> It's not clear whether warrantless use of Stingrays is unconstitutional.
No, it may be true that no court has ruled explicitly if that were the case, but to claim that this is somehow unclear is just plain false.
They're quite literally constructing a fake, pre-tapped cell tower for your cell phone to connect to.
This requires a warrant by any sane interpretation of the Constitution, it requires a warrant by any reasonable understanding of how wiretaps affect our privacy rights.
If some court rules counter to what I've just said, it is reasonable to conclude that the judge(s) in question is out of his gourd. We have a few bad ones on the bench.
The law enforcement agents who do this agree with me. Why else would they seek to hide it? They know that it can only be ruled unconstitutional, else they'd go get their rubberstamp from the guy in black robes... hell, if anything they're more optimistic than I am, seeing how they feel their chances of a judge ruling in their favor are too low to risk it.
What we need is a crowd-sourcing-tower triangulation mapping app. It will continually poll the RSSI for the tower, and the tower details from your phone and map the location of each tower - and provide info to help identify what the tower type is or who it belongs to.
If there were a way to differentiate between a Stingray tower and then let mobile devices blacklist connecting to them...
I would suggest that the court avoid ruling on the issue and instead pursue along the lines of perjury and obstruction of justice which provide a pretty wide latitude, given that 'whole truth' thing.
Put a couple cops and prosecutors in jail and the system will figure itself out.
No, it may be true that no court has ruled explicitly if that were the case, but to claim that this is somehow unclear is just plain false.
They're quite literally constructing a fake, pre-tapped cell tower for your cell phone to connect to.
This requires a warrant by any sane interpretation of the Constitution, it requires a warrant by any reasonable understanding of how wiretaps affect our privacy rights.
If some court rules counter to what I've just said, it is reasonable to conclude that the judge(s) in question is out of his gourd. We have a few bad ones on the bench.
The law enforcement agents who do this agree with me. Why else would they seek to hide it? They know that it can only be ruled unconstitutional, else they'd go get their rubberstamp from the guy in black robes... hell, if anything they're more optimistic than I am, seeing how they feel their chances of a judge ruling in their favor are too low to risk it.