STD (not what you think)

KQuinonez · April 2014

In an effort to keep our board from dying, I thought we could start a new weekly chat. Stimulating Tuesday Discussion! I figure we are running out of UO and FFFC so maybe this will help us get back to being at each others throats. J/K. Seriously though lets have some friendly discussions about babies, motherhood, or things that have nothing to do with either of those. I hope we all can have fun with this. Just remember you can and probably will get flamed if you say something stupid.

This week's topic stems from a recent Supreme Court Case, Do you think police should have the right to search your cell phone without a warrant? Hopefully our resident cop has something fun to say about this.

KQuinonez · April 2014

I keep trying to decide my stance on this but the main hangup for me is what would I have on my cell phone that I wouldn't want a cop to see. Of course I am not a criminal. I guess maybe If I was texting and driving then that could be incriminating, but beyond that I have nothing to hide.

nnikki10 · April 2014

Local po po here. We use cell phones for drug cases, human trafficking, pumping, homicides, robberies and all sorts of other crimes. We ( police) are running into the fact that cell phones are becoming more like computers everyday. Criminals use their cell for everything.

I as a police officer want to always go through your( criminal) phone bc there's tons of evidence. I think we should be allowed too. Just because I'm biased and I want to find evidence quickly with out hassle of getting a search warrant and before criminal remotely deletes all evidence.

I also know there's an expectation of privacy to your cell. So as a police I want the ability to get into phone but as private citizen If I was in trouble would want a search warrant to go through my phone.

nnikki10 · April 2014

Also on cells we are looking at text messages, photos of bad things ( ie: bad guy holding gun, dope, and money who claims to not be a drug dealer), other contacts, videos, any other proof of the crime.

MagPie 1986 · April 2014

No, they wouldn't find anything on mine but there is some personal stuff (pictures and messages with DH and friends) that I don't think someone should be able to see because they caught me going 60 mph in a 50.

ashleyamberRN · April 2014

I haven't heard of this case, but that's a tough one. Cell phones definitely apply to our right to privacy but like @nnikki10‌ said, criminals could easily delete things so fast

mz-n-ss · April 2014

Honestly I don't think I would mind. I think it would help in a lot of cases. I don't have anything else to hide; the most they could get me for is texting while driving. I can see both sides and understand how it would be invasion of privacy, but I think the pros outweigh the cons.

PB102012 · April 2014

I wouldn't mind at all. There's nothing too interesting on there at all and I tend to not commit crimes so they can search all they want.... Well, with one condition..... They better tell me what a cute baby I have because she is in every. stinking. single. picture.

MommyKristin88 · April 2014

On one hand I don't mind, because I have nothing to hide.

On the other hand, I think it's an invasion of privacy, and I don't trust that whole "probable cause" thing. A cop could easily lie and say they have probable cause, when the reality is they are just fishing for something to catch on to.

So, my vote is for no, this shouldn't be allowed.

MissyCee · April 2014

While I wouldn't have anything to hide on my phone, I don't think a police officer should be able to search through it without my permission.

Snowbird7 · April 2014

I think cell phones should be able to be searched, just like any other personal property.

And if I would object to a police officer seeing something personal on my phone (like a risque photo or something), then it probably shouldn't be on a cell phone in the first place. They can be lost, stolen, seen by a kid playing with phone, etc.

magdalina.h · April 2014

I personally don't have anything on my phone that I wouldn't show a cop, but I still have rights. They should be required to have a warrent.

shivers7 · April 2014

This is a tricky question... I definitely want criminals caught lol but we do have rights to personal property... I would say probable cause or permission to look at the cell would be alright but just taking it without any reason would be invading privacy.

KatyKatMeowz · April 2014

Despite the fact that there's nothing on my phone that could possibly be of interest to police, I'm not generally in favor of anything that infringes on my rights as a private citizen, so I say no peeking without a search warrant.

MinnesotaMomma91 · April 2014

You know i have mixed feelings about this like most. I have nothing to hide from the police. But i think of when i used to live in a town with a lot of drug use. People would use their phones to communicate with their dealers so i dont know.

I think i would want to be told what probable cause the police had to go through my phone, because in the time it takes to get a warrant i could deleate everything off my phone. So i dont know mixed feelings.

Btw i like the idea of this thread

Revez · April 2014

If this becomes legal I'm totally having a giant picture of a penis in my library just in case.

While I have nothing to hide on my phone I would feel violated having someone search through it without my permission. I feel like the ability to go through people's phones without permission would probably end up being abused.

kkay1982 · April 2014

I would be okay with it. Yes there may be times it would be taken advantage of but if overall it would help catch criminals than go for it. Like PP have said, I don't have anything to hide on it.

But it would be best if some conditions (probably cause) were put in to place to limit it from being abused.

Khaleesi07 · April 2014

Hmmm. im on the fence with this one. on one hand, I'm all for anything that can help catch the bad guys. While I have nothing to hide, I agree with those who've pointed out that this could potentially be abused.

MommyKristin88 · April 2014

petey1106 said:

I thought this was going to be like POAS Tuesday. So, who has an STD this week?!

Not it!

MommyKristin88 · April 2014

@nnikki10 Can you explain how probable cause works? Can you (police officers) really just decide in your head that you want to pull over/search someone with no proof of anything?

nnikki10 · April 2014

@mommykristen88 stand by a few I'm mobile lemme get to a computer.

nnikki10 · April 2014

So let me preface with I'm not a lawyer and the laws are never black and white. I'm going to break it down to the best of my ability. I know we have a lawyer on the board she can please correct me or expand on the info. I will stick with the drug dealer because that is when we would be going through a cell phone.

Probable cause (PC) is what gives us the right to arrest someone. We do not need probable cause to contact people. With the exception of a traffic stop is a PC stop because they violated a traffic violation. We cannot stop a vehicle just because.

Reasonable suspicion is what gives us the ability to contact people. Reasonable suspicion: "a reasonable person believes a crime could be occurring". IE: I see a guy standing at a liquor store in a high drug area, I keep seeing him at the front of the store but never enter the store, I see he makes several "hand to hands" with several different subjects. I have reasonable suspicion he is dealing drugs. I have enough to contact and detain that subject.

We can also do a consensual contact. " hey how are you? do you mind talking to me?" that person can tell me to fuck off or stop and talk to me.

It's all in our training and experience. I'm going to see things the average citizen won't because I've been to lots of training and continue to get training as the law changes.

LEMSA · April 2014

I think they should be able to look through your phone if that is the reason for the stop. ie using it in a school zone, texting while driving in an area where it is illegal.

But not as a "just because" during a routine traffic stop.

And I second @Revez‌ penis idea.

rooftop · April 2014

I think reasonable suspicion should be enough but would prefer probable cause be required. My biggest hangup on this is a single text or photo out of context could be incriminating even though no crime has been committed. For example, I have pics of my baby in the bath on my phone. Not knowing whose phone it is or that there's other pics of the same child on the phone someone could convincingly say my phone is being used to distribute child porn. They need to come up with concrete laws regarding phones and the contents before they make it a mainstream source of evidence.

MommyKristin88 · April 2014

nnikki10 said:

So let me preface with I'm not a lawyer and the laws are never black and white. I'm going to break it down to the best of my ability. I know we have a lawyer on the board she can please correct me or expand on the info. I will stick with the drug dealer because that is when we would be going through a cell phone.

Probable cause (PC) is what gives us the right to arrest someone. We do not need probable cause to contact people. With the exception of a traffic stop is a PC stop because they violated a traffic violation. We cannot stop a vehicle just because.

Reasonable suspicion is what gives us the ability to contact people. Reasonable suspicion: "a reasonable person believes a crime could be occurring". IE: I see a guy standing at a liquor store in a high drug area, I keep seeing him at the front of the store but never enter the store, I see he makes several "hand to hands" with several different subjects. I have reasonable suspicion he is dealing drugs. I have enough to contact and detain that subject.

We can also do a consensual contact. " hey how are you? do you mind talking to me?" that person can tell me to fuck off or stop and talk to me.

It's all in our training and experience. I'm going to see things the average citizen won't because I've been to lots of training and continue to get training as the law changes.

Thank you!

Followup #1: If I told you to fuck off when you tried to talk to me, wouldn't have get me in trouble?

#2: This is why I don't trust proable cause. People can get arrested over a misunderstanding, or just because the officer wants to. There's a huge grey area with that. It just seems too each to abuse it.

Jlhkandme830 · April 2014

LEMSA said:
I think they should be able to look through your phone if that is the reason for the stop. ie using it in a school zone, texting while driving in an area where it is illegal.

But not as a "just because" during a routine traffic stop.

This.
I don't think it should just be free-range to go through any time. Even though I have nothing to hide, I think our privacy has to be protected too.

If you want to see 745 pictures of DS, go ahead and look!

nnikki10 · April 2014

@mommykristen88...
#1
freedom of speech. Is it going to piss the cop off?? more than likely could they now find something to talk to you about and "arrest" you for?? yes...Case in point: I'm driving along. Guy on side of street flips me off ( not a crime) gets my attention he then flicks a cigarette into street (littering: crime). I contact him he has warrants he now gets to go to jail when I probably would not have noticed him if he did not flip me off.

#2
Probable cause is not an obscure thing they have to meet the elements of a crime. IE: in California PC 459, burglary: "entering into a dwelling or structure to commit a felony or take property." So I cannot arrest someone for burglary unless they meet the elements of the crime.

Also you would not believe how many laws people actually violate on a daily basis.

MommyKristin88 · April 2014

@ nnikki10 makes sense! That's good to know about probable cause. It's not the bad thing I thought it was

Want a personalized experience?

STD (not what you think)

Re: STD (not what you think)

Choose Another Board

Search Boards