If I could smack California Governor Jerry Brown on the back of the head, I would. He pissed me off when he took away my Amazon affiliate income for several months. Now he has vetoed legislation that required police offers to obtain a warrant in order to search your phone. That creeps me out. The idea of a California cop — not nice ones like Ponch and John — being able to search my phone for nebulous reasons is creepy. Here’s more from Wired:
California Gov. Jerry Brown is vetoing legislation requiring police to obtain a court warrant to search the mobile phones of suspects at the time of any arrest.
Brown’s veto message abdicated responsibility for protecting the rights of Californians and ignored calls from civil liberties groups and this publication to sign the bill — saying only that the issue is too complicated for him to make a decision about. He cites a recent California Supreme Court decision upholding the warrantless searches of people incident to an arrest. In his brief message, he also doesn’t say whether it’s a good idea or not.
How do you guys feel about this practice? Are you comfortable with the idea of police officers searching phones of “people of incident”? Or are you wigged out that cops can see your naughty pictures and videos for vague reasons of suspicion? Do you favor safety or civil liberties in this case?
So basically, they could take protesters phones and delete the videos if they wanted. This is giving them permission to seize phones for little or no reason.
I didn't even think about it in terms of the whole Occupy Sesame Street thing. Excellent point about protesters!
It seems like I read something about officers abusing their power everyday now. If they can go through your phone if they arrest you, they will arrest you to go through your phone. Similar to when BART shot that guy and tried confiscating peoples phones. Now they can arrest you to do it.
I recently found out that in MA if a police officer tells you to disperse and you don't, even though people have the right to protest, they can and will lock you up. They arrested 150 people Monday or Tuesday night for protesting the "Sesame Street" thing.
I will believe that's rooted in Boston's history of racism. You think MA would enjoy protests with the whole Tea Party incident….
Seriously man, I didn't even think about it that way.
I'm glad I didn't have to vote in the last California Governor's race. Everyone knew Jerry Brown was a douche, but Meg Whittman was just trying to buy the office with her own millions of dollars. No winner worth picking there.
That being said, I live in Arizona, a state where the sitting Governor literally froze like a deer in the headlights during the debate, lied about headless bodies in the desert, and still got reelected. Ugh……
I don't like the way it sounds at first glance but a wallet and a cell are becoming the same thing these days. I see it says search and arrest. So as long as the information is seen only after an arrest then so be it.
I do not like the scenarios where refusal to produce your phone for viewing could lead to an arrest though. Perhaps that is a warrantless search at that point and any and all information gathered would be tainted fruit.
That is true but I have never handed over my whole wallet, just an ID.
If you are arrested they go through your wallet though. That was where I was going with the thought.There is too much sensitive information on these devices to simply hand it over like an ID.Hopefully this kind of stuff pushes us towards biometric encryption and locks.Sent from my iPhone 4
Oh yeah I see what you mean.
Well… if you have your phone password locked… they can't make you tell them ANYTHING let alone what the password is.
They would have to break a different law to bypass the lock.
that's about the only thing that would make me want to keep my cell phone locked. That's one thing I never lose; I always know where my phone is, so keeping it locked has never been an issue for me.
It's similar to when I was in high school if you got caught with your cell phone on during school hours a teacher would take it away. Usually it was on so people could text each other during classes, and the teachers or principal would always look through your messages to see who else you had been texting so they could go confiscate their phones as well. One of my friends would always take the battery out of his phone before handing it over if he got caught because they only require the phone, not the battery.
Here's my thought: They wouldn't need to look at your phone unless you need to be arrested or are suspect to a crime, right? So, to avoid that, DON'T COMMIT CRIMES. In real life, that is: GTA is fair game. Anyway, if you're afraid that they'll see your pics when searching, just take them off. I mean, really, this isn't really that big a deal. Just delete your messages often and keep your pics on another device, and you'll be fine.
So, in short, pretend your phone is Facebook and the cops are potential employers.
That's not the point. Any government official has to assume you are innocent until proven guilty. They cannot search for evidence (personal effects) without your consent or without a warrant.
So if a cop wants to see my phone, he better have a warrant or else you simply refuse his request based on your fourth amendment right to do so and immediately call a lawyer. Our government is supposed to protect our rights, not sweep them under the rug when it is convenient for them. It is unfathomable that we can be treated like criminals even if we have done nothing wrong. The cops are not our masters and the State cannot treat us like children. Don't ever allow it.
Regardless of whether you have committed a crime or not is not the issue. You are a U.S. citizen and you have certain rights. Among them: "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."
-M
Cops can already pull you over and search your car if you look suspicious though, right? How is that any different from stopping someone on the street and searching them?
Isn't there a statute with something that (dumbed down) states that if your behavior or actions could cause harm to another person, then the police already have the right to do all of this? I'm not advocating pulling people off the streets for no good reason; no, you still have to be suspect. Besides, if asked, I'm not sure I know all that many people who would say "No, officer, I won't let you clear my name by searching my phone."
It's not that the fact that you have nothing to hide or have done nothing wrong so a person feels no harm can come of the search but the fact that it is searched prior to an arrest.
In my earlier post I advocated that I think it is legal for them to do this after you are arrested the same as if they go through your pockets and wallet. However simply stopping to search your mobile as a means of investigating whether or not some kind of criminal or civil violation has occurred is what M is contending as unconstitutional.
Yes such an interpretation of the statute exists; public harm/interest. That doesn't extend itself to an officer pulling you over for speeding and then asking to browse your personal information on your smartphone.
I think this issue will die down in the next 2-3 years and they'll just subpoena whichever cloud backend service your phone uses instead.
But you see, if the person gives their permission, then it doesn't matter if they were arrested or not, doesn't it?
Sure, no police guy would pull you aside and ask to look through your phone "just because". Surely, they'd have a legitimate reason for doing so. While I'm all for civil liberties and the like, sometimes safety must come at the expense of privacy.
And yes, they could probably access your phone info if they wanted to.
Agree to disagree then. I'm not willing to give up privacy for safety.Quite the assumption that the police are upstanding and would never do something because they have a badge and gun….never….Yes if you give permission it doesn't matter. Like all things legal though there will be exceptions. Duress, etcSent from my iPhone 4
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin (1775)
I want to address these points:
-"Cops can already pull you over and search your car if you look suspicious though, right?"-
Unless you're in Arizona where "Hispanic" is considered probable cause (sorry Nightshade)… than a resounding no.
They have to have "probable cause" to pull you over in any state.That means either you are being caught doing something wrong (speeding, tags, run a red light, etc.) or they have prior reasons (probation, parole, your under investigation for something else). If they just pull over random people and search them, no matter what they find (the Limburgh baby, Jimmy Hoffa, nuclear warheads, etc), it won't hold up in court because they violated your Constitutional rights as an American to get it.
-"Sure, no police guy would pull you aside and ask to look through your phone "just because". Surely, they'd have a legitimate reason for doing so.
What if I worked on a political campaign against whomever was in office. Now a policeman pulls me over for no reason but searches my phone, gets the contacts, and lets me go.
Does that sound right? Because you're saying that's legal already and even more so in CA now. Yes, there IS a reason for that to happen… and the term "legitimate" is suspect to interpretation.
There's this police/military practice that has been and is currently used called Random Checkpoints. Random Checkpoints are often hastily-set checkpoints hidden around a sharp corner or out of sight in order to prevent drivers from escaping unnoticed. In a random checkpoint, people are systematically pulled over and checked; occasionally, this is used as a "sobriety checkpoint" to cut down on drunk driving, but police also catch wanted criminals using this method. It doesn't matter if you look suspicious or not; the police are fully capable AND authorized by law to stop every single car for checks. So, police don't actually need probable cause to pull you over in every case. Thus, this practice of searching phones could theoretically hold up in court.
Man, I love playing Devil's Advocate.
They do not check IDs at checkpoints unless they have cause. Cause could be inebriation, expired tags, no inspection sticker, etc. Those checkpoints are also told to the public with notice but their locations are kept secret.
you are glossing the point about illegal search and seizure. You are also bumping into illegally detaining citizens.
Edit: I say that for my state which operates a diff type of law. Napoleonic Code.
SG is right. A sobriety check point is told to the public usually via newspapers. It has to be.
Joe Arpaio the Sheriff (or evil emperor if you will) of Maricopa County AZ once put checkpoints on every road entering the county line and looked for drugs in every car… The Federal Government stepped in and reamed his ass for it because it was unconstitutional.
You realize these laws started like this because under British rule, the nobles got away with doing all of this to us. If they saw a crowd of more than 3 people, they were allowed to open fire. Saying "Man… the King made a bad decision when he did that"… was considered treason and punishable by death even if you were talking about his shoes.
A Red Coat could walk in to any home at any time and confiscate anything they wanted… this is why the fundamentals that we call American came to be.
My point wasn't that you wouldn't know that you would be pulled over, it's that everybody was pulled over whether or not they were suspicious in any way. And I never said they could search the car, just look inside from outside the car. No opening the trunk or doors, just looking through the windows.
Besides, I will once again state this; this debate is purely for entertainment. I don't like the idea, but somebody has to play Devil's Advocate occasionally. This time, it just happens to be my turn. .(though I usually save this kind of thing for other sites…)
Cops can not search your car without permission or probable cause. If you say no, they can call a drug dog to sniff the exterior of you car for probable cause, ie drugs smells. They can't just search your car because they pulled you over.
BUT! They are allowed to look into your car from outside, and if they've pulled you over it's probably not just because they felt like it. I'm sure they would have a reason to pull you over. This seems to apply in most situations, except for speeding tickets and running red lights (that sorta thing). Though, indeed, they cannot search your car merely because they pulled you over.
You don't have to commet a crim to be arrested. Ask the protesters in New York and many cities across our nation.
Weeeeelllll, according to the police, they were arrested for actual misdemeanors, though that might not be entirely true.
Dude… I've been arrested more times than I care to count.
Once I spent 9 hours in a cell for playing my acoustic guitar too loud and disturbing the peace.
Another was for running away from a library that nothing happened in.
Another was for climbing a tree in a public park.
I even lost my license once for being in the band at a party in which there was my buddy's dad's beer in the fridge and underage people there.
I lost it AGAIN once here because I was driving a friend's car since he was drunk (I don't drink) and he had a busted tail light…. and he sold the car before I could prove the light had been fixed… so penalties and such added up.
All my stories PALE in comparison to others. I know a guy who was stopped at a red light, and a cop car rammed him from behind. The policeman pinned the whole thing on him somehow and he got in deep shit.
Long and short, if they want to make something stick just so they can look at your phone, they will.
Dude! You have enough of a back-story and motivation to be a DC supervillan. The only thing you're missing is the costume and a catchphrase.
-M
Oh… I got the costume and an arsenal of catchphrases. What I'm missing is henchmen and a proper lair.
If I was in Cali I'd offer my services to be henchman. I've done my part to keep the feud going by instigating it while n8 is away.
The only problem I have with that, is that you would have to refer to me as "Master N8R".
And that just doesn't sound right.
I've never heard any of the joker's henchmen call him master joker. I think you want to be called the great master n8r.
Yeah… I think of myself more as a Ra's al Gul than a Joker.
I guess I could be more like Kingpin or Penguin and just go by "Boss" to the help.
Well… once we get a lair, we'll get started on the whole world domination thing.
However, they can't easily pin some random crime on you just to look at your phone if you haven't done anything even close to being wrong. I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that it isn't likely; it would take a lot of work, and no sane person would go through that much effort just to look at your phone.
It depends…
What if my girlfriend used to date this cop and he wants to see how often I talked to her?
And they can pin some crime on anybody. Did you ever see Walking Tall with the Rock? He pulled dude over, dude said "What's the problem" the Rock said "You have a busted tail light" he said "No I don't" and the Rock smashed his tail light and said "You do now".
Do you have any idea how many cases have been overturned since new DNA evidence? These people were in jail for some cases 40 years and DNA finally proved them innocent. 40 YEARS! Sometimes, the evidence looks terrible and the person truly is not guilty. That's happened ALOT.
EDIT:
Another thing that really happened to me… I got pulled over for a cracked windshield… and there was no crack in the windshield. I pointed that out, and the officer said "Oh… I thought there was, License and registration… where are you coming from?"
This is true. I've seen some cops that have a "cuff now, ask questions later" policy. The reason they get away with it is because most people don't want to waste time and money in a legal battle with the police departmen over something "minor" and the officer will usually get off with a slap on the wrist.
-M