Submitted by Sorin61 t3_10ft8on in technology
[deleted] t1_j4zdmir wrote
[deleted]
B1kerGuy2019 t1_j4zg9qo wrote
Incorrect. PATRIOT Act + "Metadata"
That gives them the justification to sweep up records and use Metadata to see if it fits signatures. Nothing different than the whole Metadata collection unveiled by Snowden.
You're thinking about individual cases, but if they tie it to homeland security and terrorism, gives them free reign for the most part
[deleted] t1_j4zj9yz wrote
[deleted]
tdogg241 t1_j512vmh wrote
Yet the lasting damage it's done remains with us to this day.
TacTurtle t1_j514ia5 wrote
Pay no attention to the man with the server hidden behind a curtain!!
Pokey_Seagulls t1_j4zv844 wrote
Typical Reddit downvoting correct information. Jews4beer is right, even if the username seems wrong.
The Patriot Act did indeed expire in 2020 and no longer exists. Claiming that something is possible to do today because of the Patriot Act is therefore wrong. Patriot Act is dead.
PedroEglasias t1_j4zwy5j wrote
Most of the capabilities got rolled into the USA Freedom Act
temporarycreature t1_j509kvh wrote
That's bc they rolled all of the abilities of the Patriot Act to the US Freedom Act and then virtue signaled on killing the Patriot Act like they were doing something good for us.
analfizzzure t1_j523b1j wrote
You're wrong......the just changed the name. No way they would give up the right to examine our anuses
ukezi t1_j4zpvi5 wrote
However they are allowed to buy the data from private firms, just like they are buying phone records or movement profiles when they can't get a warrant.
ekkidee t1_j52heeb wrote
>If you are not awaiting trial for a financial crime it is illegal for law enforcement to access your bank records
I don't know about that. Money laundering is a crime and the US Treasury can certainly investigate it before indictment.
GoldWallpaper t1_j53amy5 wrote
This is dumb and obviously false. Even leaving aside the things others have pointed out, the whole point of investigations is to decide if someone should or should not be on trial.
Had you said something like, "Without a warrant, it is illegal for law enforcement to access your bank records" that sitll would have been wrong, but not as obviously idiotic as your actual statement.
Think harder.
[deleted] t1_j53kght wrote
[deleted]
scapermoya t1_j53kc1x wrote
They aren’t bank records
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments