the slippery slope gets even steeper.

Skaramunga

Well-known member
Sep 25, 2004
1,866
0
42
Kennedrunkport, Oxidationland
not a good thing to hear man. rep/dem i'm neither, but tracking us as individuals sounds a bit crazy. who's in control over there in wisconsin, boba fett?

time to go thro my obama posters in the trash, eh i mean recycling bin.

don't want anyone tracking my trash.
 

peter sherman

Well-known member
May 10, 2004
3,072
0
Fake Forest, IL
Lake_Bueller said:
Okay Thom....let me put it to you this way.

Some crazy pervert is suspected of stalking your daughter. Nobody has actually been able to prove the point but it's still suspected. The police don't have the time & money to tail the guy for a week. Would you be in favor of them putting a GPS tracker on his vehicle?

I'm not saying...I'm just saying.

Some crazy pervert is suspected of stalking your daughter.
Like it or not thats why there are WARRENTS! Like it or not!
Without checks & balances we have nothing... :patriot:
 

cptyarderho

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
2,904
0
Va
Scary stuff. I hope it dies at the Fed level. With a warrant is one thing, but just because, well... No thanks.
 

Lake_Bueller

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2004
2,105
59
56
Beloit, WI
Chris-St Louis said:
Define staulking.

For Illinois (Thom's state):

ILLINOIS

720 ILCS 5/12-7.3 (2000)

[Prior to 1/1/93 cited as: Ill. Rev. Stat., Ch. 38, para. 12-7.3]

? 720 ILCS 5/12-7.3. Stalking

Sec. 12-7.3. Stalking. (a) A person commits stalking when he or she, knowingly and without lawful justification, on at least 2 separate occasions follows another person or places the person under surveillance or any combination thereof and:

(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person; or

(2) places that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement or restraint; or

(3) places that person in reasonable apprehension that a family member will receive immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.

(b) Sentence. Stalking is a Class 4 felony. A second or subsequent conviction for stalking is a Class 3 felony.

(b-5) The incarceration of a person in a penal institution who transmits a threat is not a bar to prosecution under this Section.

(c) Exemption. This Section does not apply to picketing occurring at the workplace that is otherwise lawful and arises out of a bona fide labor dispute, or any exercise of the right of free speech or assembly that is otherwise lawful.

(d) For the purpose of this Section, a defendant "places a person under surveillance" by remaining present outside the person's school, place of employment, vehicle, other place occupied by the person, or residence other than the residence of the defendant.

(e) For the purpose of this Section, "follows another person" means (i) to move in relative proximity to a person as that person moves from place to place or (ii) to remain in relative proximity to a person who is stationary or whose movements are confined to a small area. "Follows another person" does not include a following within the residence of the defendant.

(f) For the purposes of this Section and Section 12-7.4 [720 ILCS 5/12-7.4], "bona fide labor dispute" means any controversy concerning wages, salaries, hours, working conditions, or benefits, including health and welfare, sick leave, insurance, and pension or retirement provisions, the making or maintaining of collective bargaining agreements, and the terms to be included in those agreements.

(g) For the purposes of this Section, "transmits a threat" means a verbal or written threat or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal or written statements or conduct.

(h) For the purposes of this Section, "family member" means a parent, grandparent, brother, sister, or child, whether by whole blood, half-blood, or adoption and includes a step-grandparent, step-parent, step-brother, step-sister or step-child. "Family member" also means any other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior 6 months, regularly resided in the household.

Legislative Update: HB 4981, enacted on August 22, 2002, expands the stalking victims from subsequent repeat stalking incidents by the same offender. Under the provisions of the new law, a person who was previously convicted of stalking commits a new stalking offense when he or she knowingly and without lawful justifications stalks the same victim again on another single occasion.
 

knewsom

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2008
5,262
0
La Mancha, CA
ok, first, RFID chips and GPS trackers are VERY different. One is TINY, the other just small. You can't hide GPS trackers in posters or registration stickers, but you can hide RFID chips, which only react to radiostimulation.

Second, a stalker and possible rapist is a perfect opportunity for law enforcement to ask for a warrant to use something like this. I support the idea of using it when it can be effective - but it can't be across the board. If there is reason for suspicion - just cause - then go for it.

The ACORN thing is a joke. They used GPS to stay organized with which houses they went to, and want to go to. Those articles are full of scare tactics, from schlocky sources. If you're worried about people knowing the geographic location of the house you live in, go sue google, because I can look up ANY address in the nation, then find out how to get there. FUCK thats scary! Must have been a liberal whackjob who thought up the concept of addresses!
 

Lake_Bueller

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2004
2,105
59
56
Beloit, WI
peter sherman said:
Some crazy pervert is suspected of stalking your daughter.
Like it or not thats why there are WARRENTS! Like it or not!
Without checks & balances we have nothing... :patriot:

Don't get me wrong....this is indeed a slippery slope. I commend the police for getting a search warrenty first. I believe that is the right action. But the judges interpretation of the law was probably correct also.

The question is where to draw the line between justified and not justified tracking. I'm not sure that we can get the full understanding of the judgement based on a short newspaper clip. It appears the criminal may have sued under the wrong basis (unreasonable search & seizure).
 
Last edited:

MUSKYMAN

Well-known member
Apr 19, 2004
8,277
0
OverBarrington IL
Lake_Bueller said:
Okay Thom....let me put it to you this way.

Some crazy pervert is suspected of stalking your daughter. Nobody has actually been able to prove the point but it's still suspected. The police don't have the time & money to tail the guy for a week. Would you be in favor of them putting a GPS tracker on his vehicle?

I'm not saying...I'm just saying.

if they cant get a warrant no I would not be. I do live in the state that invented the stalking law:D

I watch my daughter like a hawk, she is never out of trusted hands ever.

get near my daughter and I fucking kill you...let the police sort it out:D
 
Oct 27, 2004
3,000
4
Why just staulkers toward little girls. Why not crazy Ex Wives? Or crazy co workers, or whatever..... Where does it end?
 

knewsom

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2008
5,262
0
La Mancha, CA
dude. you can just enter an address in google and correlate that with GPS co-ordinates. the government knowing the exact location of your house will NOT help them spy on you. these guys who think Obama is the antichrist are just plain silly.
 

montanablur

Well-known member
Aug 29, 2004
2,011
0
planes, trains and automobiles
Come on GH BUSH is the one that used the term New World Order back in the days of Reagan... And it was GW that did away with most civil libs with the Patriot Act.

So don't go saying it's the liberal, wolf pettin', twig eating, tree huggin', hybrid drivin', rainbow flag wearing liberals! damn it!
 

jhmover

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
5,571
3
California
A local Census Taker showed up and insisted on checking the farmer?s property and, in particular, a certain field. The farmer refused to allow him access to the field but the Census Taker insisted he had the right, saying,?I?m a Federal employee and I have a card! This card allows me to go in.? Before the farmer could stop him, the Taker was off into the field.

Soon, a horrifying scream pierced the air and the Census Taker, being chased by a massive bull, reappeared running for his life.?Help, help!? he cried.

The farmer shouted back,?Show him your card! Show him your card!?
 
Oct 27, 2004
3,000
4
THis is a man who will release photos of alleged “prisoner abuse” that can be used as propaganda material by our enemies…

…but refused to release photos (for which taxpayers paid over $300,000, by the way) of the President’s plane terrorizing New Yorkers.
 

knewsom

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2008
5,262
0
La Mancha, CA
montanablur said:
...wolf pettin', twig eating, tree huggin', hybrid drivin', rainbow flag wearing...

wolf pettin' - I have an 8 year old wolf hybrid at home!

tree huggin' - yep, I've done that. I know we need wood, but we can harvest timber sustainably, and use hemp for paper. ergo, we SHOULD.

hybrid drivin' - if I could afford one, and car companies made one that did what I WANTED it to, I would.

rainbow flag wearing - whoops... guess I ALMOST fit the bill... :eek: