Can a police union buy the right to conduct warrantless phone searches?

[Aimless]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...hone-searches/

California Gov. Jerry Brown is vetoing legislation requiring police to obtain a court warrant to search the mobile phones of suspects at the time of any arrest.

The Sunday veto means that when police arrest anybody in the Golden State, they may search that person’s mobile phone — which in the digital age likely means the contents of persons’ e-mail, call records, text messages, photos, banking activity, cloud-storage services, and even where the phone has traveled.

[...]

In 2007, there were 332,000 felony arrests in California alone — a third of which did not result in conviction.

Brown’s veto also shores up support with police unions and the Peace Officers Research Association of California, a police union that opposed the legislation and recently donated $38,900 to Brown’s campaign coffers. “Restricting the authority of a peace officer to search an arrestee unduly restricts their ability to apply the law, fight crime, discover evidence valuable to an investigation and protect the citizens of California,” the association said in a message.

That support would be key if Brown decides to seek a second term.

In the last year alone, at least seven police unions donated more than $12,900 each to Brown. Those unions, including the California Association of Highway Patrolmen and the Sacramento County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, had given Brown more than $160,000 in combined contributions.

[RandBlade]

The ability to search the contents of a phone should be the same as the ability to search the contents of your pockets.

[Ominous Gamer]

This is the device the police use to steal your cell phone data during a traffic stop.



This goes far beyond simply examining your pocket lint.

[RandBlade]

Only because your pocket lint now has more info.

If you had a paper notepad in your pocket would they require a warrant?

[Ominous Gamer]

If it had a padlock on it, yes (control at time of arrest for a crime makes the law fuzzy). Laugh all you want, but Jay-Z' 99 Problems does a really good job of explaining the extent police can go. Which is why its popular for personal cellphones to be locked in the glovebox or trunk. Who keeps their phone in their pocket while driving anyway? Transporters will pick up disposable phones if they are required to stay in contact during a move.

Sadly, these devices like the one in the picture work through hardware based backdoors to get around phone locks.

[Aimless]

In reality it constitutes a search of everything your pocket may be connected to. I'm hoping password protection and encryption helps summat. Of course, these people who get arrested probably have no business owning smartphones in the first place eh.

[RandBlade]

I keep my phone in my pocket, unless I've got it plugged into the in-car charger. Got no reason not to.

[Aimless]

Unless your phone has zero connectivity and stores no data on what it's been used for, it is in fact connected to things outside your pocket. Eg. google's email servers.

[Steely Glint]

If you had a paper notepad in your pocket would they require a warrant?

If you kept your house keys in your pocket, would they need a warrant to search your house?

[RandBlade]

Your house isn't in the pocket.

[Steely Glint]

Neither is your email.

[RandBlade]

What are they copying off the phone?

If its your text messages/call log/recent usage etc that's all phone based.
If its a complete dump of all your emails, that's not.

As far as I understand it our Police do that in the case of accidents and from that they can detect if the phone was being used illegally by the driver contributing to the accident. That seems reasonable.

[Veldan Rath]

As far as I understand it our Police do that in the case of accidents and from that they can detect if the phone was being used illegally by the driver contributing to the accident. That seems reasonable.

Then get a warrant...

[RandBlade]

Then get a warrant...

Don't know about this, but what if the phone information is lost if you have a delay for a warrant? We also take blood tests on an accident to check for alcohol and illegal drugs potentially causing the accident and no warrant for them either, same principle.

[Steely Glint]

What are they copying off the phone?

If its your text messages/call log/recent usage etc that's all phone based.
If its a complete dump of all your emails, that's not.

The Sunday veto means that when police arrest anybody in the Golden State, they may search that person’s mobile phone — which in the digital age likely means the contents of persons’ e-mail, call records, text messages, photos, banking activity, cloud-storage services, and even where the phone has traveled.

Actually, depending on how you've set it up there might be local copies of e-mails downloaded onto the phone, so that was probably a bad example. It also might be possible to get copies of locally stored passwords to whatever online services you access through your phone. I dunno how they're stored on andriod and iOs and if they're encrypted.

As far as I understand it our Police do that in the case of accidents and from that they can detect if the phone was being used illegally by the driver contributing to the accident. That seems reasonable.

By "detect" do you mean "look at the recent calls list"?

[RandBlade]

By "detect" do you mean "look at the recent calls list"?

I don't know how they do it, I am not a Policeman.

[Steely Glint]

It's just that you were trying to present that as somehow comparable to what they're doing in California. Looking at the screen for something specific is a bit different to taking a huge data dump of everything you can get your hands on.

[CitizenCain]

Can a police union buy the right to conduct warrantless phone searches?

But I thought you liked public-sector unions!

Anyway, I predict a TrueCrypt mobile or similar in the near future. Or I really hope so, at least, given that the thought of having to do it myself is very depressing.

[Veldan Rath]

Don't know about this, but what if the phone information is lost if you have a delay for a warrant? We also take blood tests on an accident to check for alcohol and illegal drugs potentially causing the accident and no warrant for them either, same principle.

The phone company has records of when a phone is in use...so sorry no dice there.

And I'm of the opinion that the blood test is bad law.

[CitizenCain]

And I'm of the opinion that the blood test is bad law.

Dumbass. If there's one thing biology and psychology have taught us, it's that everyone's identical, and every event involving a human can be reduced to a mono-causal, chemical paradigm.

Then again, consider the source, or something, given that I'm living proof that the laws of statistics are completely meaningless, on account of my accident and death-free record of many thousands of miles worth of "drunk driving."

[Dreadnaught]

This doesn't make me very comfortable at all. A traffic stop is usually based on how someone is driving or a belief that something wrong is in the car (drugs, weapons, dead bodies in the trunk).

Unless you're specifically apprehending an individual (in which case you need to get a warrant), pulling the entire contents off someone's phone at a random traffic stop seems completely disproportionate.

[Ominous Gamer]

a belief that something wrong is in the car (drugs, weapons, dead bodies in the trunk).

crazy part, considering that the trunk isn't considered to be accessible while the car is in motion, you would need more than a simple hunch or belief for a police officer to get into the trunk without a warrant or permission


Another thing I loved about my delSol during that time of my life, 4 interior locking compartments.

[Loki]

This doesn't make me very comfortable at all. A traffic stop is usually based on how someone is driving or a belief that something wrong is in the car (drugs, weapons, dead bodies in the trunk).

Unless you're specifically apprehending an individual (in which case you need to get a warrant), pulling the entire contents off someone's phone at a random traffic stop seems completely disproportionate.

Or someone being black...

[CitizenCain]

Or a cop needing to meet a ticket quota...

Traffic stops haven't actually been about driving behavior or probable cause for a long time, Dread.

[Dreadnaught]

Yeah, but this increases the invasiveness of a traffic stop pretty significantly which I think is what's important here.

[CitizenCain]

The fact that traffic stops are currently illegal, as generally practiced doesn't concern you, though?

[Dreadnaught]

I think we would probably disagree on that issue.

[CitizenCain]

Oh, that's right, you don't drive. Bet your opinion would be different if you did. Doesn't take many "traffic stops" for driving while black/driving while teen/driving an expensive car while young/driving while city budget shortfall/etc until you start to see traffic stops for what they really are, which is a thinly disguised protection racket with blue uniforms and heaping amounts of self righteous sanctimony.

Nothing puts me in a homicidal mood quite like having to endure a lecture from my mugger about why I'm being mugged. 'Course, being the "glass half full" type of guy I am, it'll be almost orgasmic when I finally get to use those rounds I've earmarked specially for "muggers," once the revolution comes and all.

[RandBlade]

I've been stopped quite a few times. Been breathalysed a few and quizzed what I was doing even more.

Not had the slightest problem with it. I'd rather that than be killed by a drunk-driver.

[CitizenCain]

And how happy you must be, thinking that submitting to the unreasonable demands of your police state actually makes you safer. However, that comment was directed at Dreadnaught, who, like me, is American, and has experiences with American police and an American upbringing and culture that [to some degree] finds the whole British "War on Liberty" to be offensive.

Really, is there anything more normal than a Brit submitting to unreasonable invasions of his personal life by his democratically elected government?