How is that any different than an X-ray/millimeter-wave/infrared device being used to determine the contents of the vehicles?

In both cases (sniffing-dog and machine) a tool outside of the officer's five senses is being used.

Does having fur make using a dog permissible legally while a scanning device is not permissible short of some sort of probable cause?

If someone is stopped by an officer with a dog, the dog is legally allowed to sniff around the vehicle, but even if the officer has a scanning device with him he's not allowed to use it short of a probable cause existing.

A search is a search, regardless of whether it uses scent molecules or infrared/millimeter-wave/x-ray/ultrasonic energy, and it's also a search regardless of whether or not the "detector" has fur and a collar.

Strat

It's time we repeal the Fourth Amendment. Police need to be able to find all the criminals using any means necessary. Won't someone please think of the children!!

(And if you post arguments against this proposal, I'll push to repeal the First Amendment as well)

So when googlebot visits, I'll send it some bullshit to satisfy it. Then continue to operate my website without really having to commit to mobile content.

Don't confuse being raised going to church with actually believing that bullshit. Very few people actually believe in an invisible friend with magical powers.

See, that's the problem....EVERYONE wants a piece of the streaming pie, but people aren't going to pay $100+ a month for every streaming service. They WILL have to pair up and we'll probably end up with 3-4 main services for probably around $10-$15 per month, per service.

I'm sorry that you don't have an attention span, but how does that mean Netflix's model is bad? If you don't want to watch more than one episode a month, you're free to do that. For the people that enjoy the show and want to watch it all, they get to do that. Literally EVERYONE wins.

Are these devices attended by actual humans, or, as is likely, it's set up and left recording in some nearby convenient location like the back of a parked van, motel room, or abandoned building, etc?

If so, they should be easy to radio-locate, like the old CB radio 'rabbit hunts'. How upset would they be to find their expensive toy missing when they returned?

If it *is* attended, surround the location and start protesting and out them. Don't forget to video record.

If police don't need a warrant, then does that mean that anyone can run a Stingray? It's not that hard. A little sauce for the gander.

You can even pick up the essentials to "roll your own" "Stingray" type device at a bargain, used/refurbished.

http://www.testequipmentdepot....

Park one in a van in Washington D.C. on K St. or near the WH, and/or certain parts of Alexandria VA for extra lulz.

Strat

You say that as if some in power don't see that ideologically as a feature, rather than a bug. Many in positions of power/wealth have set themselves up so that they would benefit hugely in various ways such as politically/ideologically and financially from such a disaster, and in fact use it as a catapult into total authoritarian takeover.

George Soros, as one example, has made a pastime of profiting, and many say working to cause, national currencies and economies to collapse. There are many others who would stand to benefit enormously in various ways both inside and outside the US from it's economic/political collapse.

Bottom up, top down, inside-out.

Strat

I'm not Joe Mechanic or anything like that, but I know enough to change my air, fuel & oil filters, add fluids, etc. I've even done tune-ups on my older cars, but what about the real grease monkeys who can fix anything on a vehicle? Wouldn't this type of law put the Auto-Zones, Napas & the like out of business? I don't know where they get the majority of their sales, but I know a sizeable amount has to come from home car repair/tuning enthusiasts.

woooooOOOOOOOSSSHHHHHhhhhh!

That does not make any sense. How could a 1.8 billion light-year supervoid be anyone's mother? Furthermore how could it be a mother of someone on Earth?

How dare you bring logic and facts into this political/ideological low-info Donnybrook!

Strat

There should be no estate for Goebbels, precisely because of the person he was and the things he has done. It's that the copyright isn't valid, it's that the estate should not exist!

When I read the article it didn't seem like the normal excepts you find in a biography. The excerpts have been described as "extensive", and I think Random House could have went beyond Fair Use and into copyright violation.

Orthogonal to the copyright issue is that I don't understand why Goebbels has an estate to make a claim against Random House. It should never have been permitted to allow a convicted war criminal to pass property onto heirs or relatives and all of his property ought to have reverted to the state and have been sold at auction. So what the heck happened?