How Militarized Cops Are Zapping Rights With Stingray (alternet.org)

"Police nationwide are secretly exploiting intrusive technologies with the feds' complicity," argues a new article on Alternet -- calling out Stingray, which mimics a cellphone tower to identify every cellphone nearby. "It gathers information not only about a specific suspect, but any bystanders in the area as well... Some Stingrays are capable of collecting not only cell phone ID numbers but also numbers those phones have dialed and even phone conversations." The ACLU says requests for more information have been meeting heavy resistance from police departments since 2011, with many departments citing nondisclosure agreements with Stingray's manufacturer and with the FBI, and "often, the police get a judge's sign-off for surveillance without even bothering to mention that they will be using a Stingray...claiming that they simply can't violate those FBI nondisclosure agreements.

"More often than not, police use Stingrays without bothering to get a warrant, instead seeking a court order on a more permissive legal standard. This is part of the charm of a new technology for the authorities: nothing is settled on how to use it." Stingray is more than a 1960s TV series with puppets. Several state judges estimate there have been hundreds of instances where police have used the Stingray tool without a warrant or telling a judge.

Slashdot reader Presto Vivace writes:
This is why it matters who wins the mayor and city council races. Localities do not have to accept this technology.

Comments

Re:A simple solution to part of the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

In general, the practice in america is to throw the accused in jail for a few months until they confess, citing high (99.9+%) conviction rates and the fact that the judge WILL throw the book at anyone who dares to take a case to a trial in the first place, in order to set an example. By the time a new inmate has sampled the delights of sleeping on a concrete floor with three square feet of personal space, and sharing a toilet with twelve other men for a month or two, most of them will admit to almost anything if it means they get time served.

Particularly in california, the legal system is very predatory.

Re:Civil Contracts vs. The Constitution

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, it is pretty much the same as the contract between the five eyes.

The CIA is not supposed to spy on US-nationals in the U.S.A, so they let MI5 spy inside the U.S.A. and share the information with the CIA. Not exactly in the spirit of the law, is it.

Re:Correct phrasing.

[Feyshtey]

When opinion trumps the Constitution then the Constitution is no longer being upheld and protected by the government servants sworn to do precisely that.

The Constitution was deliberately crafted to limit what the government may do to the people without due process. Your argument here, is that because those in government who have power think its ok to weild that power against the people, then it is inherently ok for those with power to weild it against the people. That is precisely the thing that the Constitution was built to protect against, and anyone unwilling to see that or to do the mental gymnastics necessary to dismiss it is intellectually lazy, intellectually dishonest or morally corrupt.

The opinions of any individual bureaucrat isnt even relevant. What is relevant is the opinion of the judges in the courts. These days I dont have a hell of a lot of faith in them either, since so many are activist judges. However, they do get it right on occasion, and more than a couple have found Stingray to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment. (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-stingray-court-decision-20160331-story.html)