Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
BS law and a huge invasion of privacy, there is no need for it because they can get these records from the phone company. Matter of fact I would imagine they are going to have to anyway.
Specifically what sounds good about it? Why are you so willing to give up your rights?
This will not prevent accidents and will not do anything to help convict anyone, they already have the means to determine if you were using the phone. The only thing this law can do is provide the police with an opportunity to go on a fishing expedition.
Specifically what sounds good about it? Why are you so willing to give up your rights?
This will not prevent accidents and will not do anything to help convict anyone, they already have the means to determine if you were using the phone. The only thing this law can do is provide the police with an opportunity to go on a fishing expedition.
, What sounds good about it?Getting people who text their way right into a collision/accident to have some accountability for their actions and maybe through reading the phone records immediately the cop can dispense with much unnecessary bureaucracy and paperwork if it can be proven right at the scene that a distracted driver on a phone phone wasnt a contributing factor.. sounds like a good law to me.. As for whether it will prevent accidents? if penalties for causing an accident due to inattention due to phone use are severe enough maybe some will think twice before texting and driving and maybe that some one wont drive into my car. I dont look at it as a case of giving up a right but more about giving the cops another tool to use in an accident to bring those responsible to justice.
How would you deal with the problem of drivers texting while driving as it sounds as if the general consensus of the replies is to have no laws or legal consequences for texting drivers ?
, What sounds good about it?Getting people who text their way right into a collision/accident to have some accountability for their actions and maybe through reading the phone records immediately the cop can dispense with much unnecessary bureaucracy and paperwork
So is searching your house or your computer without a warrant. Do you support that or only more "modest" invasions of your rights?
Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,910,149 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCharlotte
Without a warrant? Besides, this isn't just a 4th Amendment issue. It's a 5th. What if you have a password on your phone? Or face recognition lock? What if there is something illegal on the phone and by unlocking it it tends to incriminate you?
You're not getting to my phone data without me unlocking it and I'm not going to do that no matter what.
Those two cases may seem on the surface like mere judicial confusion and contradiction. But the real difference between them, says Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Hanni Fakhoury, is what investigators expected to find on those scrambled hard drives. Fakhoury cautions that the details of every case are different, but that broadly speaking, “if the government knows what they’re going to find, they have no problem,” he says. “If they don’t, they can’t make you decrypt anything.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
