Feds push for tracking cell phones....

[thujone]

Here's a video with a relatively optimistic prediction of what it might be like:
http://www.aclu.org/pizza/

the future? try right now. that's quite similar to the format and amount of information i get for each account at my collection job. i work accounts dealing with people from 50 states and i'm doing it all from a data centre in canada. as much as you'd like to believe that something can be done if enough people wake up to the problem, the fact is governments have been trampling over people's rights since time immemorial. the only thing you can really do about it is live in small, rural communities where there aren't enough people to warrant all this attention to terrorism or drug smuggling or whatever other pretenses are being exploited.

 

[marsmellow]

^ Where does your company get all the information from? I was under the impression that this stuff was protected by privacy laws, but I guess not...

 

[Unbreakable]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/olympics-feds-reading-tweets/story?id=9825070

During the Olympics, The Feds Will Be Reading Your Tweets – And the Blotter...

I wonder why google has been so Interested in Social networking sites lately....%)

 

[thujone]

^ Where does your company get all the information from? I was under the impression that this stuff was protected by privacy laws, but I guess not...

it would be normally but when the contract is signed it's basically authorizing the company to have a lot of freedom with your information. it's not hard for them to get away with it anyway. i mean, who is really going to wade through pages of legalese just for a cell phone?

 

[spaceyourbass]

Pretty sure it's like this in most states already. They can break just about any rights with a warrant, and some even without, like random searches at checkpoints WITHIN the border. Read about the "constitution-free zone", effectively the border region, where your rights to illegal search and seizure are not protected.

That's right. You guys better take the batteries out of your phones when you need to, don't just turn them off.

 

[severely etarded]

It has always been thus.

Not leaving, sorry no. Customs never gave a rats ass about leaving the country until last year, sorry. Maybe legally the supreme court has ruled, but I was inside the US border region, what did I do that was "suspicious" besides have brown skin? It bothers me that I was singled out of a large crowd. I was doing nothing wrong, why me? The law states they need reason to suspect I am smuggling something or doing something illegal to do this to me.

It might be wise to learn about the subject before calling another person a fool.

They need reason to suspect me of doing something illegal like smuggling to detain me inside the border region, sorry. We still have rights (I think?)You need to learn the law sir. I was not doing anything to arouse "mere suspicion".(besides be brown possibly?)

No, you said you were stopped by Customs just short of the bridge at the border.

Yes I did, I was not searched by him though. The searches were at the checkpoints 80 miles in.

Whether you're late for a dentist's appointment really isn't relevant. "Oh, sorry sir, you have a dentist's appointment? Yes, of course you don't have to answer any of my questions or submit to a search. Go right ahead."

And what was I doing to arouse "mere suspicion"? Why was I singled out of a crowd. The only thing suspicious about me was that I had brown skin. I don't see how this warrants randomly singling me out of a crowd for questioning

No, the US Government regulates commerce between nations; that includes items leaving as well as items entering the country.

And your point is? I wasn't bringing anything out. What I do in mexico is my business as long as I'm not breaking the laws there or here, last time I checked. If it is the government's business, than I can no longer call this country "free", sorry. The push to care about what leaves the country was started last year, even though it may have been legal before.

They'll judge your reaction to the questions, as well as your answers, in determining whether further search would be wise. This is what enabled the US to catch an individual intent on bombing LAX on or about New Year's Day, 2000. And they'll conduct routine searches, either at random or because they simply think it might be a good idea.

I shouldn't have to answer these questions, especially at the checkpoint 80-100 miles inland. What did I do to arouse "mere suspicion"? You would have airports conduct cavity searches and do full-body X-Rays(not just scans) just to make us a little bit safer if you were in charge, I swear.

You said yourself that he probably couldn't hear you because of the noise. Is the new explanation that he was somehow degrading you?

Because I was profiled out of a crowd, tell me how that's right?

As far as the notion that white persons exiting and entering this country aren't questioned and searched, I'm quite skeptical. That someone had the temerity to stop you when you were late for a dentist's appointment isn't persuasive.

No, white persons ARE questioned entering this country(since about the same time they started requiring passports, just not leaving. And my mother who is white is never even asked about her citizenship when passing through a border patrol checkpoint. Me - searched 9/10 times and always 100% asked if I'm a citizen. As a matter of fact once when I rode with her, they asked if I was a citizen lmao. Her.. They didn't question. Tell me how profiling is right, when there are SEVERAL mexican nationals that are as white as george bush or bill clinton, spanish speaking. They tend to be wealthy business people from monterrey, most have mafia connections. They don't get profiled though .

Brown skin is what it comes down to, sorry if you don't believe anything I say Heuristic because you think I'm a looney conspiracy theorist. Maybe one day you will take a walk in my shoes. I was thinking about it last night, how we all have our own views based on our own set of experiences in life, and that it's impossible for anyone to understand your experience without going through it themselves. It's really amazing, I think if you had my set of experiences, you would think very similar if not the same as me Too bad we all argue with eachother on here, but none of us understand eachother and our experiences with life and politics

lol Heuristic letting the thread die without continuing the debate lol

 

[Heuristic]

lol Heuristic letting the thread die without continuing the debate lol

Oh, you. Very well.

Not leaving, sorry no. Customs never gave a rats ass about leaving the country until last year, sorry. Maybe legally the supreme court has ruled, but I was inside the US border region, what did I do that was "suspicious" besides have brown skin? It bothers me that I was singled out of a large crowd. I was doing nothing wrong, why me? The law states they need reason to suspect I am smuggling something or doing something illegal to do this to me.

It could be a random check. It could be that you seemed hurried, nervous (for legitimate reasons), and it could be that you weren't as routine a crosser as the other individuals. Who knows. But deciding that it must have been racism because you were chosen is highly premature. They do NOT need a reason to stop and question as you go across the border.

They need reason to suspect me of doing something illegal like smuggling to detain me inside the border region, sorry. We still have rights (I think?)You need to learn the law sir. I was not doing anything to arouse "mere suspicion".

Severely, you mentioned being stopped in the car with your wife, late for a dentist's appointment, just before "the bridge" to cross. You were AT the border. In the other instance you mentioned, you were walking across the border.

In neither instance do they need ANY reason to stop and question you.

Yes I did, I was not searched by him though. The searches were at the checkpoints 80 miles in.

Okay, at checkpoints further in they may stop your car, and ask you certain questions relating to citizenship and whether you're coming from another country. To be searched, however, the agent needs probable cause.

I understand from some of the buzz on the interwebs that many are acting as though this is new practice, but it's not. In fact the Supreme Court case approving the practice dates to 1976. U.S. v. Martinez-Fuerte et al, 428 U.S. 543 (1976).

Now, there is certainly a concern that these administrative stops for strictly limited purposes may be transformed into stops for general law enforcement purposes. To quote Judge Koziniski, an extremely well respected judge on the 9th Circuit,

In United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 96 S.Ct. 3074, 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976), the Supreme Court approved such internal checkpoints as a necessary means of stemming the flow of undocumented aliens. Experience has shown, however, that the checkpoints yield a far richer harvest--a cornucopia of contraband, particularly illegal drugs.1 Perhaps this is an accident--just a lot of lucky breaks on the part of the Border Patrol. But it may be much more: There's reason to suspect the agents working these checkpoints are looking for more than illegal aliens. If this is true, it subverts the rationale of Martinez-Fuerte and turns a legitimate administrative search into a massive violation of the Fourth Amendment.
22

A. Administrative searches are an oddity of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. They involve judicially-approved searches and seizures of countless people and places, with no particularized suspicion and normally without a warrant. To justify such a wholesale exemption from ordinary Fourth Amendment requirements, the government must establish two critical elements: first, that there's a compelling need for the intrusion; and second, that the intrusion is strictly limited to fulfilling that need. United States v. $124,570 U.S. Currency (Campbell), 873 F.2d 1240, 1244-45 (9th Cir.1989).
23

Security checks at airports and public buildings,2 sobriety checkpoints,3 safety inspections of private homes and businesses,4 home visits by welfare caseworkers,5 agricultural quarantine checks at airports,6 investigations following a fire,7 drug testing of certain public employees,8 unannounced inspections of businesses in closely regulated industries9--all of these and many more have been upheld under an administrative search rationale. What this means is that government officials routinely invade the privacy and property of countless millions; hardly anyone escapes their clammy grasp.
24

With this power comes a vast potential for abuse. The Supreme Court has therefore "repeatedly emphasized the importance of keeping criminal investigatory motives from coloring administrative searches." Id. at 1244. We too have stressed the need to keep these searches from becoming "infected by general law enforcement objectives, and the concomitant need for the courts to maintain vigilance." Id.; see Davis, 482 F.2d at 909. These judicial admonitions are fueled by the fear that, if not carefully circumscribed and monitored, administrative searches can destroy the promise of the Fourth Amendment.

http://openjurist.org/3/f3d/1312

And what was I doing to arouse "mere suspicion"? Why was I singled out of a crowd. The only thing suspicious about me was that I had brown skin. I don't see how this warrants randomly singling me out of a crowd for questioning

You're assuming that brown skin is what caused the agent to single you out. You don't know that to be true.

And your point is? I wasn't bringing anything out.

Which they don't know unless they search. That's why the government has ALWAYS had the power to search items entering or leaving the country.

What I do in mexico is my business as long as I'm not breaking the laws there or here, last time I checked.

First, you can commit crimes outside of US borders that still render you liable for prosecution. Second, you can have business in Mexico that, while legal in Mexico, is ultimately preparation to commit a crime in the United States. So it's a legitimate question.

If it is the government's business, than I can no longer call this country "free", sorry. The push to care about what leaves the country was started last year, even though it may have been legal before.

What you're talking about has always been legal practice.

Tell me how profiling is right, when there are SEVERAL mexican nationals that are as white as george bush or bill clinton, spanish speaking. They tend to be wealthy business people from monterrey, most have mafia connections. They don't get profiled though .

You do see the irony in your complaining about profiling while simultaneously doing the exact same thing in the same paragraph, right?

 

[severely etarded]

Severely, you mentioned being stopped in the car with your wife, late for a dentist's appointment, just before "the bridge" to cross. You were AT the border. In the other instance you mentioned, you were walking across the border

I never drive my car over the border. I park on this side of the border and ALWAYS walk accross to Matamorros, Tamaulipas, Mexico. I live in brownsville, makes sense when the dentists do better work with better dental equipment (don't know about medical) for much less. I do know Mexico has some VERY good hospitals for their aristocracy. But I have only been questioned leaving once, and I was not walking over the bridge, I was still well within the US before crossing the turnstyle.

Okay, at checkpoints further in they may stop your car, and ask you certain questions relating to citizenship and whether you're coming from another country. To be searched, however, the agent needs probable cause.
You're assuming that brown skin is what caused the agent to single you out. You don't know that to be true.

I am asked to unlock all my doors and open the trunk let the canines jump in the back seat and sniff the car 9/10 I go through. One time they smelled a spot where my dog had peed earlier that day and the agents checked under the back seats asking me if I had drugs under there. This has never happened to my mother, even after smoking marijuana in her car just before she drove through. She was not searched nor has she ever been, and the dogs don't hit on anyway. I tossed a roach out a half a mile before hitting the checkpoint once, pulled up to the checkpoint with smoke still coming out of the car. The agent (holding a belgian mallenois that appeared to be smelling the marijuana smoke)took a deep audible breath through his nose (pretty sure he was smelling it), asked if I was a US citizen, "Yes sir." I replied, he then said "You can go."

I stop at this checkpoint every time and 9/10 I am told to be searched before I can leave. I usually don't have time to play their games and have no interest of breaking the laws (besides recreational & responsible drug USE ONLY occasionally) This checkpoint is stupid because if I want to make a road trip somewhere, I have to find new pot connections wherever I travel WTF. Fucked up I have to stop at these checkpoints, sniffed by top notch canines and held to federal law to leave the border region of my state. A simple roach carelessly left in my vehicles ashtray could be held against me as a FEDERAL OFFENSE. As a matter of fact one time I was searched, the agent checked the ashtrays of my front and back seat, for just a little roach carelessly left behind. I am clearly profiled to be searched because of my age and race. My dad doesn't have as many problems, but other peers of age group and my skin color do.

First, you can commit crimes outside of US borders that still render you liable for prosecution. Second, you can have business in Mexico that, while legal in Mexico, is ultimately preparation to commit a crime in the United States. So it's a legitimate question.

Why should I be questioned as if to assume I may be doing something illegal? I have done nothing to arouse suspicion. I am no criminal. I have no criminal record.

Which they don't know unless they search. That's why the government has ALWAYS had the power to search items entering or leaving the country.

What you're talking about has always been legal practice.

Notice I said while this may have been legal, the push to see what's leaving in ones own pockets of one's own shorts is a fairly new concept, and I was singled out of a crowd of mostly white winter-texans then asked if I speak English. I speak VERY clear english, I sound white on the phone. I am 100% American. I felt kinda insulted I was asked if I spoke english as most people that don't speak any english are illegal immigrants(not profile, it's true) Suspecting people are up to something because they are young and brown IS profiling.

You do see the irony in your complaining about profiling while simultaneously doing the exact same thing in the same paragraph, right?

It's not profiling when you know the culture. I didn't say all, but MANY wealthy business people in Mexico have mafia connections and exert corrupt influences on police forces simply because Mexico is a very poor and corrupt country overall. It has it's aristocracy yes, but a small middle class and a huge poverty class. Every cop can be paid off because they make little to nothing. Bribery and extortion is a way of life in Mexico, and you would not understand this unless you truly understood the corrupt nature of politics in Mexico. I know a lot of Mexican people living in a town with a population where 60-65% is from mexico. About 35% of which are illegally here. The rest have dual citizenships or green cards. have many associates, contacts, everyday people from "badass" lawyers to doctors dentists, family, relatives, classmates(god do you know how many Mexican students from UTB that I know have parents that are involved in the Gulf Cartel and are putting their kids through school so they can become doctors and lawyers, how smart and wise of Mexican Mafia shor collars to do with all the money they make from their dirty business. I know MANY people from mexico, and there are MANY. I completely understand Mexican culture having Mexican-American family living in a town with 90% Latino demographic.

 

[Heuristic]

But I have only been questioned leaving once, and I was not walking over the bridge, I was still well within the US before crossing the turnstyle.

[emphasis added - H]

You've only been questioned leaving once--and on this basis you're accusing the Border Patrol of racism?

I am asked to unlock all my doors and open the trunk let the canines jump in the back seat and sniff the car 9/10 I go through.

That's interesting. Do they ask permission to search?

This checkpoint is stupid because if I want to make a road trip somewhere, I have to find new pot connections wherever I travel WTF.

Not really the best argument for a change in policy!

I speak VERY clear english, I sound white on the phone. I am 100% American. I felt kinda insulted I was asked if I spoke english as most people that don't speak any english are illegal immigrants(not profile, it's true)

You said that he asked you a question--in English, meaning that he assumed you spoke English. You answered, but believe he may not have heard you over the crowd. So, he thought that you simply were being silent in response to the question, as though you may not have understood. And, it being a border area with a high number of Spanish-only individuals, he asked you if you spoke English. That's not racism; that's courtesy.

I may end up agreeing with you on the apparently relentless searches at the checkpoint, but it sounds here like you were just annoyed at being stopped.

It's not profiling when you know the culture. [...] I know a lot of Mexican people living in a town with a population where 60-65% is from mexico. About 35% of which are illegally here.

You said on the one hand that there is a high probability that anyone (1) Spanish looking and (2) driving a nice vehicle is connected to organized crime, and should therefore be stopped. This, you say, is not profiling.

THEN you go on to say that there is a high probability that anyone (1) appearing to be Hispanic or of Mexican descent and (2) without a nice vehicle is illegal.
Stopping a person here, you say, is profiling.

Hmmm...

 

[severely etarded]

You've only been questioned leaving once--and on this basis you're accusing the Border Patrol of racism?

Racism and racial profiling are VERY different things. I never said they were "racist", just that they use racial profiling techniques to do their jobs to the best of their ability. Police could catch so many more criminals if they didn't need warrants to search people. People destroy evidence in the time it takes to obtain a search warrant, so if a police officer didn't need a warrant to search, he could effectively do his job better. It doesn't mean it's legal, but if it was it would make him more effective. But we have a bill of rights that is not to be trampled on. Profiling doesn't mean they don't like me for my skin color, just profiling me to be more likely to be engaging in illegal activity due to ethnicity and age and other factors that are considered profiling. When they start doing this to older white people(or even my hispanic 52 year old father for that matter) then I won't say they're profiling.

That's interesting. Do they ask permission to search?

Not really. It's more like Sir could you open the trunk please. Sir could you unlock the door. Even when I explain I am in a hurry, I am told to stay right where I am while they conduct a thorough search of the vehicle. One time they even lifted up everything in the trunk of my car (spare, jack, tools, floor mats, etc for NO REASON and just left it all messy in my trunk. Tell me how that's right... If you're gonna search me for no reason with no warrant, and you still find nothing, have the courtesy to put the spare tire back in the trunk the way it was after taking 5 minutes of my time making me wait so they can make my trunk a mess for me and make me take another 5 minutes putting it back. ugh.

Not really the best argument for a change in policy!

Well marijuana should be legal, not a Schedule I controlled substance. I shouldn't have to go through a Federal checkpoint with belgian mallenois canines(the best drug sniffing breed known to man) just to travel to say corpus christi or Kingsville, not to mention San Antonio or Houston. If I happened to carelessly leave a roach in the ashtray of my vehicle, they would literally seize the vehicle and press federal charges, which are MUCH more severe than state (state police here will issue a summons for a "usable amount" of marijuana. anything more is usually a ride to jail(even though in some parts of austin they are using "cite and release" for up to 4 oz. My point is I as an American citizen should not have to stop at a federal checkpoint with canines and be randomly (usually) searched and interrogated about my business in order to move freely about my state/country. Understand my point?

I may end up agreeing with you on the apparently relentless searches at the checkpoint, but it sounds here like you were just annoyed at being stopped.

Leaving the country, yes I was annoyed. While this practice may have been legal to randomly question people walking into mexico, it is a new custom to practice it. Coming into America it has always been practiced. Doing it while leaving is a new practice.(while like I said has probably already been legal)

You said on the one hand that there is a high probability that anyone (1) Spanish looking and (2) driving a nice vehicle is connected to organized crime, and should therefore be stopped. This, you say, is not profiling.

No I am just saying that rich caucasion people from mexico aren't stopped and searched. Rich caucasions from Mexico that are involved in organized crime would certainly never carry the drugs themselves. I'm not saying they should be searched, I'm just saying they are never harrassed the same way I am (I see a line of cars ahead go through no problems. I get to the front of the line:"Sir, stop right there. Are you a US citizen?" Me:"Yes sir" Them: "Sir, please open the trunk and unlock the doors. (dog jumps in car and smells things and jumps out), one time like I mentioned about them taking my trunk apart.

THEN you go on to say that there is a high probability that anyone (1) appearing to be Hispanic or of Mexican descent and (2) without a nice vehicle is illegal....

I think was misinterpretted somehow. Most dark-skinned people along the border that speak only spanish are here illegally, or very close to half. Illegal immigration is a HUGE problem in the border region.

 

[egor]

This is exactly why my rarely used cell phone is pay as you go and unregistered...

 

[Unbreakable]

Some of the scariest things are Presidential Directive #51 this is basically a blueprint for Dictatorship. Executive Orders #13303, #13315, #13350, #13364, #13422, #13438, Marshall Law, The Patriot Act , Cybersecurity Act(which lets censorship of the web),Corporations Are People too thing,the president has granted himself/government an immense arsenal of powers for which the term "dictatorial" is a modest understatement. These are just stepping stones...More will come.....

 

[Sega420]

anyone else noticing a DISTURBING trend in laws and legislations being brought in to "protect the citizens" ?