Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Drones, Dogs and the Future of Privacy

Posted by timothy on from the cruising-gently-down-the-slippery-slope dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Stanford's Ryan Calo has previously told us that 'that there is very little in American privacy law that would prohibit drone surveillance within our borders.' But will UAVs not only be legally permitted to monitor us in public, but also be used to 'peer' into homes with high-tech thermal and chemical sensors and alert police to the presence of illicit substances or other suspicious activity? Calo writes in Wired about a pending Supreme Court case, Florida v. Jardines, which will determine 'whether the police need a warrant before a dog can sniff your house' like they already do to luggage at airports. According to Calo, if the Court approves of these searches, it's a small leap to extend that same logic to the use of drones, allowing them 'to roam a neighborhood in search of invisible infractions such as indoor marijuana.' He concludes: 'The wrong decision in Jardines makes this and similar surveillance scenarios uncomfortably plausible.'"

3 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. It's already been ruled on. by scorp1us · · Score: 5, Informative

    Cops cannot use thermal imaging to see inside without a warrant. What you saw on Weeds was just a TV show.

    The walls of your house create an expectation of privacy, and that privacy is protected by the constitution.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:It's already been ruled on. by BlindRobin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The right to privacy is not explicit in the constitution but a long held extended interpretation of the fourth amendment prohibition against illegal search and seizure. Laws regarding privacy are, at this point in time, undergoing a great deal of challenge and re-interpretation in state and federal courts. This is not a done deal, the law never is. The Patriot Act and similar less publicized legislation have already eroded this presumptive right and state legislatures around the country are pushing bills targeting privacy issues in the pursuit of various ideological agenda with increasing frequency.

    2. Re:It's already been ruled on. by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Informative

      Scalia and Thomas, the most conservative members of the court both then and now, both sided with the majority in Kyllo v. US, which held that thermal imaging of a home constitutes a search and requires a warrant. Scalia even wrote the opinion.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States