Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday August 28 2017, @05:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the picture-this dept.

Some more good news on the Fourth Amendment front, even if it's somewhat jurisdictionally limited: the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has (sort of) decided [PDF] the Supreme Court's Riley decision isn't just for cellphones. (via FourthAmendment.com)

In this case, the search of a robbery suspect's backpack while he was being questioned yielded a ring, a digital camera, and other items. The police warrantlessly searched the digital phone1, discovering a photo of the suspect next to a firearm later determined to have been stolen. This led to two convictions: one for the stolen property and one for carrying a firearm without a license.

The defendant challenged all of the evidence resulting from the warrantless search of the backpack, but the state got to keep most of what it found, along with the conviction for theft. But it didn't get to keep the firearm conviction, as the court here sees digital cameras to be almost no different than cellphones when it comes to warrantless searches and the Riley decision. From the opinion:

The Commonwealth counters that Riley does not apply because digital cameras, lacking the ability to function as computers, are not analogous to cell phones for Fourth Amendment purposes. We decline to address the constitutionality of the search of the digital camera on Fourth Amendment grounds, but we apply the reasoning in Riley in holding that the search of the camera violated art. 14 [of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights].

[1] [I suspect the author meant digital camera, not digital phone - Ed]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170821/10485338053/state-supreme-court-says-digital-phones-cant-be-searched-without-warrant.shtml

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday August 29 2017, @01:25AM (8 children)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 29 2017, @01:25AM (#560617) Journal

    I don't think you understand fascism. The US is a fascist government, and has been since before the term was invented (by Mussolini) to codify some existing governmental practices. Fascist states are not, inherently, vile. They usually are, but there's no requirement baked into the idea. And democratic states aren't necessarily nice places to live. The actual witch hunts conducted in the US were under a quite democratic government. So was the pillory, and various other forms of public torture. (Including tar-and-feathering which was usually a capital punishment.)

    Fascism is the large companies working hand-in-glove with the government. We've had that from before the civil war. Otherwise the "private police forces" would have been at least prosecuted for the many murders they committed as well as lots of assault, battery, and theft. (Saying somebody is a trespasser doesn't excuse you stealing his possessions or beating him up. Those are two separate crimes.)

    That said, autocratic states are normally worse than ordinary fascism...and the US has been drifting towards autocracy as rapid communication has made centralized control more feasible.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @02:34AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @02:34AM (#560636)

    Interesting approach, normalize fascism as being the way it has always been? I guess you're correct, only the WW2 aftermath and the ideological fight against communism kept the US from devolving into horror as it is doing now. The US had to defend capitalism, show it to be the superior economic method. Oddly that required a massive increase in socialist programs which fueled the post war growth. Then the 80s and 90s came along, the cold war was over and capitalism was firmly entrenched. Goodbye social programs, hello privatization and empire building, and now we're more fascist than ever with the empire on the brink of destruction.

    The US is not worthy of being the world leader, at least not with the current state of affairs. Too many xenophobes screwing up foreign policy, too many mad dogs hell bent on killing "the enemy". The great melting pot subverted by millennia old prejudices, the wealthy subverting the will of the people in their insane greed for more power. I hope we can stick to conventional warfare at least, let the survivors stand a chance of rebuilding civilization.

  • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Tuesday August 29 2017, @08:40AM (4 children)

    by Wootery (2341) on Tuesday August 29 2017, @08:40AM (#560733)

    The US is a fascist government

    Well, no. It has a Bill of Rights, which the courts regularly enforce.

    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday August 29 2017, @10:40PM (3 children)

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 29 2017, @10:40PM (#561199) Journal

      Sorry, but the "Bill of Rights" is almost orthogonal to whether or not it's fascist. Fascist largely has to do with economic policy, and the degree to which wealthy interests control it.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
      • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Wednesday August 30 2017, @08:16AM (2 children)

        by Wootery (2341) on Wednesday August 30 2017, @08:16AM (#561389)

        From Wikipedia: [wikipedia.org]

        Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce, that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

        The First Amendment directly contradicts the 'forcible suppression of opposition' component.

        • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday August 30 2017, @04:42PM (1 child)

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 30 2017, @04:42PM (#561567) Journal

          Forcible suppression of opposition is, indeed, characteristic of all fascist governments that I am aware of...though with varying degrees of force. But it's not a defining characteristic. And if you think it hasn't been common in the US, your history teachers should be fired.

          Also, Wikipedia is *not* a reliable primary source. I, also, quote from them occasionally, but always hesitantly. They aren't reliable, and they have in the past had a tendency to explicitly exclude expert reporting. Don't believe them, only consider them as evidence. (Often the Wikipedia pages will have links to more reliable sources.)

          Mussolini, who defined the term fascism, considered forcible suppression of opposition a tactic, not a defining quality of fascism. Many forms of government use that tactic. So this cannot be consider a defining feature.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
          • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Wednesday August 30 2017, @09:32PM

            by Wootery (2341) on Wednesday August 30 2017, @09:32PM (#561746)

            it's not a defining characteristic

            Yes, it is. Wikipedia's description aligns correctly with the way the word is used in reality.

            And if you think it hasn't been common in the US, your history teachers should be fired.

            Of course it has, but the First Amendment has its moments, and is a point of national pride. Would not be so under fascism.

            Many forms of government use that tactic. So this cannot be consider a defining feature.

            That makes no sense. There is no requirement that fascism be the only political system to forcibly suppress political opposition.

  • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:46PM (1 child)

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:46PM (#560911) Homepage Journal

    No, Fascism ISN'T government and industry "working hand in hand". Fascism and Communism are exact opposites. In communism, government controls industry. In Fascism, industry controls the government.

    With that terrible SCOTUS opinion that said that money is speech, our country is headed towards Fascism, but is nowhere near there yet.

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday August 29 2017, @10:53PM

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 29 2017, @10:53PM (#561206) Journal

      That's not what Mussolini thought when he defined the term. Mussolini thought it referred to a combination of government doing what powerful companies wanted and those powerful companies doing what the government wanted. That's why he chose the symbol of a bundle of sticks bound together with an axe at the center. The axe represents the power of the state, and the bundle of sticks represents how much stronger things are when they are bound together.

      Please note that Mussolini's main purpose was to make Italy a strong country, as it had been during the days of the Romans. So he picked a Roman symbol. You might consider Mussolini's fascism a nation-building exercise, even though, as most such exercises, it miscarried. But also consider that today Italy is much stronger and more unified than it was during the period of Mussolini's rise to power. So it wasn't a total failure. (How much of the improvement is due to the episode of fascism, and how much to improved communication and transport, is a separate question, and one I have questions about, but it's worth remembering that prior to Mussolini Italians emigrating to the US used to identify with the cities that they came from rather than the country...and IIRC Italy was home to three or four separatist movements during that period. I also remember the area around Naples and south as being a separate country, but a brief search seems to show that this was a mistake. Possibly a bit earlier.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.