3 ms·

>Every circuit considering the issue has concluded that no reasonable expectation of privacy exists once trash has been placed in a public area for collection

by jaxbot 9y ago

>Every circuit considering the issue has concluded that no reasonable expectation of privacy exists once trash has been placed in a public area for collection There are particularly scary implications to this, such as cases where police have taken trash and seized discarded feminine products to test for drug use and DNA. There needs to be some stronger protections there.

mikeash 9y ago
I’m not sure I see the problem. Once you throw something away, why shouldn’t it be fair game?
- lifeformed 9y ago
  The problem isn't that other people have access to it, but that it's personally identifiable to you while it's still out on the curb.
  - mikeash 9y ago
    That’s a choice you make, though. If you have sensitive garbage, you can dispose of it by other means.
    - lifeformed 9y ago
      But there's a reasonable expectation that people won't dig through your garbage to find one of your hairs and find your DNA info. It doesn't seem fair to expect someone to make sure their garbage is DNA-free.
      - mikeash 9y ago
        You only have to do that if you don’t want your DNA to be in there. It doesn’t make sense to me to say that police can’t examine literal trash left in the street.
olympus 9y ago
I suspect there is some nuance here that needs to be considered and was probably brought up in the numerous court cases regarding dumpster diving. While it's okay to be nervous about cops stealing your DNA from your trash, it's fine for someone to pick up my unwanted microwave that I put on the curb. The hard part is where to draw the line in between these cases, and it seems like right now the courts have decided it's just easier not to draw a line at all. The classic "think about the children" case: What if we find kiddy porn in someone's trash? Should we convict that person or should they be allowed to go free because the courts decided that personal pictures are protected? Another mitigating factor is that the cops are going through someone's trash because they suspect the person of a crime. The cops aren't going through people's trash on whims. There is a possibility that corrupt cops are going through someone's trash to ruin their life, but this is pretty uncommon. And if they find something, then the outcome is a dirty person taken down by dirty cops. For citizens and generic criminals going through someone's trash, how much is the original owner's fault if their identity gets stolen because they didn't shred their paper info? Sure, it's still illegal to steal my identity even if I don't shred, but now I bear some of the responsibility myself. This is similar to if my house gets robbed because I left my front door open. The criminals are still at fault but now I bear some responsibility by leaving my door open.
monochromatic 9y ago
It’s also not particularly relevant. The reasonable expectation of privacy question has to do with whether law enforcement can dig through your trash without a warrant. It has nothing to do with whether there’s a law criminalizing private trash diving.

by jaxbot 9y ago

mikeash 9y ago

I’m not sure I see the problem. Once you throw something away, why shouldn’t it be fair game?

lifeformed 9y ago
The problem isn't that other people have access to it, but that it's personally identifiable to you while it's still out on the curb.
- mikeash 9y ago
  That’s a choice you make, though. If you have sensitive garbage, you can dispose of it by other means.
  - lifeformed 9y ago
    But there's a reasonable expectation that people won't dig through your garbage to find one of your hairs and find your DNA info. It doesn't seem fair to expect someone to make sure their garbage is DNA-free.
    - mikeash 9y ago
      You only have to do that if you don’t want your DNA to be in there. It doesn’t make sense to me to say that police can’t examine literal trash left in the street.

olympus 9y ago

I suspect there is some nuance here that needs to be considered and was probably brought up in the numerous court cases regarding dumpster diving. While it's okay to be nervous about cops stealing your DNA from your trash, it's fine for someone to pick up my unwanted microwave that I put on the curb. The hard part is where to draw the line in between these cases, and it seems like right now the courts have decided it's just easier not to draw a line at all. The classic "think about the children" case: What if we find kiddy porn in someone's trash? Should we convict that person or should they be allowed to go free because the courts decided that personal pictures are protected? Another mitigating factor is that the cops are going through someone's trash because they suspect the person of a crime. The cops aren't going through people's trash on whims. There is a possibility that corrupt cops are going through someone's trash to ruin their life, but this is pretty uncommon. And if they find something, then the outcome is a dirty person taken down by dirty cops. For citizens and generic criminals going through someone's trash, how much is the original owner's fault if their identity gets stolen because they didn't shred their paper info? Sure, it's still illegal to steal my identity even if I don't shred, but now I bear some of the responsibility myself. This is similar to if my house gets robbed because I left my front door open. The criminals are still at fault but now I bear some responsibility by leaving my door open.

monochromatic 9y ago

It’s also not particularly relevant. The reasonable expectation of privacy question has to do with whether law enforcement can dig through your trash without a warrant. It has nothing to do with whether there’s a law criminalizing private trash diving.