SCOTUS: Police can use drug sniffing dogs during routine traffic stops.

[ParentalAdvisory]

@kidchameleon

I truely doubt that good cops are going to decide to start violating people’s rights just because they have a dog.

This is great to hear. Now how about the bad cops that don’t care about peoples rights?

@kidchameleon

Now you’re getting into the person and their possessions.

So homes and automobiles aren’t possessions?

@kidchameleon

Anything coming out my house, electromagnetic radiation, particulate matter, garbage or gasses is fair game.

So I suppose audio frequencies are fair game too? Well, I’ve got some great news for you. There is no need to bug your home. We’ll just allow the police to attach directional dishes to condenser microphones, and aim them at your home. They’ll be able pick up all of your conversations plain as day. But hey, you have nothing to worry about because you don’t do anything illegal, ever. This is ok with you? My gut tells me that you would have a problem with this, but for the sake of your ridiculous arguments, you’ll be fine with it as well.

[buttonjockey308]

@ParentalAdvisory

So I suppose audio frequencies are fair game too? Well, I’ve got some great news for you. There is no need to bug your home. We’ll just allow the police to attach directional dishes to condenser microphones, and aim them at your home. They’ll be able pick up all of your conversations plain as day. But hey, you have nothing to worry about because you don’t do anything illegal, ever. This is ok with you? My gut tells me that you would have a problem with this, but for the sake of your ridiculous arguments, you’ll be fine with it as well.

Actually, Title III makes your argument moot. Until the precedent, caselaw, or SCOTUS determines that the emissions from a substance in your pocket have as much right to privacy as your oral communications, this arguement hasn’t a leg upon which to stand. This is as much of a strawman as ** Steve ** thinks my example is.