in fields," the Court wrote, "except in the area immediately
* surrounding the home."
*
* ...then the Supreme Court ruled that a barn sixty yards from a farmhouse
* was too far away from a house to expect privacy.
*
* ...then the Supreme Court ruled that aerial surveillance did not constitute
* a Fourth Amendment search.
*
* ...then the Supreme Court ruled that a "precision aerial mapping camera"
* that was able to capture objects as small as one-half inch in diameter did
* not constitute a Fourth Amendment search.
..then courts ruled that infrared surveillance of homes was permissible.
What is this?
* Subject: Re: Law Enforcement Aviation
* From: aufsj@imap2.asu.edu
* Date: 1996/12/27
* Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
*
* What interests me is how new technologies will be interpreted. I recently
* inquired at the local Law School about the courts views towards the use
* of impulse radar, and they said "Impulse what the heck?"
*
* Basically it is a radar that "sees through" things (like, say, your
* house).
*
* Their capabilities vary widely, but the feds are already using
* them and I know that Hughes corp. is designing a low-cost set up
* specifically for major police departments.
*
* They are driving towards a unit that can be mounted on a police helicopter.
*
* Will the police need a warrant? Who knows. Since they are allowed
* to do airborne infra-red analysis of your house, why not an take an
* airborne "x-ray" equivalent?
*
| 
XML site map