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