GPS Tracking—Warrant or No Warrant?

[Lemur]

A judge just ruled that the police may attach a GPS device to your car in Wisconsin, and track your movements without a warrant. What do the Orgahs think? Should the police show probable cause to a judge, or is tracking your movements sufficiently innocuous that no warrant should be needed?

Wisconsin police can attach GPS to cars to secretly track anybody's movements without obtaining search warrants, an appeals court ruled Thursday.

However, the District 4 Court of Appeals said it was "more than a little troubled" by that conclusion and asked Wisconsin lawmakers to regulate GPS use to protect against abuse by police and private individuals.

As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights -- even if the drivers aren't suspects.

Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison.

That means "police are seemingly free to secretly track anyone's public movements with a GPS device," he wrote.

[rory_20_uk]

Warrant. You can follow someone without easily enough. Oversight is required when you start tagging people more closely.

Next will be "tagging" phones without a warrant (or is this already done?)

[KukriKhan]

What do Orgahs thinK?

This one thinks: there's no legal expectation of privacy when travelling on public roads, so the tracking bit I'm OK wit; any tracker of me would be bored beyond tears.

But the placement, especially the secret placement, of a device might (and I think, should) constitute a "breaking" that some judge ought to be required to authorize beforehand, based on probable cause.

So, yeah... I vote: warrant.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

No warrant. The information gained is the same as other information that could be obtained without a warrant--having an undercover car follow the person day and night.

[Andres]

I don't want devices attached to my property by the government to track my movements, thank you very much.

Privacy is a human right.

[Fragony]

Can't remember me getting a car from them

[Hosakawa Tito]

A warrant should be required.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Drives to the Canadian Ballet parking lot and places the tracking device on Beirut's car.

[Crazed Rabbit]

No warrant. The information gained is the same as other information that could be obtained without a warrant--having an undercover car follow the person day and night.

You could say the same thing about tapping a cell phone.

There should be a warrant.

From the article:

Meanwhile, law enforcement officials called the decision a victory for public safety because tracking devices are an increasingly important tool in investigating criminal behavior.

Screw you and your public safety. Public safety means nothing compared to our rights.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You could say the same thing about tapping a cell phone.

This is true, you could say the same thing. It's not exactly the same thing though. Lots of cell phone calls are private--but anywhere you go in your car is public.

[drone]

Warrant, if only to prevent widespread abuse. It's probably a rubber stamp for the judge anyway, but I don't see a reason why it should not need a warrant.

If I find one attached to my car during my weekly bug sweeps, that thing is going on a Metro bus.

[Hooahguy]

warrant. unless its like in the movies where they latch on one the suspects car last minute as the suspect flees the scene.

[drone]

The NY Court of Appeals says: Warrant.

ALBANY — It was wrong for a police investigator to slap a GPS tracking device under a defendant's van to track his movements, the state's top court ruled today.

A sharply divided Court of Appeals, in a 4-3 decision, reversed the burglary conviction of defendant Scott Weaver, 41, of Watervliet.

Four years ago, State Police tracked Weaver over 65 days in connection with the burglary investigation.

The judges ordered a new trial and suppressed information obtained from the GPS as evidence at the new trial.

Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman wrote the majority opinion, saying the nonstop surveillance was conducted by State Police without a warrant.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

This one thinks: there's no legal expectation of privacy when travelling on public roads, so the tracking bit I'm OK wit; any tracker of me would be bored beyond tears.

But the placement, especially the secret placement, of a device might (and I think, should) constitute a "breaking" that some judge ought to be required to authorize beforehand, based on probable cause.

So, yeah... I vote: warrant.

Completely agreed.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I wonder if there is an easy way to detect such a device - somehow picking up if a GPS is broadcasting in a small area, confirming that there is one on your car...

[drone]

I wonder if there is an easy way to detect such a device - somehow picking up if a GPS is broadcasting in a small area, confirming that there is one on your car...

Judging from the two articles, it sounds like they do not broadcast anything, they just store the GPS data for an extended period of time and the police recover the device at some point and plot the movement of the vehicle. You might be able to pick up a signal from the receiver oscillator (same concept as radar detector detectors), if not shielded well I would expect some noise around 1.5 GHz.

[KukriKhan]

I wonder if there is an easy way to detect such a device - somehow picking up if a GPS is broadcasting in a small area, confirming that there is one on your car...

http://customerhelp.us/interfaqs/adv...questionId=187

GPS "loggers" just record, not transmit, so you couldn't find them electronically, only visually.

GPS "trackers" broadcast/narrowcast a short burst every 20 minutes or so.

So far. The field is still emerging, tho'.

[Askthepizzaguy]

There are video cameras everywhere. Companies track your credit card purchases. Police can follow you if you're on a public road. I personally have nothing to hide, so I don't care. Track me all day long.

If they invented a device which could track your heat signature from space, I wouldn't give a rat's behind. As long as you're not tapping my phone calls or rifling through my things at home, or sneaking around my yard and taking pictures of my nudity, you're not invading my privacy.

[Husar]

I'm just wondering how long the batteries last and how much range they have. If someone drives to Mexico, can they still track her/him without sending a car after her/him?

[Vuk]

Sure, it does not violate the constitution, but it is one of those things that State governments need to use their brains about. They should make that illegal.

[Crazed Rabbit]

The thing is, even if the same effect could be had by having cops follow a guy everywhere, using GPS trackers make it so much easier for the Police to track anyone on nothing more than a whim. A step down the road to the police state.

As always, I fully reject the "If you haven't done anything wrong you don't need to worry" line.

CR

[Andres]

The thing is, even if the same effect could be had by having cops follow a guy everywhere, using GPS trackers make it so much easier for the Police to track anyone on nothing more than a whim. A step down the road to the police state.

As always, I fully reject the "If you haven't done anything wrong you don't need to worry" line.

CR

Indeed.

Also, if the government wishes to break into my privacy, they'll need a very, very good reason as the right on privacy is a human right.

"You don't have the worry if you didn't do anything wrong" is not a good enough reason to break into my privacy.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I'm willing to be persuaded on this, but how do you define privacy when you are out in public?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Well, how do you feel about your phone being tapped while you're on your cell in public? After all, half of that conversation is public anyway...

[Vuk]

Indeed.

Also, if the government wishes to break into my privacy, they'll need a very, very good reason as the right on privacy is a human right.

"You don't have the worry if you didn't do anything wrong" is not a good enough reason to break into my privacy.

Agreed. And of course if they have free reign to break into people's privacy, it will no doubt lead to abuses so you WILL have something to worry about. I am a WI citizen, so this is gonna affect me personally (which isn't to say that I will be tracked by them, but that they will now have the right to track me). I don't go anywhere I wouldn't tell anyone who asked me on the street, but it is none of their darned business unless they got a darned good reason, and then they better have a warrant. If they want to know where I drive, they can bloody ask me in person or get a warrant.

[Askthepizzaguy]

That is different. I can speak softly enough to not be overheard. My phone call is a private matter. But anyone can see where I am when I am driving.

[Andres]

That is different. I can speak softly enough to not be overheard. My phone call is a private matter. But anyone can see where I am when I am driving.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean I have to be followed constantly. Why would the government need to registrate where I am at any given time?

Is collecting data about where you were at what time not an infringement on your privacy?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Is collecting data about where you were at what time not an infringement on your privacy?

I think it's good to require a warrant that isn't much hassle for these, but how is it infringing on privacy? You're in public. The "placing a device on your car" is the bit they need a warrant for.

[Andres]

I think it's good to require a warrant that isn't much hassle for these, but how is it infringing on privacy? You're in public. The "placing a device on your car" is the bit they need a warrant for.

Yes Sasaki, you're right.

But the thought of a government being able to track all my movements makes me feel uncomfortable, that's all. It's a bit too much 'Big Brother is watching you' for my taste.

It's my life and I don't want to be constantly followed or have my behavioural patterns registrated by the government, be it by a device or a person.

I'm sensitive for such things

I meant privacy more in the "leave me alone and mind your own business, please" kinda way.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I think that it's a good idea to play it on the safe side and get a warrant, on further reflection. I don't think there's much of an issue here because it is all in public, much like your garbage is public. But I think getting a warrant could prevent certain abuses.

[Vuk]

I think that it's a good idea to play it on the safe side and get a warrant, on further reflection. I don't think there's much of an issue here because it is all in public, much like your garbage is public. But I think getting a warrant could prevent certain abuses.

If it is serious enough to put a tracking device on someone's car, then it is serious enough to get a warrant. Such things can and do lead to abuses. There is no reason for allowing such a thing.