They can also be found and removed in seconds. Know your vehicle.
But that doesn't include just highway movement, does it? It tracks what private establishments one goes to... Heck, you could drive around for 3 days in a parking lot, never entering onto the public roads, and it would record that too.
That, and a huge potential for GPS detectors.
Most intersections in my area have video cameras. Simply add license plate reading software, and they will know where most people are most of the time.
Drive down to the truck stop remove device and attach it to a long haul truck heading out of town.
Yeah, no expectation of privacy, but he did expect the government not to tamper with his property.
Anyone carrying a cell phone can be tracked..
Look out for the "if you have nothing to hide" crowd. Those people will sell any freedom away.
Placing a device on a private vehicle without the owner's permission is not a violation of privacy? How about recording everything the driver says as he drives down the road. This judge is a very dangerous idiot.
"who said using the gadgets is virtually the same thing as following a car along a road."
The only difference being that if they actually want to follow a car on the road they have to use a vehicle and manpower to do it.
Now instead they can have someone attach a device that costs $60 to as many cars as they want and sit someone down at a pc to watch them.
This is very, very bad.
The devices that these cops are using must include some sort of transmitter. This is more like Lojack, or the combined GPS/cell-phone services provided by OnStar.
So I don't want stories like this to scare people away from heading to the store and picking up a standalone GPS navigation system, or ordering one (without OnStar) in their car. They're pretty cool and useful devices.
(As for cell phones with GPS built in---well, I don't know enough about them to know for sure how much of a privacy scare they are. But there is definitely potential for scariness there.)
Time to start selling a GPS jammer, maybe broadcast static at 1575.42 and 1227.60 MHz.
If they can take the time to get one of these devices and install it on a car, I don't think it can be seen as an undue burden to law enforcement to also require a warrant.
"Must attach Bat-Tracker to the back of the villians' getaway car..."
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
Typical NY State crap!
True. But in conducting the visual surveillance, the cop wouldn't have had to place his hands on the vehicle without a warrant or the owner's consent to install the tracking device.
BTW, this is why I will never have Onstar or Easypass. How could I seriesly argue that I have an expectation of privacy if I've authorized GM to track my every move?
Wow, many ideas going through my mind now.
Thanks for posting this thread.
well, shoot. putting a gps on a person's body is virtually the same as watching someone walk around so, hey, why not?
Somebody please put the "prudence" back in jurisprudence.
So if I find one on my car, can I assume it has been abandoned or given to me to use as a skeet target?