Tuesday, July 22nd14.9°C
20923
21195

Police need new internet surveillance tools

B.C. topics.

Moderators: oneh2obabe, Jo, ferri, Triple 6

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 29th, 2012, 5:05 pm

the police can obtain a warrant anytime they want in under 10 minutes with proper grounds.
10 minutes, 2 minutes - how much time really?
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 29th, 2012, 5:06 pm

to say they need the ability faster goes beyond common sense.
To be able to act swiftly when a child's safety is at stake is paramount.
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby keith1612 » Oct 29th, 2012, 6:39 pm

Fancy wrote:
to say they need the ability faster goes beyond common sense.
To be able to act swiftly when a child's safety is at stake is paramount.

lol sure because they cant wait 2-10 minutes (the time it takes to make a phone call really) to obtain a legal search warrant.
perhaps less time in tim hortons and more time on the street and the childs safety can be protected better.
taking away Canadians civil rights for a BS hokey reason is garbage.
you are posting they need this law for a childs safety how does saving 5 minutes to search our emails, phone records, etc going to make a child safer?
it wont.
what they want is the right to search everyone's private records with no excuses needed.
there is no safety reason that they cant make a call and ask for a warrant, except perhaps they know they will be declined and thats what they are trying to get around.
you say this new law basically changes nothing so why make it?
you may not believe in basic civil and human rights but many of us do.
are you in law enforcement or something?
it seems strange for a ordinary person to be so willing and happy to hand over rights our grandfathers etc fought and died to protect.
and you should realize making a stupid law that breaks Canadians rights will be overturned in court allowing more real criminals to go free.
keith1612
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 735
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sep 1st, 2012, 5:51 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 29th, 2012, 9:13 pm

perhaps less time in tim hortons
And that was worth while posting? Seems you aren't really taking the subject seriously. You spout information that I wonder how accurate it is. You ask a personal question yet never answered a simple one I had - did you read the law?
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby mrj222 » Oct 29th, 2012, 9:20 pm

I do not know how long it takes to get a warrant now but I know for a fact that it could be sped up to a 10-15 minute process and still maintain the oversight of a third party judge ensuring no abuse via proper paperwork.

There is absolutely no reason to have instant access to some ones phone calls/internet traffic, none. Police need to wait for crime to be committed and once that is done they can take their time and gather evidence. Especially in the case of computers logs are there for long periods of time and can be preserved upon request while waiting for a warrant.

There is absolutely zero reason to bypass the warrant process.
We can't stop here, this is bat country!
mrj222
Übergod
 
Posts: 1041
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 17 posts
Joined: Jun 24th, 2006, 11:26 am
Location: Kelowna

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 29th, 2012, 9:28 pm

but I know for a fact that it could be sped up to a 10-15 minute process and still maintain the oversight of a third party judge ensuring no abuse via proper paperwork.
How? And have you read the law?
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Trunk-Monkey » Oct 30th, 2012, 6:03 am

keith1612 wrote:there is a difference between police showing quick action and having the full rights to monitor your phone calls and mail etc without even having to explain why.
whats next no need to ask for a warrant to search your home?
it seems like a feeble excuse "it takes too much time to request a warrant"
it takes a entire 2 minute phone call.


Having written and execuded many search warrants I can assure you its a lot more than a "2 min phone call". Besides the time it takes to write the warrant the grounds needed to get the warrant are getting more and more difficult to acquire with all of the many points of electronic ways of communicating. I think you need to sit back and ask yourself, " Have I ever written a warrant"? If not then dont comment on things you know nothing about...
Trunk-Monkey
Übergod
 
Posts: 1479
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mar 28th, 2011, 9:32 am

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Smurf » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:04 am

Isn't it amazing how much people know about something they actually know nothing about.
Consider how hard it is to change yourself and you'll understand what little chance you have of changing others.

The happiest of people don't necessarily have the best of everything, they just make the most of everything that comes their way.
User avatar
Smurf
Guru
 
Posts: 5334
Likes: 266 posts
Liked in: 398 posts
Joined: Aug 12th, 2006, 8:55 am
Location: Okanagan BC

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby keith1612 » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:14 am

Trunk-Monkey wrote:
keith1612 wrote:there is a difference between police showing quick action and having the full rights to monitor your phone calls and mail etc without even having to explain why.
whats next no need to ask for a warrant to search your home?
it seems like a feeble excuse "it takes too much time to request a warrant"
it takes a entire 2 minute phone call.


Having written and execuded many search warrants I can assure you its a lot more than a "2 min phone call". Besides the time it takes to write the warrant the grounds needed to get the warrant are getting more and more difficult to acquire with all of the many points of electronic ways of communicating. I think you need to sit back and ask yourself, " Have I ever written a warrant"? If not then dont comment on things you know nothing about...


well i can assure you i have unfortunatly in my youth seen more than once how long it takes to get a warrant and its not much more than a 2 minute call.
i have had the missfortune of them asking if i would allow them in or they had to get a warrant and they never the front of my property and they then had it in very short time.
if warrants are getting harder and harder to get nowadays i suppose it may be because judges feel there is good reason for that.
allowing the government then to make a law going against judges would just be tossed out when challenged in supreme court.
take a look i believe they are going through some of Harpers new laws now deciding what to do.
keith1612
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 735
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sep 1st, 2012, 5:51 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby zzontar » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:21 am

OnTheRoadAgain wrote:
Reasonable grounds is what you need for a warrant too...... Why would we remove our only protection?





I would think if they are looking, they must have reasonable grounds.
I don't think they check up on people for fun.


No, sometimes it's much worse than that.

Larry Neumeister and Tom Hays
The Associated Press

NEW YORK--A police officer using a law enforcement database creates a list of scores of women he plots to abduct, kill and — in ways he describes in sickening detail — eat their body parts.

Cop arrested in plot to eat women.

The federal charges against Gilberto Valle are real. But was his alleged appetite for cannibalism more than fantasy?

Federal prosecutors told a judge on Thursday that even though no one was harmed, the answer is definitely yes.

With one potential victim, Valle “took active and affirmative steps” that brought him to the brink of “kidnapping a woman, cooking her and actually eating her,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Hadassa Waxman said in arguing successfully to deny the officer bail.

Valle’s attorney countered that her client only indulged in deviant fantasies played out in fetish chat rooms and elsewhere on the Internet.

“Nothing has happened,” said the lawyer, Julia Gatto. “We may be offended. We may be alarmed. But it’s just talk, your honour.”

The shocking allegations against Valle — a six-year New York Police Department veteran, college graduate and father of an infant child — were revealed Thursday in a criminal complaint charging him with kidnapping conspiracy and unauthorized use of the database.

Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman agreed on Thursday that Gilberto Valle should be jailed without bail on charges he called “unspeakable” and “profoundly disturbing.”

Authorities say the investigation began when Valle’s estranged wife tipped authorities off to his chilling online activity.

A search of Valle’s computer found he had created records of at least 100 women with their names, addresses and photos, the complaint says, including two identified as Victim 1 and Victim 2.

One document found on his computer was titled “Abducting and Cooking (Victim 1): A Blueprint,” according to the criminal complaint. The file also had the woman’s birth date and other personal information and a list of “materials needed” — a car, chloroform and rope.

“I was thinking of tying her body onto some kind of apparatus ... cook her over low heat, keep her alive as long as possible,” Valle allegedly wrote in one exchange in July, the complaint says.

In other online conversations, investigators said, Valle talked about the mechanics of fitting the woman’s body into an oven (her legs would have to be bent), said he could make chloroform at home to knock a woman out and discussed how “tasty” one woman looked.

“Her days are numbered,” he wrote, according to the complaint.

The woman told the FBI she knew Valle and met him for lunch in July, but that’s as far as it went.

The complaint alleges that in February, Valle negotiated to kidnap another woman — Victim 2 — for someone else, writing, “$5,000 and she’s all yours.”

He told the buyer he was aspiring to be a professional kidnapper, authorities said.

“I think I would rather not get involved in the rape,” according to the complaint. “You paid for her. She is all yours, and I don’t want to be tempted the next time I abduct a girl.”

It says he added: “I will really get off on knocking her out, tying up her hands and bare feet and gagging her. Then she will be stuffed into a large piece of luggage and wheeled out to my van.”

Cellphone data revealed that Valle made calls on the block where the woman lives, the complaint says. An FBI agent interviewed the woman, who told them that she didn’t know him well and he was never in her home.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/artic ... say-police
They say you can't believe everything they say.
User avatar
zzontar
Guru
 
Posts: 6722
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 167 posts
Joined: Oct 12th, 2006, 9:38 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby keith1612 » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:23 am

Fancy wrote:
perhaps less time in tim hortons
And that was worth while posting? Seems you aren't really taking the subject seriously. You spout information that I wonder how accurate it is. You ask a personal question yet never answered a simple one I had - did you read the law?

i think i did answer you above, if not then no i have not fully read the law.
as im not a lawyer all the jibberish they word everything with can leave you just as knowledgeable after as before.
i started this thread over the CBC's story regarding what the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs were asking for.
And say what you want when they stand up and say we need this or society will crash too many fools listen.
just look at the gun registry and the .05 no rights law, 1 now removed finally and the other has been being fought in courts since the day brought in.
reading or not reading a defined law doesnt change the ability or right to post opinions on having our basic rights stripped away.
if they can impose new laws that dont infringe on peoples rights i am all for them.
keith1612
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 735
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sep 1st, 2012, 5:51 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:24 am

f warrants are getting harder and harder to get nowadays i suppose it may be because judges feel there is good reason for that.
It's probably just red tape and protocol.
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby keith1612 » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:27 am

Fancy wrote:
f warrants are getting harder and harder to get nowadays i suppose it may be because judges feel there is good reason for that.
It's probably just red tape and protocol.


thats just a guess though.
keith1612
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 735
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sep 1st, 2012, 5:51 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby Fancy » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:34 am

do you think judges draft up the requirements for warrants?
Fancy
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29535
Likes: 199 posts
Liked in: 614 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Police need new internet surveillance tools

Postby simnut » Oct 30th, 2012, 8:42 am

Smurf wrote:Isn't it amazing how much people know about something they actually know nothing about.


....it is...isn't it? :D But we all do it........
I don't have issues with police, just their boss....the government......
simnut
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 838
Likes: 25 posts
Liked in: 37 posts
Joined: Feb 4th, 2012, 1:36 pm

PreviousNext

Return to British Columbia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests