‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Federal judge calls Flock 'indiscriminate mass surveillance'

483 points · 267 comments · sbulaev

  1. charcircuit · · focus · HN ↗
    What you do on public roads is public.

    The idea that law enforcement tapping into existing law enforcement knowledge constitutes as a search of "persons, houses, papers, and effects" does not logically follow for me. It is a search of law enforcements own property.

    1. simoncion · · focus · HN ↗
      > What you do on public roads is public.

      You seem to be paraphrasing the US v. Knotts decision. Read pages 30 and 31 of the document found here [0]. If you have fifteen-to-thirty minutes free, you should really read the whole thing.

      [0] &lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;storage.courtlistener.com&#x2F;recap&#x2F;gov.uscourts.oknd.76981&#x2F;gov.uscourts.oknd.76981.62.0.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;storage.courtlistener.com&#x2F;recap&#x2F;gov.uscourts.oknd.76...&gt;

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.