Unreasonable searches

I could see the day when the government attempts to get a search warrant for your thoughts:

A group of neuroscientists at the University of California, Berkeley, reported they may have come up with a scientific way to read people’s minds.

They can already demand blood samples so why not connect you up to a machine to see if you have anti-government thoughts or knowledge of a crime?

13 thoughts on “Unreasonable searches

  1. I am reminded of a comedian who used to tap the side of his head while saying, “If you think my act is weird, you should see what I’m like in here.”

  2. They don’t need to search my head for my anti-government thoughts. I have a device attached to my head that spouts them for the government.

  3. @Windy… Yeah almost had my mind out of the gutter today. No worries though, that comment deep sixed it straight back to Davey Jones’s locker.

    If they read my thoughts they’d never let me out of prison. Doesn’t matter that I have self control, some consider the mere thought of doing X utterly deplorable. Well I’ll just dream of killing the guy reading my thoughts over and over during the exam.

  4. A new “scanner” for the TSA clowns?
    “Are you thinking about blowing up the plane, train, ship….?”

    Just think, we could add one to private automobiles!
    If you are angry – no driving.
    If you are not alert – no driving.
    If you are distracted – no driving.
    If you are not a government sheep – no driving.

    That would just about handle all of the polution right there.
    Of course, I would then have murderous thoughts about the politician/regulator who forced cars to work in that manner…

    Stop trying to make US better and work on yourselves D.C.!

  5. There might be a 5th amendment issue with this tech.

    A good lawyer could make the arguement that pulling thoughts from a person’s head and using them at trail could constitute being forced to testify against themselves.

  6. @J, You can be forced to turn over your blood, passwords, safe combinations, and keys.

    I asked a lawyer friend about this once. They told me it was clear from the founders writings that the prohibition about self-incrimination was because of fear of torture being used to obtain (in many cases false) confessions.

    If a scanner no more instrusive than a MRI machine could be built I suspect courts would give it serious consideration.

  7. “They told me it was clear from the founders writings that the prohibition about self-incrimination was because of fear of torture being used to obtain (in many cases false) confessions.”

    This is a big reason I don’t like polygraph tests. There is lots of evidence that these things are unreliable in uncovering the truth, yet they are still used, and even believed. Since we can think all sorts of things, I suspect that this device may have similar issues.

    From the sounds of things, this technology is also invasive: it seems to require an implant. Thus, I’m sure the case can be made that the 5th amendment applies here, too.

  8. @Alpheus, Sure, if it requires a brain implant it the 5th Amendment (as currently understood) will block it. But, as I suggested above, if it can be no more intrusive than a MRI machine then we may see the courts willing to give it serious consideration.

Comments are closed.