First, no it's not. Second, in public you have ZERO expectation of privacy, same as when you are on the business property of others.
It makes me wonder more about the potential motives. I would think that if white hat guy was truly fighting for a "cause", he might be a little less nonchalant.
The white hat guy looks like a punk. The arrogance and nonchalance with which he is walking disgusts me - at least have some reverence for the **** you're about to pull. It's like he's just doing it for ****s and giggles. I wonder though what he planned on doing after the attacks as he doesn't seem at all concerned about being recognized.
It would be stupid to plaster these guy's mugs all over national TV, they could flee to a country that has no extradition treaty with The United States.
It's a double edged sword.
LOL, I agree. They are one of the reasons I generally go into a place with a drive through - to avoid the stress. I would think that by now they might even have cameras so that we can see the lips moving on the person taking the order. But alas, businesses are cheap mofos.
No, I'll give people their biological function. But since when has a camera been part of human physiology?
They might be pros, though I ruled that out initially because they walked by the various cameras showing their faces. Maybe they thought they would be lost in the clutter of all the acquired images since there was going be thousands of cameras in the area anyhow. The other thing maybe is they are NOT they guys who pulled off the bombing. This point we have to potential suspects wearing backpacks that look like the packs used in the bombings. That's what I am presuming the FBI is looking at anyhow.
ahhh, but you see, it's the same thing. Big Brother is watching you from the corner. A human cop is not a biological function. He is paid government eye.
Or they could have been recognized by a neighbor or caught at the airport and/or border before they were able to flee.
<<delete>>My rights do not cease to exist in public.
My rights do not cease to exist in public.
There are two types of expectations of privacy:
A subjective expectation of privacy is an opinion of a person that a certain location or situation is private. These obviously vary greatly from person to person.
An objective, legitimate or reasonable expectation of privacy is an expectation of privacy generally recognized by society.
Examples of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are person's residence or hotel room[1] and public places which have been specifically provided by businesses or the public sector to ensure privacy, such as public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses,[2] or a phone booth.[3][4]
In general, one cannot have a reasonable expectation of privacy in things held out to the public. A well-known example is that there are no privacy rights in garbage left for collection in a public place.[2] Other examples include: pen registers that record the numbers dialed from particular telephones;[5] conversations with others, though there could be a Sixth Amendment violation if the police send an individual to question a defendant who has already been formally charged;[6] a person's physical characteristics, such as voice and handwriting;[7] what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official's vision;[8][9] anything in open fields (e.g. barn);[10] smells that can be detected by the use of a drug-sniffing dog during a routine traffic stop, even if the government official did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect that drugs were present in the defendant's vehicle;[11] and paint scrapings on the outside of a vehicle.[12]
Ah, I wasn't even thinking about that. Yeah, I figured it's probably more complicated than I was imagining.It's not just the cameras, high quality being more expensive, it's the wiring and the storage. The more high quality the capture, the larger the file. Even with storage being "cheap", you'd soon reach your storage limit.
Nor do the camera owner's.
His right to liberty is protected from whatever arbitrary controls you wish to place on his use of his property.
It might be a spoiler; an attempt to make the real perps relax and slip up, because they think that no one is looking for them.
But, who knows...right?
And they have such nice "enhancers" that can magically take incredibly blurry pictures and transform them into detailed HD photos that can even capture that tiniest of birth marks.But, but, the pictures are so clear on NCIS and the there is instant facial recognition!
That's possible, too. Like I said: a double edged sword.
I agree that if the FBI is letting the cat out of the bag like this, it means they don't have jack **** else to go on.
You have no expectation of privacy in a public place. At least learn the law. It might come in handy for you some time.
I have every expectation that my rights and liberties shall be observed and revered in public. I have way above zero expectation to privacy in public. You don't get to steal my identity, for example, because I am in public.
I have a reduced expectation, not zero. In that if I commit a crime right in front of a cop, that cop has got all reason to exercise force against me. But you are not unfettered, there is always restraint against government force.
Again, this is untrue. You cannot steal my identity if I'm in public, you cannot take my records if I am in public, you cannot search me for being in public, you may not do a myrid of things to me just because I am in public. The words you are looking for is REDUCED EXPECTATION. Not none, not zero, but "reduced". In that other people can see me and I cannot control photons just yet. So if a cop directly sees me committing a crime, he does not have to go and get a warrant to have it admissible in court. He saw me. But you are not free to do whatever you want to me just because I am in public. My rights still exist.
I thinking more about the way he had the bag on one shoulder like it was nothing, his backwards cap and his casual walk. The guy in front was much more serious at least in those aspects.Actually the placement of his hands tell me he was very nervous.
Nonsense, I'm not allowed to steal your identity in private either.
You're wrong on this one, not only constitutionally, but legally. The court disagrees with you, the law disagrees with you, and most of the folks here disagree with you on this.
ZZZZZZZ, government use of force wasn't the issue or any part of it.
I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Photons. Give me a break. That's not what we're talking about here. And you know that. People can photography you and video tape you all they want all day long if you are in public. If you're splitting hairs about some future technology, that's not what's being discussed here.
I thinking more about the way he had the bag on one shoulder like it was nothing, his backwards cap and his casual walk. The guy in front was much more serious at least in those aspects.
ahhh, but you see, it's the same thing. Big Brother is watching you from the corner. A human cop is not a biological function. He is paid government eye.
You're stretching this now.
How about this? There's an FBI van outside your home just watching and waiting for you to come out. ohhhhh! the humanity!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?