4 ms·

It's like everybody who's replying to you didn't read your last paragraph

• ineedasername 7y ago
  No, I read that, but the author presented a viewpoint from the historic example of luggage, cargo, etc. searches and then simply stated the courts disagreed. Expanding on that to talk about why those things are in fact different and not comparable is a salient point, and not something that a reader of the GP comment would necessarily come away with otherwise.
  • hannasanarion 7y ago
    Because the reasons are fairly obvious to everyone here. Smartphones are basically an extension of our brains. They are our eyes, ears, mouths, and memories. Searching a smartphone (and usually copying its contents) is an invasion of privacy far beyond flipping though a ship log or traveler's diary, so that precedent isn't good enough to establish reasonableness.
    • ineedasername 7y ago
      Well, maybe what I wrote was redundant then.