• Lojcs@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    11 months ago

    Is having a large party supposed to be illegal? Either way doesn’t sending drones to someone’s backyard constitute unwarranted search?

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      What’s visible from public spaces, including the air, is not considered a search of your persons, houses, papers, and effects. Or at least not an unreasonable search.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        11 months ago

        So if I got a drone and live streamed some cops backyard pool party that’d be ok?

      • treefrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        11 months ago

        What’s visible with the naked eye. If using a dog outside an apartment door to smell weed is unconstitutional, I imagine doing a flyover with a drone is too.

        • anticommon@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          I remember hearing about police thermal camera use being unconstitutional (or at least not allowed) in some places. How is this different?

          I would like to add I have no source for this it’s just something I remember hearing and you shouldn’t believe people on the Internet do some research in verified sources or reputable news organizations and definitely don’t just blindly believe what I have to say, but if it’s for entertainment purposes then sure believe me. I believe me but I’m not heavily invested in verifying this fact.

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        So they can use thermal imaging from outside the house to watch the people inside? That’s bs

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Police are not allowed to use anything other than the ‘naked eye’ (their own senses) without a warrant.

          If this includes police dogs (it does, the SC ruled on this and a conservative justice wrote the majority decision), it includes drones (with or without thermal cameras).

          NYC will see a lawsuit out of this for sure.

        • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          How do you think they catch grow-houses? They thermal scan neighborhoods for heat signatures from the grow lights. Cops are masters of subverting the law to do whatever they want.

        • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          I know thermal imaging has been used to look for marijuana farms, back when grow lamps were incandescent and houses would stand out as hot. But I don’t know if they had warrants for those or not.

          But to actually use imaging, whether it’s thermal, radio, or X-ray, to see through a wall, is definitely considered a search.

        • Voyajer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Thermal cameras can’t see through glass, but they could be used to see if a building is significantly warmer than the surrounding structures.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Your property rights do not stop at the ground. No one has the right to fly a drone over your property. There’s just usually not much you can do about it.