Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/1 ... ng-device/

This should require a warrant at the very least.

Also, those things are suppose to cost a small fortune. The government is way getting ripped off. That looks like a couple of high schoolers put it together for extra credit.

gunderwood wrote:Also, those things are suppose to cost a small fortune. The government is way getting ripped off. That looks like a couple of high schoolers put it together for extra credit.

It's probably way cooler than it looks

allingeneral wrote:

gunderwood wrote:Also, those things are suppose to cost a small fortune. The government is way getting ripped off. That looks like a couple of high schoolers put it together for extra credit.

It's probably way cooler than it looks

Have you ever work for or known someone who has worked for the FBI? Advanced technology and FBI are an oxymoron. At a previous job (contractor) there was a joke about you know you screwed up when they transfer you to the FBI. Their computer systems are laughable.

The fact that the FBI did this is the problem (geez, talk about 1984!!). I hope the FBI gets sued to High Heaven for this.

If the next 9/11 terrorist attack is adverted because of one of these tracking devices, I doubt that anyone here will object.

Besides, this is nothing new. It happens everyday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

OakRidgeStars wrote:If the next 9/11 terrorist attack is adverted because of one of these tracking devices, I doubt that anyone here will object.

Besides, this is nothing new. It happens everyday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

i can't reconcile this post to your av

gunderwood said:

This should require a warrant at the very least.

What if they had warrant?
From the article:

Later that day, a friend of Afifi’s named Khaled posted pictures of the device at Reddit, asking if anyone knew what it was and if it meant the FBI “is after us.” (Reddit is owned by CondeNast Digital, which also owns Wired.com).

“My plan was to just put the device on another car or in a lake,” Khaled wrote, “but when you come home to 2 stoned off-their-asses people who are hearing things in the device and convinced it’s a bomb you just gotta be sure.”

and

Afifi retrieved the device from his apartment and handed it over, at which point the agents asked a series of questions – did he know anyone who traveled to Yemen or was affiliated with overseas training? One of the agents produced a printout of a blog post that Afifi’s friend Khaled allegedly wrote a couple of months ago. It had “something to do with a mall or a bomb,” Afifi said. He hadn’t seen it before and doesn’t know the details of what it said. He found it hard to believe Khaled meant anything threatening by the post.

Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/1 ... z11tzDsboT

So it's my opinion that Khaled may have actually been the target of the investigation and Yasir Afifi may make some poor choices in his selection of friends, Khaled and the 2 stoned off-their-asses people at home. He also lived out of the US for 5 years in Egypt. has a job where he will be traveling to the middle east. Any of these things might perk up an ear?
The things that amaze me about are:
1.They didn't know what it was.
2. It was located in the rear of the car (near the gas tank!).
3. It appeared to have some sort of transmitter or receiver.
4. They didn't think it might be a bomb.
5. They didn't call the Police.

CowboyT

The fact that the FBI did this is the problem (geez, talk about 1984!!). I hope the FBI gets sued to High Heaven for this.

Just a casual observation for CowboyT, you and I as federal taxpayers will be the ones who actually pay the bill if the FBI is is sued and loses. I am hoping that they had a warrant.

To muddy the waters further:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/0 ... itutional/

Wherever J. Edgar is, I'm sure he's nodding approvingly.

@GrumpyMSG

The comment was about the 9th Circuits ruling on a different case. They said that LE can come onto your private property and attach one of these without a warrant. That is police state stuff.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS197061744020100827
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 50,00.html

Right on, gunderwood.

gunderwood you are right about the 9ths ruling, the 7th had a similar ruling. We as region fall under the 4th, the ruling in: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/0 ... itutional/ was done near us, not California. This will have to be addressed by the Supreme Court at some time. I just looked at the court locator: http://www.uscourts.gov/court_locator.aspx and it appears D.C. has it's own Circuit and isn't part of the 4th.

OakRidgeStars wrote:If the next 9/11 terrorist attack is adverted because of one of these tracking devices, I doubt that anyone here will object.

Besides, this is nothing new. It happens everyday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

Yeah but they can spin anything they want and I for one am not a fan at all for giving up rights and liberties so the government can better protect me...you can completely count me out on that notion...

HOLY COINCIDENCE BATMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just took a closer look at that picture....it looks exactly like the emission control device on my truck...