SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the Chicago Police Department is fighting a lawsuit to force them to reveal how they use Stingray cell tower-emulating devices:
Since 2005, the department has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on cell-site simulators manufactured by the Harris Corp. in Melbourne, Florida, records show. The devices — with names like StingRay and KingFish — capture cellphone signals.
Cops can use the technology, originally developed for the military, to locate cellphones. Police agencies in other states have revealed in court that StingRays and similar devices have been used to locate suspects, fugitives and victims in criminal investigations.
But privacy activists across the country have begun to question whether law enforcement agencies have used the devices to track people involved in demonstrations in violation of their constitutional rights. They also have concerns the technology scoops up the phone data of innocent citizens and police targets alike.
The Chicago Police Department has also been running a CIA-style black site, according to a recent report by the Guardian.
When the federal government began imprisoning people at Guantanamo in violation of the Constitution, some argued it was the only place, and that there were exceptional, extenuating circumstances. When the network of CIA black sites around the world and its practice of "extraordinary rendition," known to normal people as, "kidnapping," were revealed, some argued it was only for terrorists and other bad guys. When the NSA's mass violations of the Constitution were revealed by the Snowden leaks, some argued that it was for our own protection. Each time, they were justified as defense against the "Other."
Is this Chicago case a harbinger of things to come, that those tools and practices developed to violate the rights of the "Other" elsewhere, are now being applied to "Us", here?
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 24 2015, @11:43PM
is that we get to see Americans shooting themselves in the foot.
I laugh at you America.
Your own constitution is shit and you twist the law to fuck yourselves.
Great job!
Keep up the great work!
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 24 2015, @11:46PM
But still way the fuck better than anywhere else. I notice dickwads like you who are quick to shit on the US never seem to brag on that utopia where you live. Things that make you go "hmmmmmm".
(Score: 1) by Ox0000 on Wednesday March 25 2015, @01:01PM
You mean places like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, ...
Shall I go on?
Face it, we've lost our #1 spot... (Except for being #1 in the developed world in illiteracy, belief in 'Angels', religiosity, arrogance, dislike-by-others, teen pregnancy, STDs... shall I go on as well?)
Instead of blindly saying "we're number one" and thumping your chest ignoring the facts and being dismissive about anyone who tells us the truth, we should take it upon ourselves to try to regain the #1 spot in things that aren't on the list of things we are #1 in right now...
Dumb-ass!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @06:04PM
We may or may not have lost our #1 spot in various places, but the vast majority of the dipshits here who to love to shit on anything US-related never own up to where they live, because the majority of their complaints apply equally to whatever shithole they live in. For instance, as we all know on this site, the NSA is entirely evil and everyone who works there (and even thinks of working there) is morally corrupt (call this the Soylent Axiom of Moral Righteousness). This is, of course, because the NSA spies, and we know that no other country in the world spies. The majority of the comments are from people who are shocked, SHOCKED! that the NSA spies on other countries, because surely THEIR country would never stoop so low as to do something so underhanded.
This isn't about chest-thumping as you seem to think it is, or your apparent feelings of inadequacy I suppose, but it is about simple honesty from the shithead talking regulars here who are as predictable and intellectually honest as any talking head on any cable pundit show.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TLA on Tuesday March 24 2015, @11:59PM
I'll bite.
The Constitution of the United States is pretty much the most powerful document ever written, up there next to Magna Carta, and the Orange Constitution of 1688.
With a few notable exceptions, and notwithstanding decisions out of the Supreme Court, the US legal system is pretty much compliant to the clauses contained within the Constitution. Any that aren't are either given exceptions or are rapidly struck out as "bad Law".
This is in stark contrast to the English legal system, wherein Laws are enacted by Parliamentary vote and Royal Assent (which is a joke since there has been no right to veto since 1911), and when bad Laws are enacted (happens often) Parliament and the Government both pass the buck to the Courts who pass it back to Government, all three claiming Constitutional privilege with one hand and saying we don't have a Constitution with the other (what's Magna Carta then? Toilet paper??), and all saying that they can't unilaterally change the Law. I say the body responsible for enacting the Law in the first place (Parliament) is also quite capable of repealing it. You can unfry an egg.
1911 Parliament Act: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/1-2/13/contents [legislation.gov.uk]
Unfry an egg: http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/1998/19980710-hsp104.html [uchospitals.edu]
Excuse me, I think I need to reboot my horse. - NCommander
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @12:43AM
With a few notable exceptions, and notwithstanding decisions out of the Supreme Court, the US legal system is pretty much compliant to the clauses contained within the Constitution. Any that aren't are either given exceptions or are rapidly struck out as "bad Law".
This has to be a joke. The government routinely ignores the constitution. And why exclude Supreme Court decisions? Because they frequently ignore what the constitution actually says?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by TLA on Wednesday March 25 2015, @01:13AM
I refer specifically to numerous decisions concerning PATRIOT, which the SCOTUS rolls have it repeatedly as being Constitutional. Simply put, I and many others disagree which is why it keeps ending up back in court as a not-settled Constitutional issue.
Excuse me, I think I need to reboot my horse. - NCommander
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @06:09PM
It does not. Don't let your ignorance of the law or legal decisions stand in the way of comprehension. Just because you can recite verbatim the 4th Amendment, just as a bible thumper can recite John 3:16, doesn't mean you understand what the words mean or how they have been interpreted by the courts for 200+ years. Do not be so self-centered to think that anything you disagree with or do not like means that it is illegal or corrupt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @07:09PM
Certain government agencies, such as the DEA have their sole purpose as violating the constitution. The NSA and DHS seem to be that way now too. Not the whole government, sure, but entire governmental agencies, absolutely.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Wednesday March 25 2015, @02:48AM
"The Constitution has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
– Lysander Spooner
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @06:11PM
I fail to see how quoting a 19th century anarchist is relevant or even meaningful.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tathra on Wednesday March 25 2015, @07:21PM
the constitution has failed to prevent our current police state due to the non-enforcement of Title 18 USC § 1918 [cornell.edu] which explicitly states anyone holding government office that ignores, subverts, or suggests to ignore or subvert the constitution (all acts that work towards overthrowing our constitutional form of government) is to be fined or jailed for a year, and also due to the past 100 years of the "drug war". alcohol prohibition took a constitutional amendment, thus by precedent if nothing else all drug prohibitions require one to be legal. once the constitution-subverting precedents were set "fighting against drugs" (which was really nothing more than racism, fighting to keep non-whites oppressed), it was easy to use them to further subvert the constitution. the process was so slow (and so many people supported each individual step) that its only recently that we can see that our constitutional form of government has been overthrown.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 25 2015, @07:59PM
Awwwww. looks like someone is a little jealous that they don't live in the USA. It's okay. You're not alone.