Onboard vehicle tracking without a warrant

[Guest oldsmobile98]

Caught Spying on Student, FBI Demands GPS Tracker Back | Threat Level | Wired.com

Apparently, the chowderheads on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the feds can put a tracker on your car without a warrant. Even if it's in your driveway.

In the story, the dude found one on his car. He took it off. His friend posted photos of it online. FBI came and said they wanted it back. Quote: “We’re going to make this much more difficult for you if you don’t cooperate.†He gave it to 'em. So we don't know if they had a warrant or not.

End of the article:

Afifi’s encounter with the FBI ended with the agents telling him not to worry.

“We have all the information we needed,†they told him. “You don’t need to call your lawyer. Don’t worry, you’re boring. “

They shook his hand and left.

I probably won't ever find a tracker on my car. But if I do, and if they come and make some vague threat about making things difficult for me if I don't return it, I'll give the device back to them.

But there will be some .308-caliber holes in it.

What do you think? Am I outta line here? Maybe I'm overreacting. I need to go back and read my copy of 1984.

P.S. You lawyers out there ... can a citizen legally put a GPS tracker on FBI vehicles without informing? Good for the goose = good for the gander, right?

[Guest jackdm3]

Aside from the torture techniques, I'd like to send it on some sort of busy transportation. Like under a FedEx truck, a semi or Amtrak.

[Guest oldsmobile98]

That's what his buddy was thinking, too.

“My plan was to just put the device on another car or in a lake,” Khaled wrote...

Just don't forget to wear gloves, Jack.

[Pain103]

I'm sure it was for some investigation. I would like to know how he found it and does he normally sweep his vehicle for bugs and/or tracking devices normally? Seems like there is probably a lot more to it. Now just throwing one on a person's vehicle for no reason is bull and violation of laws.

[Pain103]

Read more into it I guess they were looking at him for possible terrorism related stuff. I don't know about the whole thing but gotta suck to be the guy in charge of hiding it. lol

[midtennchip]

This issue has been heard in a couple of other Federal Appeals Courts in the last year or so. The Appeals Court for the District of Columbia found that long-term tracking like that violates the 4th Amendment, but also stated that short-term GPS tracking is similar to police/FBI/etc tailing someone (which is not a violation).

Appeals Court Rules Against Secret Police GPS Tracking | dailyator.com

Back in August, the 9th Circuit also found that planting a GPS device on someone's car in their driveway isn't a 4th Amendment violation:

Chief Judge of 9th Circuit:

The 3rd Circuit has also ruled (although somewhat vaguely) that certain types of cellphone tracking would not violate the 4th Amendment.

This is a developing area of the law and really isn't as black-and-white has it might appear at first.

[Chucktshoes]

I want one of those neato tracking devices too. Maybe it is time to really get involved in the militias.

[BrasilNuts]

I would have packed it up and sent it to Africa via FedEx.

[DaveTN]

I think if you are Arab looking or Muslim and they are looking at you as a possible terrorist; they pretty much can do whatever they want.

You could put a device on an FBI vehicle but please make sure you are making video of it when they find out so we can all watch.

Both those devices in that picture are pretty big. Which one was on the car? Is this the best technology we have? On TV they use little button sized devices.

Edited October 10, 2010 by DaveTN

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Assuming a hidden device must also transmit location, rather than just record location for reading later when the device is recovered, the gadget would need to be bigger. A long-term transmitting tracking device would also need connection with the vehicle power supply for long-term power, unless the feds have access to some kind of miraculous new battery technology.

I wonder about GPS antenna for hidden devices. Most consumer GPS, even the expensive ones with small patch antennas, do not perform worth squat inside a house, under tree shade, or even inside a car unless they are positioned to look out a window. A completely hidden device would either need a hidden antenna that can also 'see the sky', or some kinda awesome good RF front end on the receiver.

If they have to install a device that has a hidden-but-visible antenna (possibly wired to the car radio antenna?), and is wired into the car electrical system, then if these FBI fellers ever lost their investigator jobs, they would make fantastic car stereo installers!

[Guest TargetShooter84]

I want one!

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I want one!

If you can recover it later for reading, or you don't have to hide the antenna, there are many available, ferinstance--

Amazon.com: i-gotU GT-120 Travel Blog Master (USB GPS, Data Logger, SiRF III Chipset) (Bumper Case, Data Cable and Software Included) (GT-120): Electronics

Dog Tracking Collars & GPS Dog Collars - FREE SHIPPING

[Guest HvyMtl]

Own a Chevy with Onstar? You have one. Waiting for some divorce atty to subpoena the info from GM. Notice the commercials? They can shut your engine off, too. Waiting for the Feds to use that as well...

Anyway, I think the Feds are overstepping here.

[DaveTN]

Oh no…. I have On-Star. So now when I go out running from the cops they will be able to shut my car off? That really blows. Don’t I have a right to run from the cops? I mean, who cares if I’m putting you and your family in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm…. aren't my rights more important?

[-boatman-]

If it was on your car you could call it abaondoned property and you could make a case to do with it what you wanted to, keep it, sell it, or throw it away. But in the end I would probably give it to them. I think it would be easier on myself to give it up.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Considering Dave, if they got it right, and stop the right vehicle, or the right person... Otherwise, they have just removed an innocent's safety...

And considering how they botched this, I would not put it past them botching something which could lead to a motor vehicle accident, injury, and death...

Edited October 10, 2010 by HvyMtl

[jughead]

dont have any idea why there would be one on my vehicle but if i found one some one would have a long chase trying to keep up with it.

[Guest jackdm3]

There doesn't need to be a chase for them to use it. It might not be traveling at high speed for them to kill your car, but they might hit it at 55MPH. You could be around others when they do it. When they kill it, it stops everything, right? And that stops power steering, right? Power brakes, right? The potential to have the auto NOT come to a safe stop while taking others with it, right? Right!!!

Glad I don't get into situations where I would even consider giving chase to them underpaid G-men.

[Guest oldsmobile98]

I'm sure it was for some investigation. I would like to know how he found it and does he normally sweep his vehicle for bugs and/or tracking devices normally? Seems like there is probably a lot more to it. Now just throwing one on a person's vehicle for no reason is bull and violation of laws.

He found it when he went to get an oil change and they put it on hydraulic risers.

This issue has been heard in a couple of other Federal Appeals Courts in the last year or so. The Appeals Court for the District of Columbia found that long-term tracking like that violates the 4th Amendment, but also stated that short-term GPS tracking is similar to police/FBI/etc tailing someone (which is not a violation).

Appeals Court Rules Against Secret Police GPS Tracking | dailyator.com

Back in August, the 9th Circuit also found that planting a GPS device on someone's car in their driveway isn't a 4th Amendment violation:

Chief Judge of 9th Circuit:

The 3rd Circuit has also ruled (although somewhat vaguely) that certain types of cellphone tracking would not violate the 4th Amendment.

This is a developing area of the law and really isn't as black-and-white has it might appear at first.

Thanks for the post. I urge everyone to look at the second link provided by midtennchip. It is about Chief Judge Kozinski's dissenting opinion. Apparently he lived in Romania until he was 12. Both his parents were Holocaust survivors. Read the end of his opinion:

"I don’t think that most people in the United States would agree with the panel that someone who leaves his car parked in his driveway outside the door of his home invites people to crawl under it and attach a device that will track the vehicle’s every movement and transmit that information to total strangers. There is something creepy and un-American about such clandestine and underhanded behavior. To those of us who have lived under a totalitarian regime, there is an eerie feeling of déjà vu. This case, if any, deserves the comprehensive, mature and diverse consideration that an en banc panel can provide. We are taking a giant leap into the unknown, and the consequences for ourselves and our children may be dire and irreversible. Some day, soon, we may wake up and find we’re living in Oceania."

Pure gold.

I think if you are Arab looking or Muslim and they are looking at you as a possible terrorist; they pretty much can do whatever they want.

You could put a device on an FBI vehicle but please make sure you are making video of it when they find out so we can all watch.

Both those devices in that picture are pretty big. Which one was on the car? Is this the best technology we have? On TV they use little button sized devices.

If you want to live in a police state like in the novel 1984, I am not gonna be able to change your mind. I can only warn you about where the path toward statism has always led to: Room 101.

The transmitter and battery pack were both on the car.

Own a Chevy with Onstar? You have one. Waiting for some divorce atty to subpoena the info from GM. Notice the commercials? They can shut your engine off, too. Waiting for the Feds to use that as well...

Anyway, I think the Feds are overstepping here.

You can choose not to have OnStar. You can't choose to prevent the FBI dude from secretly sticking the thing on your car.

Oh no…. I have On-Star. So now when I go out running from the cops they will be able to shut my car off? That really blows. Don’t I have a right to run from the cops? I mean, who cares if I’m putting you and your family in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm…. aren't my rights more important?

The FBI themselves admitted that Afifi was not a threat. No one is talking about running from the cops. I am talking about the right to privacy, as codified in the Fourth Amendment. If you don't like it, you don't have to exercise it. I will, and I will spend the time to fight for it with words so that the next generation can have it. Men better than me paid for it in blood so that I could enjoy it, and I won't throw it away.

If it was on your car you could call it abaondoned property and you could make a case to do with it what you wanted to, keep it, sell it, or throw it away. But in the end I would probably give it to them. I think it would be easier on myself to give it up.

Giving it up would be easier on you. But giving it up is how we got here.

Easy for me to say, right? I haven't been in that situation. Maybe someday I will be. If so, we'll see if my butt can cash the check my mouth wrote. Hopefully, one day we will live in a country where the FBI doesn't threaten to make things "much more difficult" for citiz... er, I mean subjects who don't comply with their whims.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The FBI or any other alphabet agency shouldn't be able to do

anything like that without a warrant.

That ad that GM had last year with

Onstar's ability to shut down a

vehicle should have scared the

hell out of all who saw it.

[Guest HvyMtl]

What would I have done with the device? I would have encased it something which would prevent signal, called my attorney, given it to a trusted friend, had them place it someplace where a warrant would be mandatory to retrieve the item, and then acted ignorant and indignant when the feds popped up and wanted their toy back.

I would then have a tech test it, take it apart, and I would then show the world what is in it, just after I returned it to the feds, in its separate parts (not broken, just dissected.)

I would also look towards any legal action I can take to make the feds look bad in court and in the media for doing such a stupid thing.

"That ad that GM had last year with Onstar's ability to shut down a vehicle should have scared the hell out of all who saw it."

6.8 AR, it more than scares me, as I trust GM less than the government. Just think, they could use OnStar on someone who has quit paying, in traffic. Or if they get the wrong vehicle I.D. and turn off the wrong car at the wrong time...

We have been lucky so far they haven't killed anyone.

Edited October 11, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Guest strelcevina]

G.W. Bush. Signed Patriot act.

And this law gave government Right to do stuff like this .

[DaveTN]

The FBI or any other alphabet agency shouldn't be able to do anything like that without a warrant.

That ad that GM had last year with Onstar's ability to shut down a vehicle should have scared the hell out of all who saw it.

Didn’t scare me a bit, I’m not the least bit worried about the cops tracking me or shutting my vehicle off. Since I worked a lot of traffic I have always wondered how many lives have been saved because the car called for help when the driver was unable to.

Does GM not offer a “TinFoil Hat†model that doesn’t have the latest technology?

And yes… the cops have already used On-Star to shut down a car. They used it in Florida when a car jacker was running with the victim’s child in the back seat. The Childs life was saved. I bet those parents were glad they had On-Star.

[Guest oldsmobile98]

What would I have done with the device? I would have encased it something which would prevent signal, called my attorney, given it to a trusted friend, had them place it someplace where a warrant would be mandatory to retrieve the item, and then acted ignorant and indignant when the feds popped up and wanted their toy back.

I would then have a tech test it, take it apart, and I would then show the world what is in it, just after I returned it to the feds, in its separate parts (not broken, just dissected.)

I would also look towards any legal action I can take to make the feds look bad in court and in the media for doing such a stupid thing.

Okay, I can get behind that. Same strategy, different tactic. Perhaps wiser.

G.W. Bush. Signed Patriot act.

Yes, he did. He did something very bad and wrong.

And this law gave government Right to do stuff like this .

American Jurisprudence sez:

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ... " (16 Am. Jur. 2d, Sec. 178)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Didn’t scare me a bit, I’m not the least bit worried about the cops tracking me or shutting my vehicle off. Since I worked a lot of traffic I have always wondered how many lives have been saved because the car called for help when the driver was unable to.

Does GM not offer a “TinFoil Hat†model that doesn’t have the latest technology?

And yes… the cops have already used On-Star to shut down a car. They used it in Florida when a car jacker was running with the victim’s child in the back seat. The Childs life was saved. I bet those parents were glad they had On-Star.

Like Olds said, at least by implication, a little Orwellian for me.

It may have been used for good one time, but its ability to be used for evil by a tyrannical

government, in a time of emergency(like when they don't like what you may be considering

doing because they have taken all perceived rights away), you might change your mind.

But that's just the boogey man speaking.

It's the gradual creeping in the door of a bad law that you don't understand. The Patriot Act

is another example of a bad law with maybe good intentions. It was still a bad mistake. If

Onstar is so good, why hasn't it been unversally adopted? I hope it never gets that far.