This note below by "cubic-dog" is nonsense. The Suprmee Court explicitly ruled this week that "this type of surveillance" is *not* permitted without a warrant because it is invasive. -Declan On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:05:12AM -0400, cubic-dog wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, John Young wrote:
Let me try again after reading Time's Q&A and the responding attorney claiming that anything inside a home is protected but nothing outside it is.
Well, this is pretty much pure bullshit.
The LE folks are hip to using ir imaging to figure out who is running a whole lotta lights inside at night to determine who is doing home cultivation.
They use this technique as probable cause to request a (rubber stamped) search warrant. Not the other way around.
This type of surveillence is allowed without warrent because it is non-invasive.