Proposed law would permit warrantless cell phone searches
A law proposed by a Vermont lawmaker would permit authorities to search cell phones without warrants.
Lawmakers want to make it easier for officers like [Jean Miques] Bariteau [pictured] to enforce Vermont’s 2014 ban on using hand-held devices while on highways. They’re asking Vermonters to give up some of their privacy in exchange for safer roads. But even the chief sponsor of the bill said he hasn’t “really thought about” what, exactly, would be fair game for a warrantless search under his bill.
H.527, introduced by Rep. Martin LaLonde, D-South Burlington, would allow law enforcement officers to see a driver’s phone or other electronic device, to see if it was being used. LaLonde said he doesn’t intend for police to be able to take a person’s phone back to his squad car and rummage through it.
“Essentially, it’s ‘show me your text log,’” he said.
But opponents say the proposal goes too far, and even LaLonde said he isn’t sure if the bill can “thread the needle” between giving law enforcement better tools and protecting privacy.
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
26 responses to Proposed law would permit warrantless cell phone searches
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
whatthe46 January 17th, 2016 at 19:49
Rep. Martin LaLonde, D-South Burlington, why don’t you just cross over to the dark side. there’s this thing called a subpoena. you request it from the judge to get records to see if anything “illegal” at the time was going on. i don’t want someone reading my text or thumbing through anything of mine. how about this happens to a family member of his or himself. or anyone agreeing with this. there are measures put in place to see if there’s wrong doing, this isn’t it.
rg9rts January 18th, 2016 at 06:34
Hi tippy!!!~ always the lawyer
FatRat January 17th, 2016 at 20:09
Dear diary, just got pulled over by an official. Wonder my private thoughts are mine or not.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/8a/c3/c4/8ac3c4c0024df6f6f41ca86048048e2c.jpg
Mike January 17th, 2016 at 20:16
Get an Apple…there’s no backdoor.
bpollen January 17th, 2016 at 20:42
Apple says they can bypass your phones security:
http://www.engadget.com/2015/10/23/apple-doj-iphone/
The government says that since Apple owns the software that provides the security, they can be forced to open it up at government request. Where or not the government gets a win in the argument, the takeaway is that Apple says that your security is at their discretion.
Mike January 18th, 2016 at 17:26
It is impossible to circumvent the passcode of any iPhone running iOS 8 and later. The article is talking about an Iphone running iOS 7.
bpollen January 18th, 2016 at 17:52
I can’t tell you the number of people who claim Macs and other Linux based computers are bulletproof. They keep being proven wrong. You may be right, but that would be the FIRST security that is not circumventable. The very FIRST.
Mike January 18th, 2016 at 18:30
I never claimed bullet proof, just futile, in the end.
Later versions of IOS were written without support for circumventing the passcode.
Not sure what you mean by first.
Here’s a guy who picked up a cool $1 million for hacking a 5c running 9.1 and 9.2 …the new update killed his hack so he got a million bucks for doing something that was relevant for a couple days….see what I mean…???
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/somebody-just-won-1-million-bounty-for-hacking-the-iphone
Apple is insanely fastidious about their OS and send automatic updates within hours of finding out how someone might have compromised their product.
Bottom line, the courts might one day force Apple to write code to enable bypassing the passcode but hacking an Iphone is no easy trick…even for seasoned hackers working in a lab…
bpollen January 18th, 2016 at 20:55
What I meant by “first” is that no security measure yet devised cannot be circumvented. Easy or hard, they still can be beaten.
profit maximizer January 18th, 2016 at 05:21
0❝I have scored 186k dollars previous year working online and I am a full time student. I am attached with an online business entity that I heard about and I have earned such great cash. It is really user friendly and I feel myself lucky to have that option. Why not try this.,,,,,,
mindskilljob.da.cx
hy…..
DogsRgoodpeople January 17th, 2016 at 21:44
You never miss your water till your well runs dry. Water being what you need to exist and the cops being the ones looking for a promotion.
okay, let’s try this from another angle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fQ_r-9fDqc
Dwendt44 January 18th, 2016 at 00:14
I was under the impression that cell phone calls were not private since some scanners can pick them up and anyone can monitor them. Why should text messages be any different?
StoneyCurtisll January 18th, 2016 at 15:55
You might be thinking of the old cordless phones that transmit and receive in the 800-900mgz range that could be listened to on a simple AM radio.
FatRat January 18th, 2016 at 18:04
That sounds right, you could listen in to phone conversations on your tv if you turned up UHF to the really high channels.
StoneyCurtisll January 18th, 2016 at 22:22
Yep..
Way back in the day…
whatthe46 January 18th, 2016 at 22:33
if i was outside on my cordless, i could get good conversations from other parties. i’d tell my friend shhhh, lets listen. LOL. i’ve always wondered if someone was listening to mine.
StoneyCurtisll January 19th, 2016 at 17:50
The good ol days….
Cordless phones the size of a brick..
whatthe46 January 19th, 2016 at 19:12
and the first cell phones were bigger than that.
JoseM4 January 18th, 2016 at 05:34
If a distracted driver killed your loved one, would you want to know if the person was texting while driving?
StoneyCurtisll January 18th, 2016 at 15:52
Yeah but do your really think the “distracted” driver offense is what this is all about?…
Searching someones telephone/papers/records, without a warrant is a violation of the 4th amendment..
Today’s phones can show where a person has been through GPS and show who they have been in contact with..
This is far more information the police should have available to them during a simple traffic stop.
whatthe46 January 18th, 2016 at 18:08
that’s what discovery is for when you’re trying to prove negligence/liability in a law suit. that isn’t what this is.
Mike January 18th, 2016 at 22:15
would you want to know if the person was texting while driving?
Of course I do…!!! But isn’t that a moot point…???
In the case of a vehicular injury or death a warrant isn’t necessary…probable cause is a given. The case being argued is one where an officer can confiscate your phone and breeze thru it on a fishing expedition…looking for al Qaeda stuff. Clearly 4th territory…
rg9rts January 18th, 2016 at 06:29
Ever see a cop that could resist a fishing expedition??
allison1050 January 18th, 2016 at 11:14
This rep sounds like a complete and utter fool simply because he’s proposed this “without having really thought about it”. Which girl did his homework for him in high school?
whatthe46 January 18th, 2016 at 18:11
i would break my phone first.
liberalMD January 19th, 2016 at 02:42
This law would be annulled upon first pass at the Supreme Court for sure.