TexasCHLforum.com

C-dub

Within the realm of tracking devices, 100m does sound short range to me. To boost the range further seems like more trouble and expense than most BG will go through.

Many people already wear RFID badges for employment. I do. If I were to inactivate mine I would not be able to open many doors that I need access to and it would cost me $15 to have another made.

I'm not saying that I'm all in favor of doing this, but I do see more positive applications that I think outweigh the probability of it being used negatively.

Regarding earlier comments about being able to track my daughter, I'm an enigma. What can I say? Hopefully, my wife and I would be the only one's with the code with the ability to track her. I wouldn't track her every movement, but it would be nice to be able to find her when she doesn't show someplace she was expected.

C-dub

Bart wrote:
C-dub wrote:
duckhead wrote:How about we shoot the feebs with a tranquilizer dart, attach a wildlife tracking collar, and drop them in the middle of the wilderness? Maybe we should do a pilot project with Abraham because he likes GPS tracking so much.
Easy now.
Why are you crying fowl? The suggestion sounds like sauce for the goose, or duck in this case.

Not crying foul. I just didn't want it to go any further than that. I assumed there was a sarcastic tone, but still didn't want things to get any more serious. It was more of a request to be careful that no one descended to saying we should do anything to any one just because we disagree.

C-dub

KD5NRH wrote:
C-dub wrote:
Barbi Q wrote:What's the harm in tracking people without permission?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 41100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Other than being able to get $$$ for the school by saying that the student was there, when they can only prove that their badge was, I don't see too much downside to this.
Because pedophiles and parents without visitation rights could never come up with a way to abuse it, of course.

The technology is readily available, and pretty discreet. A few cheap used cars parked around the area with scanners would get you a route mapped in great detail, and since the other kids are tagged, would tell you if and when your target is walking home alone, too.

Wouldn't they have to know which tag belonged to which child? Because of the extremely short range of RFID it probably would not be used this way due to the cost. Why waste the money when in this case it really would be cheaper to just follow the child.

C-dub

skub wrote:
C-dub wrote:
Barbi Q wrote:What's the harm in tracking people without permission?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 41100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Other than being able to get $$$ for the school by saying that the student was there, when they can only prove that their badge was, I don't see too much downside to this. I'm sure there is, but I'm not seeing it yet. I do think the benefits will far outweigh the negatives.

Haven't thought deeply about this, but it sure makes my spidey senses tingle. One downside that immediately comes to mind is that it conditions the coming generation to have their every movement tracked by "the authorities".

If there were a way to implant something in my daughter that wouldn't harm her in any way that would allow me to track her anywhere in the world and show me vital signs I would do it. Of course, there would also have to be the capability to remove the device at my daughters request once she turned 18y. How many parents wouldn't do this to be able to track their kids if they turned up missing? Paranoid? Maybe. She's my baby!

C-dub

Barbi Q wrote:What's the harm in tracking people without permission?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 41100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Other than being able to get $$$ for the school by saying that the student was there, when they can only prove that their badge was, I don't see too much downside to this. I'm sure there is, but I'm not seeing it yet. I do think the benefits will far outweigh the negatives.

C-dub

duckhead wrote:How about we shoot the feebs with a tranquilizer dart, attach a wildlife tracking collar, and drop them in the middle of the wilderness? Maybe we should do a pilot project with Abraham because he likes GPS tracking so much.

Easy now.

C-dub

Abraham wrote:C-dub,

Okay.

Where's the proof (examples man, I need examples to be convinced this is going on) this is a widespread development of what appears to be police state-like tactics used against our citizens?

I'd like to believe our law enforcement agencies would use such a tactic against criminals/terrorists and not as a fishing tool used arbitrarily against just anyone, cuz hey, you never know what you might find...

I want to believe the various U.S. agencies are ethical (obviously there have been exceptions...) and wouldn't use such a tactic unless it's necessary to catch criminals/terrorists.

Am I being naive?

I dunno, maybe...

Just read your reply before posting the above and that's the one example (and the only one) I'm aware of. (I alluded to it in an earlier post) Given his background information, I'd say he wasn't just some run-of-the-mill citizen. He may very well be linked to a terrorist. Of course, he may not be too, but we don't know all the facts. He certainly doesn't appear to be just some joe-schmoe the feds arbitrarily decided to track...and that's the crux of this entire thing.

I don't see example after example of regular citizens being tracked, but I see a lot of fear, that it MIGHT be happening.

Is it?

Let's keep in mind that I think you and I agree on this subject. I don't really see a problem with this. Misuse can occur with anything. Coming onto private property (driveway), which we already know is treated as a public place from the discussions around here regarding OC on one's property, is not that intrusive and could just as easily be done while we are at a grocery store or any other obviously public place.

I look at this like roaches. If there's one you can bet there are a hundred. This one example can't possibly be the only one. This is just one that has made the news.

C-dub

Mike1951 wrote:http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/1 ... ng-device/

Caught Spying on Student, FBI Demands GPS Tracker Back

Here you go Abraham. I thought I saw this here somewhere. I don't know where quote within this one is from.

C-dub

Abraham,
It may be semantics, but the use of these devices are to gather information from people suspected from breaking the law. They may not have broken the law yet, which still possibly makes them law abiding citizens. There may be circumstances something like this would be used to find bigger fish, but otherwise I don't think it would be used on someone's vehicle if they have already broken the law. They would just arrest them and then they would hopefully know where they are and a GPS device would be unnecessary. lol

C-dub

KD5NRH wrote:
C-dub wrote:
KD5NRH wrote:
C-dub wrote:I know it seems like an intrusion, but what really is the difference between this and just following someone around?
Roughly the same as the difference between following someone around to listen to their phone conversations and tapping the line.
Is this apples and oranges? Following someone around still doesn't give them permission to listen to phone conversations. That still requires a warrant, doesn't it?
You can listen to anything you can hear. With good ears, you can easily get both sides of a conversation from the next table.

Under these circumstances, I agree. Overhearing a conversation taking place in public is quite different from tapping a line and the information gleaned from following someone and using a GPS device is the same. Other than speed, the GPS device doesn't tell one any more than that.

Maybe the difference is the expectation of privacy. When talking to someone on a private phone line there is a certain expectation of privacy. Excluding talking in a public place and the person on the other line is a load talker. However, while driving around on public roads there can't possibly be any expectation of privacy with regards to one's location.

C-dub

KD5NRH wrote:
C-dub wrote:I know it seems like an intrusion, but what really is the difference between this and just following someone around?
Roughly the same as the difference between following someone around to listen to their phone conversations and tapping the line.

Is this apples and oranges? Following someone around still doesn't give them permission to listen to phone conversations. That still requires a warrant, doesn't it?

C-dub

Dave2 wrote:
C-dub wrote:I know it seems like an intrusion, but what really is the difference between this and just following someone around? LE can follow anyone without a warrant. This is just a cheaper and more effective way of doing so.
Yeah, but that's way more resource-intensive than sticking a gadget under their car, so they won't be tracking just anyone.

Exactly. That's my point. Cheaper for them means cheaper for us.

Wait. Or is it your point that without a gadget under the car LE will only be able to track those that are more deserving?

C-dub

I know it seems like an intrusion, but what really is the difference between this and just following someone around? LE can follow anyone without a warrant. This is just a cheaper and more effective way of doing so.

C-dub

The two options I like the best are helium balloons and OTR truck. Or how about the container on an OTR truck that will get loaded onto a ship to be shipped overseas?

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 14 matches

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS

Re: Government's right to track you with GPS