Wiretaps and The Expectation of Privacy
The Fourth Amendment (that we shall be secure in our homes and papers, etc.) is a tricky rascal and one that I am a firm believer in. I am a true Libertarian about such things. Unless authorized the government shall not intrude. They need warrants supported by probable cause that a crime has been committed to break down your door and open sealed mail etc. Our rights under this amendment are basically described as being protected when we have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Does that apply to cell phones?
A cell phone is basically a radio. If you say something over a radio do you have an expectation of privacy? That seems ludicrous on its face. You put the signal out into space and it can, and will, end up almost anywhere. Want privacy? Find another way to communicate, say a land-line or letter (not to be confused with email which has essentially the same problem as a cell phone).
I am assuming (never a safe thing to do) that most of these intercepts involve wireless communication. If that is the case, I think the government is completely within its rights to intercept them. I know I do not say or do anything I do not want the world or God to know over a cell phone or the internet.
This is not to say that I think the government should be involved in this sort of thing on a regular basis. For one thing, to do so in an untargeted manner would involve billions of bits of information and would be hugely wasteful and unproductive. Secondly it is a way of slouching toward Big Brother and that makes me nervous indeed. Should it be shown that sort of thing was going on, which I doubt is the case, we would need to look seriously at some new privacy laws, not to mention encryption technology. But given the current state of technology and the law, I fail to see a problem with what the government has done here insofar as I understand the issue.
Eavesdropping on Bin Laden and his little friends is impolite but not illegal.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:01 am
Does this mean the author assumes that land lines are never tapped? Get real. Relinquishing our liberties is not a way to defend our liberties.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:10 pm
Did I miss something in what I wrote? I believe I said that if you have an expectation of privacy, use a land-line. For that a warrant is needed.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:15 pm
A warrant is needed for all types of wiretapping. It’s ridiculous to compare cell phones to radios because they aren’t the same thing. When you say something over the radio, you are broadcasting, as in, to everyone on the same channel as you. So therefore, you’re “calling” whoever might be listening. When you’re using a cell phone, you are calling one person directly, and don’t expect anyone else to listen. You aren’t calling “whoever might be listening”. A cell phone is more like a land-line than a radio. You’re just arguing to be arguing.
At any rate, you can read some law, and you’ll see that wiretapping without a warrant is illegal. Sure, you might say, “Intelligence needs to be able to move quickly to gather as much information as possible.” But there is a 72-hour window in which a federal agency can start a wiretap before physically having a warrant. We have this exception built-in specifically for instances of terrorism, etc. Besides, we’re talking about American citizens, here. Regardless of what we think they MIGHT be doing behind closed doors, we have to use the judicial system that we all help create.
How can we preach to Iraq about forming our value system when we’re blatantly ignoring it ourselves?? What about, ‘Innocent until proven Guilty?’ If you were so Libertarian, you wouldn’t want Big Brother stepping on your privacy. Furthermore, if you think some kind of common sense paranoia should make people understand that they shouldn’t use cell phones if they want privacy, then why can’t you turn that paranoia back on yourself… and understand that your land-line could be tapped just as easily as your cell phone calls can be intercepted.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:30 pm
James, we’re not talking technology here, we’re talking about how reasonable your expectation of privacy is. If you have an expectation of privacy in a wireless world, you’d best adjust your thinking.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:22 pm
James said: “It’s ridiculous to compare cell phones to radios because they aren’t the same thing.
Duh, James! They are EXACTLY the same thing! If you are so technologically challenged that you don’t under that, why should anyone pay attention to anything else you say? Your POV is obviously off-track. Sorry, go sit in the corner until you understand what’s happening.
Anyone within your cellphone’s range using a first-rate, sophistacated radio receiver can intercept anything you say on that “phone”. Ergo, you must be using a radio, not a phone. Same thing is true of ‘land lines’ when one is using a cordless ‘portable’ phone at home or in the office. Radios, all. Only a fool would have an expectation of privacy when using any of these devices.