View Single Post
Old March 7, 2013, 04:25 PM   #39
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Kyllo v US actually sets a relatively clear standard, of, in general public use, as to whether or not it would require a warrant. Simply put, imagers/detection devices(FLIR or similar technology in the case of Kyllo) that bypass what would normally constitute privacy are a no go since typically they are not in general public use. This is a relatively clear standard that allows for evolving technology while simultaneously putting restrictions on it's use.
sigcurious is offline  
Page generated in 0.05637 seconds with 7 queries