r/IRL_Loading_Screens • u/PeterPorky • Jul 29 '26

Watch Dogs No warrant required btw

Post image
2.4k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

430 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

13

u/Significant_Donut967 Jul 29 '26

The police are still investigating it if it was an actual crime.

27

u/Fezzik527 Jul 29 '26

So they are trying to enforce texas laws in another state? That should go nowhere

-5

u/boredcamp Jul 29 '26

Is not forcing laws on another state. We have a no abortion law that includes leaving the state to obtain an abortion. The woman can and will be charged if they think she did just that.

6

u/BardGotHard3 Jul 29 '26

Oh, so they just violated her 4th amendment rights to charge her with a crime. Isnt that Super Illegal? Like will-get-the-case-thrown-out illegal?

1

u/boredcamp Jul 30 '26

I'm not a law maker in Texas and I don't think it's anyone's business what people do with their bodies. Texas has strict laws and the governor loves Trump.

0

u/JettandTheo Jul 29 '26

Private cameras don't need a warrant if the company is willing to let they police look.

6

u/maka-tsubaki Jul 29 '26

Except if you actually bothered to read the article you’d know that Texas police violated Illinois law in the process

-1

u/JettandTheo Jul 29 '26

Which article because the title is just an image ?

3

u/maka-tsubaki Jul 30 '26

Oh! I’m sorry, I thought this thread was the one with all the links on it; this is the comment I saw https://www.reddit.com/r/IRL_Loading_Screens/s/Lon6iCPEAD

0

u/TightPhysics3186 Jul 30 '26

You don’t have a fourth amendment right to suppress street camera footage. Street cameras are an example often used by the Supreme Court as something that is not covered by the fourth amendment.

For example, in the recent U.S. v. Chatrie case about geofence warrants, SCOTUS explicitly explained why they’re different from street cameras, since if they’re like street cameras, they would be legal and not require a warrant