Your Thoughts: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops
- Thread starter Byte
- Start date
kinnelonfire75
Member
Personally, I couldn't care less. I would be ok with every individual being strip searched publicly as they entered an airport to prove they weren't carrying a bomb. I have nothing to hide. If a LEO wants to check out all my information, so be it - it is easy enough to get all of that illegally anyway.
Before I step on any toes, let me put this disclaimer out there: The opinions referenced in this post are those of the author, and do not reflect the views, opinions, or policies of ANY agency the author is affiliated with, nor any websites/forums the author may be now/may have been/ possibly will be a member of in the future.
I do find it outrageous that this idea was even considered, let alone actually put into service. That being said, it is a tool, but should not be considered a tool to be used frequently. I honestly think that the police officer who requests this should also have to obtain a warrant specifically giving permission for the use of this device. But, as with all of our freedoms that are slowly being eroded away, this will just give Big Brother another eye into our lives.
I shall not delve more into this matter at the time being, but shall end this post with a few quotes to think about:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
- Bertrand de Jouvenel
"It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses."
- Thomas Jefferson
And one final quote:
"I may not agree with what you say, but to your death I will defend your right to say it."
- Voltaire
I do find it outrageous that this idea was even considered, let alone actually put into service. That being said, it is a tool, but should not be considered a tool to be used frequently. I honestly think that the police officer who requests this should also have to obtain a warrant specifically giving permission for the use of this device. But, as with all of our freedoms that are slowly being eroded away, this will just give Big Brother another eye into our lives.
I shall not delve more into this matter at the time being, but shall end this post with a few quotes to think about:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
- Bertrand de Jouvenel
"It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses."
- Thomas Jefferson
And one final quote:
"I may not agree with what you say, but to your death I will defend your right to say it."
- Voltaire
kinnelonfire75 said:
YOU are the problem. YOU are the reason our rights are being stripped from us daily. Complacency kills.
Fast LT1
Member
If we must obtain a warrant to view your phone records, then we should have the same responsibility when viewing your actual phone.
Last edited by a moderator:
cameo89
Member
While I dont have a problem with this being used during the investigation of an Accident, to determine if the driver was distracted by a phone call or a text, I have a BIG problem with LEO's Checking phones during a simple traffic stop.
There is NO reason to check a cell phone during a traffic stop for a burned out taillight.
There is NO reason to check a cell phone during a traffic stop for a burned out taillight.
AZEMT
Member
KD8GPM said:
It disturbs me that this device would be deployed without a warrant in any case. It sounds like it's too powerful a tool to be used unless you can get a judge to sign off on probable cause. If you can get that, more power to you.
Fast LT1 said:
I ABSOLUTELY agree. Furthermore, what happens to the data acquired from the phone after the search is completed? Can we be absolutely certain that the phone's data is, in fact, not recoverable?
I'm in favor of this tool, but also very much in favor of making sure that the tool is used judiciously, wisely and legally.
kinnelonfire75 said:
John said:
Bullshit!!!! Nothing to hide is nothing to fear!!!!
I, however, don't necessarily agree with this contraption. If it's something you'd likely have to get a warrant to see normally, it should require a warrant. Seize the phone, pull out the battery (so it can't be remotely accessed), and apply for a warrant. Problem averted.
PJD642
New Member
I agree that it's an infringement of rights and quite possibly a fourth amendment issue. The article doesn't say, however, that MSP had actually done any of this, just that they had tools that could be used to. I'm fairly certain that if the ACLU had found even one motorist who's phone had been searched, they would have sued on their behalf for millions of dollars.
The ACLU probably want MSP to PROVE they haven't used it improperly, and want thousand of pages of records documenting all traffic stops since the device was acquired. MSP probably came up with the dollar amount as the cost of researching and reproducing all that info. And then of course the ACLU will say the individual troopers purposely didn't record their use of the device...and the vicious circle continues.
The ACLU probably want MSP to PROVE they haven't used it improperly, and want thousand of pages of records documenting all traffic stops since the device was acquired. MSP probably came up with the dollar amount as the cost of researching and reproducing all that info. And then of course the ACLU will say the individual troopers purposely didn't record their use of the device...and the vicious circle continues.
hitman38367
Member
I am a law abiding citizen. I do nothing illegal other than break the speed limit from time to time, which I freely admit that I do, however, I do take my rights and privacy as a citizen very seriously. I have nothing to hide, but I also have the right as a citizen, that if upon a traffic stop I am asked for consent to search, I have the right to refuse a search of any of my property and person and will exercise that right to the fullest extent of the law. I have no problems with law enforcement doing their job. I DO have a problem with LEO's thinking that they can do whatever they wish under color of law and passively or actively coercing me into something that is not even remotely reasonable. This device is clearly an invasion of personal privacy and property in my opinion and shouldn't be used unless it is absolutely necessary to avert a heinous or life threatening crime from being committed. Using it on the average joe at a traffic stop is simply outrageous and total nonsense. These are my opinions and I stick by them. Freedom is not free, and I will be damned if I will let all the men and women that have died for my freedom die in vain because I simply just lower my head and comply with status quo just because others don't have the backbone to stand up for what is right.rwo978 said:
FireEMSPolice
Member
mcpd2025
Member
#1 This is an AWESOME tool and more departments should have it.
#2 This is a TERRIBLE tool and it has the potential to be exploited.
It amazes me the very personal things that people take pictures of and keep on their phones or send to their friends. I can't think of a logical reason on a simple traffic stop to need to have access to pictures on someone's cell phone. You MIGHT be able to make the argument that its reasonable to look to see if someone was texting/talking at the time of an accident, but that is something you can get a warrant for.
I do see the potential for this tool after a warrant has been obtained, to more easily allow a forensic analyst to search a device. I feel like the phone is a private enough device that it should be protected and require a search warrant. It should be fairly easy to get a warrant if you are investigating something, and its easy to seize a phone. Granted, you will then still have access to private information, but at least the person committed some type of crime... rather than just a simple traffic encounter.
I do find the ACLU's comment to be funny though, "Law enforcement officers are known, on occasion, to encourage citizens to cooperate if they have nothing to hide," ACLU staff attorney Mark P. Fancher wrote. "No less should be expected of law enforcement, and the Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure."
Isn't the ACLU the organization that bashes EVERYTHING that police do, including encouraging cooperation? Now that they want us to cooperate, they don't have a problem with this tactic...
#2 This is a TERRIBLE tool and it has the potential to be exploited.
It amazes me the very personal things that people take pictures of and keep on their phones or send to their friends. I can't think of a logical reason on a simple traffic stop to need to have access to pictures on someone's cell phone. You MIGHT be able to make the argument that its reasonable to look to see if someone was texting/talking at the time of an accident, but that is something you can get a warrant for.
I do see the potential for this tool after a warrant has been obtained, to more easily allow a forensic analyst to search a device. I feel like the phone is a private enough device that it should be protected and require a search warrant. It should be fairly easy to get a warrant if you are investigating something, and its easy to seize a phone. Granted, you will then still have access to private information, but at least the person committed some type of crime... rather than just a simple traffic encounter.
I do find the ACLU's comment to be funny though, "Law enforcement officers are known, on occasion, to encourage citizens to cooperate if they have nothing to hide," ACLU staff attorney Mark P. Fancher wrote. "No less should be expected of law enforcement, and the Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure."
Isn't the ACLU the organization that bashes EVERYTHING that police do, including encouraging cooperation? Now that they want us to cooperate, they don't have a problem with this tactic...
wkr518
Member
I will have to research this device.Kinda scary if you ask me.A European friend of mine ask me if we had a popular citizens Anti- Govt revolt like in egypt,libya,syria etc and the Govt cracked down and sic'ed the Military on the revolters and started killing them would UK,France or other countries go attacking US Military to protect the citizens revolters?
The US is just as much becoming a Police State as some of our Axis Of Evil countries but have faith that NGO or Rights Groups in the USA keep the Govt on their toes.
Having been rearended in my personal vehicle twice by young persons talking or texting or distracted by their cellphones I have no problem with pulling the phone/sms history with times and GPS coordinates off that particular device, IF a legally issued warrant is executed.
* drivers texting while driving are so obvious,what else could they looking at down in thier lap/crotch area while doing 55mpf on a roadway? Oh wait,setting myself up for something I know!
The US is just as much becoming a Police State as some of our Axis Of Evil countries but have faith that NGO or Rights Groups in the USA keep the Govt on their toes.
Having been rearended in my personal vehicle twice by young persons talking or texting or distracted by their cellphones I have no problem with pulling the phone/sms history with times and GPS coordinates off that particular device, IF a legally issued warrant is executed.
* drivers texting while driving are so obvious,what else could they looking at down in thier lap/crotch area while doing 55mpf on a roadway? Oh wait,setting myself up for something I know!
theroofable
Member
Where does the scanned information go. Some people pay for things with their phones, and have personal information which should not be uploaded somewhere else. What if that server is insecure, credit card numbers ect. The phone companies can provide data records cant they?
I do have an issue with the misuse of the device. My phone does have number and emails of very sensitive persons working from state to federal positions and I have the appropriate security to go with it as well. That being said, the easiest way to defeat the system is to remove the battery. Done in a couple seconds, so long as you're not using an Otter Box.
Edit- I can SMS now with my voice, not by hand so if they did check, there is a chance that I would have a record of a message if I were involved in an accident.
Edit- I can SMS now with my voice, not by hand so if they did check, there is a chance that I would have a record of a message if I were involved in an accident.
no warrant and no VALID probably cause = not getting anywhere near my cell phone i dont give a damn who you are especially if all you are stopping me for is a tail light bulb out or slight speeding.
now if i was a known drug dealer or other criminal then i could understand, but not if im just some joe smuck minding my own business driving 80mph in a 75..
now if i was a known drug dealer or other criminal then i could understand, but not if im just some joe smuck minding my own business driving 80mph in a 75..
I'm certified in portable storage media and cell phone forensics (although I don't get to put it to use very often).
A cell phone is a container, holding information. Within that phone there are multiple other containers. There's a storage container for contacts, another one for emails, another one for SMS messages, and so on. If I have to have a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances to search any physical container you may possess, why wouldn't I have to have the same allowances when searching your cell phone? It only makes sense to me.
An outright search on the roadside without consent/warrant/exigent circumstances seems like a clear violation of the 4th amendment to me.
And along with what mcpd2025 said, it's amazing the amount of stupid and incriminating things people keep on their cell phones. I don't know how many cases we've built off cell phone call logs and text messages, especially for drugs (with proper warrants). I don't even have any special machines or software here at the PD, I pull all my stuff with publicly available freeware.
A cell phone is a container, holding information. Within that phone there are multiple other containers. There's a storage container for contacts, another one for emails, another one for SMS messages, and so on. If I have to have a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances to search any physical container you may possess, why wouldn't I have to have the same allowances when searching your cell phone? It only makes sense to me.
An outright search on the roadside without consent/warrant/exigent circumstances seems like a clear violation of the 4th amendment to me.
And along with what mcpd2025 said, it's amazing the amount of stupid and incriminating things people keep on their cell phones. I don't know how many cases we've built off cell phone call logs and text messages, especially for drugs (with proper warrants). I don't even have any special machines or software here at the PD, I pull all my stuff with publicly available freeware.
Ben E. said:
Let me ask you a hypothetical: If the technology were available to download the contents of a suspects brain (thoughts, memories, etc.) would it be reasonable to search that container? A cell phone and or computer is something the majority of people in this country have these days and to a large degree they are an extension of your mind. They can convey your conversations and ideas while storing a record of them. The files and browsing history stored on these devices are a window into the person you're investigating. It is very intrusive to examine these items and as a people we should be entitled to an expectation of privacy when it comes to personal electronics. Let's say as an example someone who has their phone searched was browsing gay porn but is a married father, an officer discovers this legal browser history and casually mentions it to someone who knows this suspect. That person could be ruined. This is just one example.
PC Comms
Member
A friend of mine has one of these devices (UME36) in his cell phone store and uses it primarily to swap data from one phone to another (example, someone buys a Boost phone and they want all their pictures, phone numbers etc, transferred from their current phone). It is a pretty neat device, but yes, it can also retrieve a LOT of data that most people think is "gone forever" when deleted from their phone.
John said:
That will never be available as long as I'm a cop, but if it were, I'd have to say "with a proper warrant", and if I had reason to. Pretty much anything you can search that a person owns (car, house, phone, etc...) are all extensions of their brains. You can learn a lot about someone, having never seen or met them, just by walking around their house. As far as the gay porn scenario goes, I'll just say it's up to each individual officer to stay professional about what they find in ANY case, and I'm pretty good at that. Nobody gets to know what I find unless it's theirs to know.
NCFD43
Member
kinnelonfire75
Member
John said:
Sorry I am not around as much as I would like to be and did not see this immediately.
It is the society that we live in. As rwo978 said, I have nothing to fear and I am not committing any major crimes. Sure, it is not the most comfortable feeling to have someone rifle through your personal information, or to walk through the full body scanner (the one that makes you naked to someone behind a closed door). However, it is a sacrifice that I am willing to make to ensure that I am safe.
If this device is used correctly (and not abused), it could be a great tool to law enforcement in the capture of all types of criminals.
kinnelonfire75 said:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
-Benjamin Franklin
Cam said:
I didn't want to get into the whole airplane travel shit again, stick to the topic of the cell searches, but...... Fucking A people!!!!!!! Have we forgotten about 9/11 already. Especially us in this field. You'd think we would never forget.... You need to sacrifice some for a little safety. If we all go about our lives willy nilly, thinking nothing bad is going to happen, you're in for a big surprise. Shit happens!!!! A lot!!!! So, you get felt up before getting on a plane, have a cigarette after. All this is to make air travel safer. People are outraged that women and children are getting searched. Well, terrorists are getting smarter. They know the typical radical is a male. They're going to be grilled. So, a new tactic would be to use women and children to carry the IED/weapon in. Where's a common spot for druggers to stach dope, in a baby bag, diaper, car seat because they don't think we'd look there, it's innocent, a child. We have to think outside the box.
Take a look at all the LODDs this year from gunfire. Do you think I'm a little on edge dealing with hinky people and tend to be more restrictive of what they do, securing/detaining them quicker than before? Hell yeah, I'm going home at night.
Just stop and think about things people. Freedom ain't free. There's sacrifice to have it. Look at all the soldiers that have perished fighting for it. Just stop and think!!!
rwo978 said:
All of that is true, but is there not a point where it is taken too far? As was stated above, if the officer needs to look through that phone with such a device, then he can arrest me, confiscate the phone, and then obtain a warrant. Otherwise, just leave my cell alone. I have absolutely nothing to hide, nor anything to fear, but I also know and revere my rights. About 4 months ago, I was stopped after leaving a particularly rough neighborhood (my grandmother has lived there her entire life, and I was visiting her for her 85th and final birthday...she passed 13 days later) and the officer asked for consent to search. Again, I have absolutely nothing to hide, but I refused consent for the search. There was little basis for the stop (He said he couldn't see the tag clearly because the gravel dust from where I live obscured it.) but other than giving him consent, I was very cooperational. Within 20 minutes, I had a K-9 unit scouring around my car finding nothing. He gave me a warning and sent me on my way after that. Had I done anything to warrant that behavior? Nope. Was there a single thing in there that was illegal, that I was ashamed of, etc? Nope. Why did I not consent to the search? Because I felt that he had no probable cause to suspect me of anything and was looking to find something. I feel the same way about this issue. We cannot give up our essential liberties piece by piece and expect this not to happen.
I already made my statement about the phone searches above.
I do, however, have issue when all this airplane searches shennanigans comes around. If you don't want to get searched, don't fly, spend 3 days driving yourself cross country. :thumbsup: :undecided: :hopeless:
The consent search is a necessary evil. It can take a while to 'get good at it', meaning knowing when someone might be 'holding'. I'm not good at it, so I don't do it very often. There's officers that I do work with that do have a nack for it however.
I do, however, have issue when all this airplane searches shennanigans comes around. If you don't want to get searched, don't fly, spend 3 days driving yourself cross country. :thumbsup: :undecided: :hopeless:
The consent search is a necessary evil. It can take a while to 'get good at it', meaning knowing when someone might be 'holding'. I'm not good at it, so I don't do it very often. There's officers that I do work with that do have a nack for it however.
Station 3
Member
We have looked thru phones when they are left at the crime scene. We once raided a party at a known crack house and of course the kids fled the scene as soon as the first patrol car showed up but the thing was these little bast@rds left there phones at the house and also several cars which we then inpounded of course. But the funny part was we looked thru all the phones found countless photos of them smoking mary jane snorting coke and found lots of text messages which we then used to catch and convict some small time dealers. I like that idea ALOT
rwo978 said:
I'm not sure where the air travel stuff is coming from. You said you don't want to get into to it but you bring it up? I;m talking about this cell phone spy thingy and using on traffic stops. You're why out in left field, lets try and stay on topic.
Cam said:
Lets try re-reading again....mkay. Posts #2, #4, and #10 respectively below.
kinnelonfire75 said:
John said:
rwo978 said:
Again, I was fine with the discussion as is until the whole airplane thing came up. That's the part of this thread that set me off. I even said that in my post you just quoted, that I wanted to stay on topic..... but, :eyebrowhuh:
So, before we go blaming and who said what, who brought up what, and who's in 'left field', maybe we should know what's going on... :thx:
wkr518
Member
As for airplane security ( if there is another thread already point me to it!) , I am willing to wear a hospital apron before I board if it means my plane will not explode midair due to a terror act. I am as much a tech freak as everyone else, but I could live without cellphone,ipod,laptops being on flights too.Give me a good book or magazine and I all set for that JFK to Frankfurt 10 hours flight.
kinnelonfire75
Member
rwo978 said:
Sorry for bringing up the airplane stuff,
...I just think that all this privacy/don't spy on us stuff plays hand in hand, that is all.
Back on topic! :thumbsup: