• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Google Earth Used To Find Unlicensed Pools

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. - A town on New York's Long Island is using Google Earth to find backyard pools that don't have the proper permits.

The town of Riverhead has used the satellite image service to find about 250 pools whose owners never filled out the required paperwork.

Violators were told to get the permits or face hefty fines. So far about $75,000 in fees has been collected.

Riverhead's chief building inspector Leroy Barnes Jr. said the unpermitted pools were a safety concern. He said that without the required inspections there was no way to know whether the pools' plumbing, electrical work and fencing met state and local regulations.


Google Earth Used To Find Unlicensed Pools

Paging big brother......
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,420
Reaction score
16,256
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Last edited:

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,083
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why do pools require a permit anyway?
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Yea that won't fly, the pools are technically in "plain view" so it would be allowed.
Not if there is a fence unless humans have learned to fly as part of their daily activity.
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It's outside, that practically qualifies it as "plain view."
Not that I want them to be able to spy on people but that is the truth.
But its not in plain view unless you are a bird.
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Or you have a satellite.

I'm 95% sure any court would say that qualifies as "plain view."
I seriously doubt that. How many people own orbital satellites?

In plain view has always been at ground level. Plain view would not cover Satellite coverage
 
Last edited:

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It's not what I want but that is how a judge will, most likely, look at it.
I know its not your opinion but I just don't see how you can call a satellite image "in plain sight"

That from what I have seen has always been from the perspective of an individual's position to what they can see around them not overhead by a machine.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
First, its hard for me to call this "big brother" when its a publicly available piece of software that we can all go forth and do this very instant.

Second, I'm conflicted. The police are not utilizing specialized equipment, performing an action that is beyond what a normal citizen could do without a warrant, is not invading privacy (Which the FLIR in my opinion would as they see inside the house), etc. At the same time, there is something just kind of unnerving about the notion.

Not sure how I feel on this.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,420
Reaction score
16,256
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Yea that won't fly, the pools are technically in "plain view" so it would be allowed.
If it was plain view then they would not have had to use google earth. Again this is no different that tapping phone lines or using FLIR without a warrant.
 
Last edited:

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
88,743
Reaction score
27,894
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I know its not your opinion but I just don't see how you can call a satellite image "in plain sight"

That from what I have seen has always been from the perspective of an individual's position to what they can see around them not overhead by a machine.
I thought "in plain view" meant with you own eyeballs.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The thing is, a fence does not present one a reasonable assumption of privacy from individuals in high places. A person in a house near by on the second floor can see in, helicopters can see in, repair man working on a telephone pole can see, a person working on the roof of your neighbor can see in, hell for some fences a tall person can see in.

This is different then FLIR as it is giving someone a view inside your house, somewhere you have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to views through the wall. A phone tap is letting someone listen into something through an extra piece of equipment to hear something that is believed to have an expectation of privacy.

If you're talking about illegal activity on your cell phone and a cop hears it, or you're playing it on speaker phone, they don't need a warrant to act becuase you're expectation of privacy is negligable because people doing no investigation of any kind of could reasonable be able to do the same thing as the cops. Likewise, you have no reasonable expectation to privacy in your fence because its routinely possible for people to be able to see over it.

I think you're off base trying to compare this to items that allow you to get a view of sorts inside walls, or something allowing you to ease drop on a private conversation.
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The thing is, a fence does not present one a reasonable assumption of privacy from individuals in high places. A person in a house near by on the second floor can see in, helicopters can see in, repair man working on a telephone pole can see, a person working on the roof of your neighbor can see in, hell for some fences a tall person can see in.

This is different then FLIR as it is giving someone a view inside your house, somewhere you have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to views through the wall. A phone tap is letting someone listen into something through an extra piece of equipment to hear something that is believed to have an expectation of privacy.

If you're talking about illegal activity on your cell phone and a cop hears it, or you're playing it on speaker phone, they don't need a warrant to act becuase you're expectation of privacy is negligable because people doing no investigation of any kind of could reasonable be able to do the same thing as the cops. Likewise, you have no reasonable expectation to privacy in your fence because its routinely possible for people to be able to see over it.

I think you're off base trying to compare this to items that allow you to get a view of sorts inside walls, or something allowing you to ease drop on a private conversation.
So playing Devil's advocate you would be ok if tax evaluators could leapfrog your fence to see what you have in the back yard in an effort to increase the taxes on your property?
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. - A town on New York's Long Island is using Google Earth to find backyard pools that don't have the proper permits.

The town of Riverhead has used the satellite image service to find about 250 pools whose owners never filled out the required paperwork.

Violators were told to get the permits or face hefty fines. So far about $75,000 in fees has been collected.

Riverhead's chief building inspector Leroy Barnes Jr. said the unpermitted pools were a safety concern. He said that without the required inspections there was no way to know whether the pools' plumbing, electrical work and fencing met state and local regulations.


Google Earth Used To Find Unlicensed Pools


Paging big brother......
well, the broke the law and got caught. too bad for them.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So playing Devil's advocate you would be ok if tax evaluators could leapfrog your fence to see what you have in the back yard in an effort to increase the taxes on your property?
No, but then that'd be because they were tresspassing.

You could say they could get a ladder, stand on public property with it, and peer over. However I think that'd be rather easy to fight in court that peering over from the sidewalk is hardly going to give one the proper examination needed to reflect the legitimate value of anything they see in relation to taxes able to be paid.

And, also, I'll note. I am conflicted on this...it FEELS wrong, but it just seems like it should be okay.

To give a better scenario...if I or someone else was growing pot in my fenced in back yard and a police officer came by on public property adjacent to my house, put down a step stool, walked up said step stool, and then saw into my back yard and saw pot plants growing....no, I don't think I'd have a problem with that.

Now if I had them covered by a tarp and he entered into move it, that'd be wrong. If he had to come onto private property to do it, that'd be wrong. If he just sat there watching me for hours on day, that'd be wrong (akin to peeping tom type laws). But I have no reasonable expectation of privacy in regards to the top down view of a fenced in back yard.

Think of it this way...

Its perfectly legal for a woman to lay naked face up in the middle of her house, because the only way someone is going to see it is if they're illegally viewing it. However i that same woman went into her fenced in backyard and laid in it naked with her front side up, and the kid next door is clearly able to see it from his window, its to my understanding that the childs mother could actually call the cops in regards to the person exposing themselves. Its because there's no expectation of privacy from above in a fence, and therefore you're still essentially exposing yourself to public. I believe this is similar to the notion of not being able to have sex in front of ones window that is clearly visible to those outside.
 
Last edited:

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The thing is, a fence does not present one a reasonable assumption of privacy from individuals in high places. A person in a house near by on the second floor can see in, helicopters can see in, repair man working on a telephone pole can see, a person working on the roof of your neighbor can see in, hell for some fences a tall person can see in.

This is different then FLIR as it is giving someone a view inside your house, somewhere you have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to views through the wall. A phone tap is letting someone listen into something through an extra piece of equipment to hear something that is believed to have an expectation of privacy.

If you're talking about illegal activity on your cell phone and a cop hears it, or you're playing it on speaker phone, they don't need a warrant to act becuase you're expectation of privacy is negligable because people doing no investigation of any kind of could reasonable be able to do the same thing as the cops. Likewise, you have no reasonable expectation to privacy in your fence because its routinely possible for people to be able to see over it.

I think you're off base trying to compare this to items that allow you to get a view of sorts inside walls, or something allowing you to ease drop on a private conversation.
This, good post.
 

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,356
Reaction score
8,095
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hmmm, I wonder if they can figure out if union labor was used to build it. lol

Permit, ordinance, certification.......all just code words for "tax".
 
Top Bottom