'Safety is our number 1 priority...' Nonsense. They are interested in one thing. Revenue, and the generation of said revenue. That's it. And on the idea of 'real time surveillance', this is a pretty blatant 4th Amendment violation. It's already been adjudicated in the 3rd circuit. United States v. Katzin, clearly states tracking a vehicle via any means, *requires* a warrant. According to the SCOTUS decision found in United States v. Jones, GPS tracking is considered a 'search under the 4th Amendment' In order to put _any_ kind of tracker on a vehicle, the law enforcement agency has to go to a judge and get something called a warrant. That doesn't appear to be occurring here. If the Belle Meade police put a tracker on my truck without a warrant, I'll sue their asses into bankruptcy for said constitutional rights violations. This is a blatant 4th Amendment violation. Its also quite possible the 5th and 6th Amendments are being implicated, and violated as well. People in this country have something called *RIGHTS* This is what happens when qualified immunity is given to fools, who have no understanding of the constitution, in which they took an oath to uphold.
@@drayne3750 Lol. Typical elitist attitude. There are tons of locales such as Belle Meade who have had that attitude, and have paid millions in all types of lawsuit settlements. The federal government doesn't care about a locations 'wealth' especially when dealing with matters of constitutional law. All federal judges actually take an oath affirming such. Coral Gables, Florida is currently embroiled in numerous lawsuits for the exact same thing that's going on in Belle Meade, involving warrant-less surveillance and license plate cameras. See Raul Mas Canosa v. City of Coral Gables, Florida, et al. for more information. Case is currently in the 11th circuit court. Furthermore, places like Belle Meade would be the first place a competent lawyer would look for a case, due to the simple fact that its a *WEALTHY AREA* Especially concerning a matter of constitutional law, that has already been adjudicated and has already been proven to be a 4th, (and possibly 5th and 6th) Amendment violations. Lawyers generally don't go after poor people. Didn't think this through did ya?
![How To Detect A GPS Tracker On My Car [Step-By-Step]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6Cuoyuqzm60/mqdefault.jpg)
Sweet!! Come on Newark Ohio get on board
GSP been doing this for years and it’s amazing! Glad to see Tn starting to get this amazing system
Is it still 20k?
A police chase is usually going to end in a crash anyway. The cars are stolen and the kids run five different directions even if they do track it.
this is a great tool for the police ,outstanding
'Safety is our number 1 priority...' Nonsense. They are interested in one thing. Revenue, and the generation of said revenue. That's it.
And on the idea of 'real time surveillance', this is a pretty blatant 4th Amendment violation. It's already been adjudicated in the 3rd circuit. United States v. Katzin, clearly states tracking a vehicle via any means, *requires* a warrant. According to the SCOTUS decision found in United States v. Jones, GPS tracking is considered a 'search under the 4th Amendment'
In order to put _any_ kind of tracker on a vehicle, the law enforcement agency has to go to a judge and get something called a warrant. That doesn't appear to be occurring here. If the Belle Meade police put a tracker on my truck without a warrant, I'll sue their asses into bankruptcy for said constitutional rights violations. This is a blatant 4th Amendment violation. Its also quite possible the 5th and 6th Amendments are being implicated, and violated as well. People in this country have something called *RIGHTS*
This is what happens when qualified immunity is given to fools, who have no understanding of the constitution, in which they took an oath to uphold.
You do not have enough money to bankrupt anything in Belle Meade. Maybe go through the community and see the wealth and you will learn something.
@@drayne3750 Lol. Typical elitist attitude. There are tons of locales such as Belle Meade who have had that attitude, and have paid millions in all types of lawsuit settlements. The federal government doesn't care about a locations 'wealth' especially when dealing with matters of constitutional law. All federal judges actually take an oath affirming such. Coral Gables, Florida is currently embroiled in numerous lawsuits for the exact same thing that's going on in Belle Meade, involving warrant-less surveillance and license plate cameras. See Raul Mas Canosa v. City of Coral Gables, Florida, et al. for more information. Case is currently in the 11th circuit court.
Furthermore, places like Belle Meade would be the first place a competent lawyer would look for a case, due to the simple fact that its a *WEALTHY AREA*
Especially concerning a matter of constitutional law, that has already been adjudicated and has already been proven to be a 4th, (and possibly 5th and 6th) Amendment violations. Lawyers generally don't go after poor people.
Didn't think this through did ya?