191–200 of 615 posts
Formally the police can't demand a lot of stuff. Informally, they'll put you in a room and tell you that they have the legal right to keep you anywhere from 24 to 72 hours in there and they definitely can make you reconsider during that period -- to put it very mildly. Hint: some cops are really good in the skill of inflicting pain to people without lasting medical trace to prove it afterwards. Until there's true acc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is messed up. That said, biometric unlock is identification, NOT authorization; if you have secrets on your phone, do not use biometrics. They are a low to medium security convenience. Second, of course, don't keep evidence of crimes on your phone. And final tip, on an iphone, hitting the lock button on the side five times rapidly will disable the biometric unlock until the passcode has been filled in. It also…
On Android, rebooting the phone will disable biometric login until the passcode is re-entered.
"In Valdez, the defendant was charged with kidnapping his ex-girlfriend after arranging a meeting under false pretenses. " 'Valdez' is not going to be arbitrarily charged with kidnapping, he'll have the ex-girlfriend as a primary witness. If I were innocent and accused of kidnapping someone I'd check with my lawyer and then hand over my phone because it would exonerate me. I'm inclined with the ruling, but let's be p…
That's the whole point. This was done without a court order, and they used his refusal . There should have been a court order.
Also, the rule is not about unlocking phones. It's about what happens if a defendant refuses to unlock a phone: that fact can't be used against the defendant in court.
The purpose of this rule is not to protect kidnappers, but to protect other people who might be browbeaten or manipulated into incriminating themselves for crimes they didn't commit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely, if I travel with a company laptop and I am asked to unlock it I'll outright refuse and cite that I can and will be sued by my employer if I unlock it, and will direct the airport security to my employer's legal team. I don't want to open myself up for litigation so I'll definitely put up a fight in this case.
Would you say more about your employer suing you if you cave under pressure and unlock the laptop? That sounds to me like your employer is asking a lot of you! Or, if you are bluffing to security about the suing, why are you putting your personal safety on the line to protect your employer?
1.) Not allow my phone to be unlocked by fingerprint/face.
2.) Not carry USB sticks or similar portable storage devices on my person, to only transport them by courier.
3.) Not unlock my computer for anyone, including the police, unless directed to by our compliance office.
Or it's breach of contract and they can reclaim part of my compensation. I don't work on anything exciting, just Big medical data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely, if I travel with a company laptop and I am asked to unlock it I'll outright refuse and cite that I can and will be sued by my employer if I unlock it, and will direct the airport security to my employer's legal team. I don't want to open myself up for litigation so I'll definitely put up a fight in this case.
Would you say more about your employer suing you if you cave under pressure and unlock the laptop? That sounds to me like your employer is asking a lot of you! Or, if you are bluffing to security about the suing, why are you putting your personal safety on the line to protect your employer?
Meanwhile, in the UK: https://www.hcsolicitors.co.uk/news/giving-the-police-your-p... If a judge authorises a notice, under RIPA, you can be served a 2 year sentence for failing to disclose your phone's passcode.
So after serving the 2 year sentence, can they ask you again for the pass code?
There should be a second passcode that erases the phone or locks it for 3 days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now do the other side of the analogy with liberals and gun free zone signs.
To be honest, I don't really understand the analogy. Guns have been prohibited in school zones since 1990. It was signed into law by George H. W. Bush. Is there some new angle on this that implicates liberals in unreasonable behavior?
However, when a mass shooting of some sort occurs there is a distinct difference between how conservatives tend to respond to such a thing and how liberals do. Liberals will want more areas to be gun free zones. They will pressure businesses like grocery stores to put up gun free zone signs or push for stricter gun regulations that would not have prevented the event in the first place.
This behavior is directly analogous to the conservative behavior. The state does not care about Constitutional rights any more than mass murderers care about gun free zones. Hopefully it's understandable why this analogy might be difficult to get for both conservatives and liberals because it is difficult to step outside ones entire worldview.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> political persuasion and education level Sorry, I'm not following. My understanding is that the job attracts bullies and I see bullies from all political persuasions and all education levels.
The police job attracts most people who do not have a college degree, are white, and lean into conservative/justice-heavy politics. Many of those people are bullies. That doesn't mean anything about people that do not have a college degree, or white people, or conservative/justice-heavy politics, it just means something about the police job and the people who agree to take it. We're looking at probability of (white A…
Maybe you're talking about leadership/management positions? But, even then, you're talking about one of the stronger unions in country and a group of employees who will fight your attempts at progress.
Again, I agree with just about everything else, and there isn't an easy solution, but I think your criticism is either unclear or misplaced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy to me the amount that people who have never dealt with the cops think "I'll just show them x legal code so they can see they don't have the right to do that." Turns out, they don't care. For minor infractions, they'll use whatever intimidation and coercion they want, then make you feel lucky for letting you out because they didn't feel like prosecuting. In most circumstances, the word of the person with th…
Yep. My philosophy is to always cooperate (unless they ask for something super egregious) and show myself as friendly. This immediately reduces the alarms in their heads. I even say things like "sure guys, here are my docs, here are the contents of my backpack, hope you catch the guy you are after" and smile. Very often the mere fact that you are not trouble makes them pay less attention and the whole thing ends real…