<center>https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2017/07/13/10/22/technology-2500010_1280.jpg </center>
## Police around the US have been using StingRay technology for several years now in order to spy on Americans. 
Despite their heavy use however, many police departments haven't exactly been forthcoming about their use of this technology or their policies surrounding it. 

These devices are used to sweep up <b>private data</b> about individuals who are within a certain range of the device, they can have an <b>affect</b> on any phone within *200-500*m.
<center> http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2992707.1489032220!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_1200/cellphone-tracking.jpg </center>


The device is able to <b>sweep up data</b> from every phone that is within the area and this is the exact sort of phishing expedition behavior that the Constitution has sought to *prevent against*. Americans should be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, but yet this sort of technology enables police departments to sweep up private data in violation of that privacy. And they have been doing it for years. 

## Critics want to be sure that the police are using this technology in the right way. 
Because the worst thing for the police to do would be for them to misuse and abuse what they believe is a beneficial tool for them to do their jobs. Because if they misuse and abuse that tool, then it opens up for the chance to have that tool taken away from them, so they should use it with the utmost caution. And not only that, but police should obtain a warrant before using this technology to spy on an individual. 

It seems that an appeals court in Washington DC has also agreed, that the use of this technology, under ordinary circumstances without a warrant, is a direct violation to the *4th amendment*. 

And they've recently ruled that the police do *need a warrant* before they can go using the StingRay technology to spy on people. This isn't the first ruling of its kind either, similar rulings were given in courts New York City, San Francisco, and Maryland. 

Because law enforcement hasn't been forthcoming about their policies and use with this technology, police departments in various states have been sued. And if they are using that technology in a way that coincides with their legal authority, then they shouldn't have a problem with detailing their policies or use of that technology. They should be eager to demonstrate how that technology is being used to supposedly keep communities safe.

<center>https://steemitimages.com/DQmaW48YhsgLS2fxaYkXCuon3tFpQEEh1tSUCU3jjJXv7RT/%40doitvoluntarily.gif </center>

Pics:
Pixabay
AP via nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-stingray-tech-spy-new-yorker-cell-phones-article-1.2992708


Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_tracker
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/09/21/police-use-of-stingray-cellphone-tracker-requires-search-warrant-appeals-court-rules/?utm_term=.0dce5a018724
https://steemit.com/technology/@doitvoluntarily/using-stingray-devices-to-try-and-track-gunshots
https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/21/court-stingray-without-warrant-violates-fourth-amendment/