>>>>http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/public-privacy/#ixzz10GwocAiu
>>>
>>>At first glance it seems like an invasion of privacy to do this without a warrant. But.................
>>>
>>>You don't need a warrant to follow somebody and make a record of where s/he goes. Is it really so different to use a GPS device rather than a Mark I eyeball tracker?
>>>
>>>Or should there be a warrant for both types of surveilance?
>>
>>With the GPS you don't have to follow the person around though.
>To me that isn't anything more than a semantic difference. In one case it's electronic, in another it's in person. The end result is the same in that a record is kept of your whereabouts.

The entire point of laws is semantic differences..


>>To me it seems more like a bugging device - which *should* require a warrant.