Thread I actually agree with the ....

Atan Nolme

Flaccid Member
Oct 14, 2004
6,388
12
0
Karningul,Eriador, Endor
Marklar
₥363
ACLU

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan last Wednesday demanded that state officials stop stonewalling freedom of information requests for information on the program.

ACLU learned that the police had acquired the cell phone scanning devices and in August 2008 filed an official request for records on the program, including logs of how the devices were used. The state police responded by saying they would provide the information only in return for a payment of $544,680. The ACLU found the charge outrageous.

Full Story
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,468
9,438
473
41
Oz
Marklar
₥25,442
That is fucking bad. This should be a HUGE story nation wide.

Guess I'm going to need to encrypt my phone.
 

Amstel

The Hoarse Whisperer
Jul 12, 2009
28,172
12,439
473
you're a whore, but in a good way. Kindof.
Marklar
₥43,497
Could these cops be just asking for the phone and if they can "review the contents for reasons not limited to recent calls that may have caused distractions."

I can see an officer saying that and it being intimidating to a driver who doesn't want to be labled uncooperative.
 

Sarcasmo

A Taste Of Honey Fluff Boy
Mar 28, 2005
34,396
464
648
45
Austin
Marklar
₥663
Wow, kneejerk journalism at its finest. That's like publishing something that reads "Illinois state police equipped with handguns that could accidentally discharge and kill innocent children hundreds of feet away."
 

fly

omg
Oct 1, 2004
76,252
26,119
1,323
Marklar
₥64,619
Steam
mattressfish
Could these cops be just asking for the phone and if they can "review the contents for reasons not limited to recent calls that may have caused distractions."

I can see an officer saying that and it being intimidating to a driver who doesn't want to be labled uncooperative.

Uhhh, you still (should) have to say Yes for them to be able to search it without a warrant. It certainly doesn't have anything to do with officer safety.
 

b_sinning

Erect Member
Nov 22, 2004
22,790
47
41
46
Savannah, GA
Marklar
₥10
Hello Patriot Act. That 30 something housewife with 2 snot munchers in the back of her volvo looked like a terrorist so I better copy her sexting to her husband with out her knowing.
 

Amstel

The Hoarse Whisperer
Jul 12, 2009
28,172
12,439
473
you're a whore, but in a good way. Kindof.
Marklar
₥43,497
right. but if you don't do you appear uncooperative and get harsher treatment from the officer? Like everyone hopes to get off with a warning, but if you deny the cop access to your phone he can be intimidating to people who don't know.

I realize the citizen has to say yes. The issue is your situation when the officer says, "So, you won't cooperate with my request?" The citizen may have no idea what the officer has the capability of doing with your phone so he may just cough it up so he think he looks like he's cooperating.
 

kunlao21

Giant Member
Sep 14, 2009
66
0
197
Phoenix, AZ
Marklar
₥0
Atleast in FL, unless there's law enforcement's probable cause to believe that your phone needed to be searched for some traffic-related charge pertaining to the initial stop, they wouldn't be justified in demanding the phone and going through it. Pertaining to "hands-free phone" while driving-type laws and such.

Officers can ask to search your car during a traffic stop typically after the lawful reason for stopping you has been addressed. - i.e. stopped for speeding, given warning/ticket, "have a nice day. But before you go, mind if I search for bombs, bazookas or dead bodies real quick? Can I have a look at your phone while we're at it?"

At that point they can begin tossing your items, opening bags, boxes, lids... And your phone. But the permission to search can be withdrawn by you just as fast as you gave it. Since your phones can hold info just like briefcases, file folders, etc.

But unless the officer can articulate something to the effect of the cell being a direct circumstance of the traffic stop, it's search would need your consent.

And as far as being cooperative... The request shoudn't even come up until the the reason for your detainment has been resolved...
 
Last edited:

eileenbunny

Druish Princess
May 25, 2005
13,500
2,429
573
47
Columbia, Maryland, United States
Marklar
₥932
what i don't understand is Why the fuck do they have them in the first place?

Many states now have laws saying you can't text while driving and must use hands free devices to talk, so I'm guessing the cops are trying to find out if the reason you were driving like a complete fucktard is because you were using your cell phone while driving. Not you personally of course. I cannot comment on your driving abilities.

Regardless, it's wrong and it is an invasion of privacy and I'd be really unnerved to know that illegal search and seizure was taking place every time I get pulled over. Not that it helps to say no to an offer from a police officer for a search of your car in this state. If you do say no they arrest you, search your vehicle anyway, and hold you for the max amount of time they can while trying to come up with charges to pile upon you. It's easier to just let them search the car in the first place. Less of a waste of time.
 

Onnotangu

Flaccid Member
Oct 13, 2004
11,644
30
0
47
Detroit, MI USA
Marklar
₥0
Many states now have laws saying you can't text while driving and must use hands free devices to talk, so I'm guessing the cops are trying to find out if the reason you were driving like a complete fucktard is because you were using your cell phone while driving. Not you personally of course. I cannot comment on your driving abilities.

Regardless, it's wrong and it is an invasion of privacy and I'd be really unnerved to know that illegal search and seizure was taking place every time I get pulled over. Not that it helps to say no to an offer from a police officer for a search of your car in this state. If you do say no they arrest you, search your vehicle anyway, and hold you for the max amount of time they can while trying to come up with charges to pile upon you. It's easier to just let them search the car in the first place. Less of a waste of time.
then ask to see either bluetooth device or headset.
Problem solved.
 

eileenbunny

Druish Princess
May 25, 2005
13,500
2,429
573
47
Columbia, Maryland, United States
Marklar
₥932
then ask to see either bluetooth device or headset.
Problem solved.

I agree, that solves most of the problem. Most people wouldn't even take theirs off just because they got pulled over so the cop wouldn't even have to ask. It doesn't prove whether someone was texting or not though since most bluetooth devices that I'm aware of don't do that, so I'm guessing from the f'ing cops point of view this isn't good enough.
 

Onnotangu

Flaccid Member
Oct 13, 2004
11,644
30
0
47
Detroit, MI USA
Marklar
₥0
if it is your phone, do what you want with it.
encase it in plastic, shove it up a rhino. skatebroad on it.

there was a comment on an article about this
"Actually, there is a very easy way to opt out: go to oo.apple.com on any iOS device to opt out for that device. "

can someone with an iphone tell me if this works?