FBI Uses PS3s to Catch Pedophiles

[Woodsey]

You know I hear they'll even let you play games on it soon.

Nobody likes a troll.

It's ironic.

Don't jump the gun, read between the lines.

 

[Therumancer]

The article itself mentions that right now perps are protected from being forced to give their passwords by Law Enforcement. This of course leads to them taking the computers they have already seized, hooking them into networks to decrypt them, and getting the password that way.

IMO if they can seize the bloody computer they have the right to force the suspects to give up the passwords to retrieve said information from the computer they seized. To me it's common sense.

As far as the method used, it could simply be considered a crime akin to obsctucting an investigation to not provide a requested password for a seized device. So thus if the person is innocent they might still face jail time for refusing to reveal the password and obstructing the investigation (which could simply be making the police waste time on them when they are a dead end lead).

Of course this brings up the entire issue of them seizing computers to "break them" to begin with, but honestly when they get to that point I figure saying the cops are entitled to the password is a foregone conclusion to be honest.

Mmmm... Nope.

Even if it could be construed as impeding an investigation, no suspect shall be required to do or say anything that may incriminate themselves. The cops may have suspicions of illegal activity, but not proof. The suspect is not obligated (or advised) to help the officers obtain that proof. As annoying to the police and courts that may be, it's part of the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. After all, the cops bust innocent people all the time. If people were forced to tell the cops anything and everything, they could construe guilt from even the simplest things, and thus the witch hunt is on.

Or put another way... It is the police's job to prove your guilt. It is your job to prove your innocence. It may not be convenient, but that's part of being in a free and democratic nation.

We will have to agree to disagree here. As a criminal justice major I think that the entire legal system took a huge wrong turn at "Mapp Vs. Ohio" (which I won't explain since it would get too long, but it should be easy to look up and find numerous dissections of since it's such an important case to the way our legal system developed. It's not that case exactly but all the things it established precedent for). A lot of the "rights" people seem to think are inherant to being in the US are actually fairly recent developments, and I feel the nation operated fine prior to certain desicians, which have made it more difficult for citizens to freely walk the streets in safety and causing less freedom, than anything. This is very debatable.

I understand full well why the police can't do certain things, but that doesn't mean I agree with those limitations. So I stand by my statement that they SHOULD be able to demand the passwords, which they are going to get anyway (simply saving time and money) providing they are in a position where the seizure of the computer was deemed reasonable to begin with.

But then again understand that I feel we should pretty much reset all of our search, seizure, and self-incrimination laws back to say 1955. Despite some outcries on the subject I think that most people they wouldn't even notice the change, even those that would cry about it.

You might also notice that I frequently talk about precedent and a "snowball" effect when it comes to law. Mapp Vs. Ohio is one of those cases that created a precedent which had totally unforseen repercussions, including many of which were never conceived of when it was being decided. This is why I am so obstinate about any kind of precedent that establishes the right of the goverment to censor or ban anything (like video games) on a purely subjective basis, even if currently being defended as "to protect our children". What might be right in the short term or in a specific situation, is not nessicarly going to right in the long term or when applied to all cases where it could be. The govermental bureaucracy cannot distinguish such things which is why I feel one needs to look at cases for the precedent they will establish and perhaps even do the wrong thing in specific situations to prevent more damage from being inflicted down the line.

 

[FinalGamer]

And it worked so well with the DS. *rolls eyes*

 

[stone0042]

I've got a 360, but i've got ti admit that's badass

 

[Raykuza]

The PS3 likes to wear black.
So does Batman.

The PS3 is adaptable to many different scenarios.
So is Batman.

The PS3 fights crime when not working at its regular job.
So does Batman.

Questions? Questions? Anyone?

I have a question! Can I play Blu-rays on my Batman?

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

The PS3 likes to wear black.
So does Batman.

The PS3 is adaptable to many different scenarios.
So is Batman.

The PS3 fights crime when not working at its regular job.
So does Batman.

Questions? Questions? Anyone?

I have a question! Can I play Blu-rays on my Batman?

Have you ever SEEN what he keeps on that belt? There was an episode where they used "Shark repellent." Yes, I am quite certain your batman has blu-ray capabilities.

 

[Sevre]

The online capability of RapePlay reveals its true motives.

 

[Azmael Silverlance]

You thinkt he FBI could get better hardware than a PS3. I mean super computers..

Well there goes value for money man Why spend 10s of thousands of $ when you can buy couple of old PS3s and get the job done :> saving tax payers money this is xD And also a very good endorsement for Sony

PS3: Fights boredom , fights crime! lol

p.p: Ebay prices for PS3 prolly went up with this haha xD