Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihu1h.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!ihu1h!parnass From: parnass@ihu1h.UUCP (Bob Parnass, AJ9S) Newsgroups: net.auto,net.legal Subject: Re: Radar Surveillance (RADAR != unwarranted search) Message-ID: <650@ihu1h.UUCP> Date: Thu, 8-Aug-85 00:19:42 EDT Article-I.D.: ihu1h.650 Posted: Thu Aug 8 00:19:42 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 02:33:06 EDT References: <1081@homxa.UUCP> <4891@allegra.UUCP>, <269@ihlpl.UUCP> <1090@homxa.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 20 Xref: linus net.auto:6543 net.legal:1646 x > My point is not that police should not apprehend speeders, I am all for > safe highways. My point is that the use of radar guns to catch speeders > is basically unwarrented search, from which we have constitutional protection. > The police are "searching" every car, sometimes even before they can see the > car, to determine its speed. They have no "probable cause" in most cases > .... and yet they are still searching. You are confusing "searching" with observing. > It is very easy to overlook this infringement of our rights because radar > is so unobtrusive; but so are wiretaps! RADAR and wiretaps are unrelated. People using a conven- tional telephone have "a reasonable expectation of privacy." Not so driving down a public road. Illinois law treats having a driver's license as a privilege, not a right. -- =============================================================================== Bob Parnass, Bell Telephone Laboratories - ihnp4!ihu1h!parnass - (312)979-5414