PS If cops are told that the "Find Me" feature on an Apple product is showing which house the stolen device is in, why can't they go to that house and make arrests, or at least retrieve the stolen property? Seems like the "Find Me" feature is extremely strong evidence of who and where the burglars are.
What's the big deal? If Obongo had sons they were just collecting their free obongo phones!
"All that the South has ever desired was that the Union, as established by our forefathers, should be preserved, and that the government, as originally organized, should be administered in purity and truth." – Robert E. Lee
The cops still need a warrant to go into a house. You know, that pesky 4th amendment thing gets in the way from cops just making their way into to wherever an app tells them they should go.
The phone in the house does not prove that the thief is in there, or which thief is the thief that stole the iPhone; thus a warrant is needed to enter the house.
Your argument is a good and strong one but is it enough to convince a judge he should allow cops to force their way into a house?
The cops still need a warrant to go into a house. You know, that pesky 4th amendment thing gets in the way from cops just making their way into to wherever an app tells them they should go.
The phone in the house does not prove that the thief is in there, or which thief is the thief that stole the iPhone; thus a warrant is needed to enter the house.
Your argument is a good and strong one but is it enough to convince a judge he should allow cops to force their way into a house?
Seems like a good chance a judge would give a warrant, but can't a cop just knock and announce to whoever responds that the stolen property is in the house, requesting its return and some information about where they got it? That doesn't require a warrant.
PS What's the difference between this scenario and a cop responding to a Lojack signal after a car theft?
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
National Rifle Association - Patron Member National Muzzleloading Rifle Association - Life Member and 1 of 1000 Illinois State Rifle Association - Life Member Carlinville Rifle & Pistol Club ~ Molɔ̀ːn Labé ~
I've had some experience with this issue as a police officer. Unfortunately, you can't just walk up to somebody's house and say "Apple says the phone is here, let me in! " Sometimes the technology works very well, sometimes it doesn't. The Fourth Amendment protects people from situations like this, and you should be glad it does.
I've had some success knocking on the door and talking to the homeowner. Especially when the parent looks at the kid and says " go get the phone, now! " More often though, people won't answer the door when I come knocking. Experience as a cop goes a long way. How you talk to people and what you tell them, plays a big part.
The accuracy of the app is often suspect. If there is one house at the end of a country road, it's pretty good. However, when you're looking at 12 apartments in one building of a huge complex, it's not nearly so good. I've seen the app say the phone was in one place and then suddenly say it was 5 miles away, when it was determined in the end that it never moved.
As far as getting a warrant goes, the officer can't swear to the accuracy of the information or the technology it's based on. Judges don't issue search warrants based on free apps. Again, you should be glad they don't. We may get to the point some day where this technology is good enough, but that's a long way off.
The question regarding the Lowjack hit is a good one. I suggest anyone wondering about that dig a little deeper. Start with learning what a Carroll stop is. The bottom line is the law is almost always lagging behind advances in technology. But you have to ask yourself how you'd feel if somebody kicked your door in and came in your house based on the information provided by a free app.
Deadlines and commitments, what to leave in, what to leave out...
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
I had a conversation with a fellow in a gun shop once who said he found the truck belonging to the robbers who burglarized his home. His neighbor tried to stop them from leaving his home when he figured out he was being burglarized, and was threatened with a firearm, thus converting the burglary into armed robbery. The neighbor, however, got a description and license plate. The homeowner (after already dealing with police) drove through various neighborhoods near his home and found said vehicle in a driveway. He then called the police, expecting them to arrive and make arrests. He said, however, that the police refused to respond. They said, according to this fellow, that they couldn't do anything.
Not sure if I got the whole story, of course, but can anyone think of a reason why (assuming all this was true) cops wouldn't be able to act on the above information?
Apple needs to add a new "Explode on Command" app.
Whether it blows their head off when talking, or a chunk of their ass off while carrying it in their hip pocket, it'd still be a "bang" to see thieves get what's coming to them.
Make the app do the same for stolen Air Jordans too.
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
I had a conversation with a fellow in a gun shop once who said he found the truck belonging to the robbers who burglarized his home. His neighbor tried to stop them from leaving his home when he figured out he was being burglarized, and was threatened with a firearm, thus converting the burglary into armed robbery. The neighbor, however, got a description and license plate. The homeowner (after already dealing with police) drove through various neighborhoods near his home and found said vehicle in a driveway. He then called the police, expecting them to arrive and make arrests. He said, however, that the police refused to respond. They said, according to this fellow, that they couldn't do anything.
Not sure if I got the whole story, of course, but can anyone think of a reason why (assuming all this was true) cops wouldn't be able to act on the above information?
That is indeed PC enough to get a search warrant.
Getting the agency to pursue the warrant may be the trick...
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
I had a conversation with a fellow in a gun shop once who said he found the truck belonging to the robbers who burglarized his home. His neighbor tried to stop them from leaving his home when he figured out he was being burglarized, and was threatened with a firearm, thus converting the burglary into armed robbery. The neighbor, however, got a description and license plate. The homeowner (after already dealing with police) drove through various neighborhoods near his home and found said vehicle in a driveway. He then called the police, expecting them to arrive and make arrests. He said, however, that the police refused to respond. They said, according to this fellow, that they couldn't do anything.
Not sure if I got the whole story, of course, but can anyone think of a reason why (assuming all this was true) cops wouldn't be able to act on the above information?
You'd have to be an idiot to assume this is true.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
Apple needs to add a new "Explode on Command" app.
Whether it blows their head off when talking, or a chunk of their ass off while carrying it in their hip pocket, it'd still be a "bang" to see thieves get what's coming to them.
Make the app do the same for stolen Air Jordans too.
I believe that the Israelis have that app for phones. Air Jordens should be equipped w/ pressure detonated C-4.
mike r
Don't wish it were easier Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that. Craig Douglas ECQC
The cops still need a warrant to go into a house. You know, that pesky 4th amendment thing gets in the way from cops just making their way into to wherever an app tells them they should go.
The phone in the house does not prove that the thief is in there, or which thief is the thief that stole the iPhone; thus a warrant is needed to enter the house.
Your argument is a good and strong one but is it enough to convince a judge he should allow cops to force their way into a house?
Seems like a good chance a judge would give a warrant, but can't a cop just knock and announce to whoever responds that the stolen property is in the house, requesting its return and some information about where they got it? That doesn't require a warrant.
PS What's the difference between this scenario and a cop responding to a Lojack signal after a car theft?
Petit larceny vs grand larceny
Originally Posted by Mannlicher
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
I had a conversation with a fellow in a gun shop once who said he found the truck belonging to the robbers who burglarized his home. His neighbor tried to stop them from leaving his home when he figured out he was being burglarized, and was threatened with a firearm, thus converting the burglary into armed robbery. The neighbor, however, got a description and license plate. The homeowner (after already dealing with police) drove through various neighborhoods near his home and found said vehicle in a driveway. He then called the police, expecting them to arrive and make arrests. He said, however, that the police refused to respond. They said, according to this fellow, that they couldn't do anything.
Not sure if I got the whole story, of course, but can anyone think of a reason why (assuming all this was true) cops wouldn't be able to act on the above information?
The guy you had a conversation was full of schit, and you bought it.
Originally Posted by Mannlicher
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
Sure, just park the stolen car in your attached garage and you're home free?
Can't they enter if they observe evidence of a crime? Here, look at this Go Find Me signal, observe this evidence of a crime. That's no more far-fetched than finding marijuana growing in the close from an infrared signature or finding it hidden out of sight in a vehicle by observing a dog's reaction.
The simple fact is most busy departments can't be bothered with solving property crimes.
I had a conversation with a fellow in a gun shop once who said he found the truck belonging to the robbers who burglarized his home. His neighbor tried to stop them from leaving his home when he figured out he was being burglarized, and was threatened with a firearm, thus converting the burglary into armed robbery. The neighbor, however, got a description and license plate. The homeowner (after already dealing with police) drove through various neighborhoods near his home and found said vehicle in a driveway. He then called the police, expecting them to arrive and make arrests. He said, however, that the police refused to respond. They said, according to this fellow, that they couldn't do anything.
Not sure if I got the whole story, of course, but can anyone think of a reason why (assuming all this was true) cops wouldn't be able to act on the above information?
The guy you had a conversation was full of schit, and you bought it.
I'd bet on that.
Had my home burglarized while I was working out of town. Spotted some of the identifiable stolen goods at a pawn shop (purely coincidence) which, ironically, was across the street from the cop shop. Walked across the street and asked for the detective in charge of my burglary case. He got the ID info from the pawn broker and, long story short, made the arrest.
Point being, that any guy who isn't an idiot will get the job done when you make it easy for him. Low hanging fruit, etc...
