[deleted]
New police radars can 'see' inside homes
31–40 of 117 posts
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
People use a lot of different construction materials and techniques across the country, but I don't think this "sarking" is common for residences. People don't want to live inside Faraday cages though, for the reason you already mentioned: their mobile phones wouldn't work. Not to mention broadcast television, AM/FM radio, garage door openers, etc.
I'm already living in a Faraday cage - we had to have AT&T send us a microcell because we had zero reception in our apartment. Plus, if my phone could place calls over wifi, I wouldn't mind if other signals couldn't get in - I don't even think we have a TV antenna, or anything that would pick up an AM/FM radio signal.
Me too, maybe. We have a stucco exterior that was applied over a wire mesh. While the mesh isn't necessarily electrically contiguous (SIGINT/stealth wasn't part of residential construction specs in the 1940s), we have very poor cell reception inside and pretty good reception if we walk ten feet so we're outside the exterior walls.
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#33What if it's passive? Wifi from the routers of homes emit the RF energy and all the police do is use a detector I could see that as legal since it's energy being emitted just as if it were light shining out a window and you were a silhouette. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/133936-using-wifi-to-see-... >The system, devised by Karl Woodbridge and Kevin Chetty, requires two antennae and a signal processing unit (i.e…
I wouldn't consider the passive/active distinction the definition for 'invasive.' I'd consider thermal imaging from the outside of the home w/out a warrant 'invasive', but a thermal camera is just picking up the heat radiated by your body.
The article links to the relevant Supreme Court decision. They, in "Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001), held that the use of a thermal imaging, or FLIR, device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person's home was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and thus required a warrant." -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States
The article goes on to say the Supreme Court "specifically noted that the rule would apply to radar-based systems that were then being developed."
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#34What if it's passive? Wifi from the routers of homes emit the RF energy and all the police do is use a detector I could see that as legal since it's energy being emitted just as if it were light shining out a window and you were a silhouette. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/133936-using-wifi-to-see-... >The system, devised by Karl Woodbridge and Kevin Chetty, requires two antennae and a signal processing unit (i.e…
There's already precedent about this involving radiated IR, which ruled that police may not use such tools without a warrant, as it violates what people normally consider to be private information.
It's possible that different rulings will come in the future, but you have people defending drug dealers to thank for essentially ruling that this requires a warrant at present.
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would argue the opposite. The dissenting opinion's rationale doesn't hold up in this case > Heat waves, like aromas that are generated in a kitchen, or in a laboratory or opium den, enter the public domain if and when they leave a building. In the case of thermal imaging, you measure light waves that is already leaving the building. In the case of radar, you are actively sending in light waves to bounce off the ins…
That's certainly true using that reasoning (which, incidentally, I think is ridiculous). Of course, they could come up with a workaround. Like perhaps it's not a violation of property rights for invisible and virtually harmless waves to enter private property, and if they happen to bounce off something and come back to the source for collection and analysis, so be it.
It is most certainly not a violation of property rights; radio waves are a notable exemption to normal property rights. Not to mention the fact that their are many other radio waves that already enter your private property.
They still would need to argue that it is not a 4th amendment violation.
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#36Any examples of the display output of the radar device?
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#37As disturbing as the police use is, I am more disturbed by the possibility (inevitability?) of devices like these, and similar audio devices, becoming so cheap and readily available that even basic privacy from strangers while in your home becomes a thing of the past. It seems to me that before too long anyone could pick up audio and video devices for a couple hundred bucks that would allow them to see you in your ow…
Bouncing lasers off window panes to detect audio is a worrisome development. The counter-measure is to install dual pane windows equipped with acoustic transducers that vibrate the panes with white noise. For the device mentioned in the article, when the technology becomes available to consumers and/or is open-sourced, anyone will be able to count the occupants of any location near to them. The question again becomes one of counter-measures.
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#38So does using these new devices mean they will be using the flash bangs less? They should be able to see who all is inside and realize a child or person that is not the suspect?
This is actually a good point. Under current law they aren't going to be able to use one to gather evidence without a warrant, but if they already have a warrant it might make raids safer. Assuming the tech is any good, that is.
Re: New police radars can 'see' inside homes
#39So does using these new devices mean they will be using the flash bangs less? They should be able to see who all is inside and realize a child or person that is not the suspect?
Of course not, they can't tell the race of the inhabitant.